thank you for showing some understanding. It is indeed not meant insulting but it is insulting to think of a bastard as something that can be insulting. After all a bastard is a child that is not pure in race and if Jesus is not standing above the definition of race - who is then? To me it is precisely the point why the jews failed to recognise him as the Messiah as they expected him to be a Jew as their God picture still locked them into racial superiority. Jesus is to me categorised by accepting to be seen as the lowest of the low as this category is irrelevant to him and by doing so he gains authority of those who judge by rank and their own superiority. It appears as a paradox to many but by not demanding authority you gain it. By accepting any insult you stand above it as it has no power over you. It is like Jesus having authority over death by not insisting to be spared the cup because of being the son of God but by taking it on.
It is not for no reason that children conceived in rape are referred to as Gods children. Albeit that we all are, their position is special as their conception is anything but the glorification of men, but them being born and loved is a triumph of the selfless love that is of God a trait most often found in women.
Glad we no longer live in first century Palestine. No child is illegitimate as every child has a biological mother and a biological father. In 21st century America, it is society’s responsibility to make sure that every child is cared for, has health care, and is educated to live in a secular scientific world not matter who the child is cared for and loved by.
This is precisely where you are wrong. The point that what God has put together should not be separated by men does not at all mean that it does not matter who the child is cared for and loved by. If you have a human right than it should be to be loved by the parents who created you first and foremost. If you create a human life as an accidential byproduct of your sex and not out of love you devalue life to an accident. To then put the burden of care for the byproduct of your illegitimate sex life onto the rest of society is as selfish as you can get, but perhaps it is coherent with your belief in a mindlessness of creation / evolution. Illegitimacy occurs from the lack of commitment to the joint care by formally taking responsibility for the mother and the child by the father before having sex. Guess it is a consequence of emancipation, e.g. trying to make women more like men. Why would they ever want to sink that low 
This is as offensive as one can get. Let’s see who have you offended: single women raising children, same sex couples raising children, orphans, abandon children, grandmothers taking care of their grandchildren, working woman. Are you sure that you are not living in “Leave it to Beaver” 1950’s America?
why is it offensive? There is nothing wrong with those who do raise the children out of taking over responsibility but the failure is with those failing to take their responsibility. Responsibility is however a metaphysical concept. So if you teach evolution it would be interesting to ask the kids if they think responsibility or love for thy neighbour has evolved or if they think it it predates our existence unless it would be offensive to mention something as unscientific as love in a secular scientific world.
@marvin, I’m OK with discussing the links between science and morality, but it’s not helpful to just list the things you don’t like in contemporary society (particularly in context of sexuality, which needs to be handled delicately in public conversation) and then just infer that “evolution leads to this” without any proof or evidence or any elaboration. It’s not helpful to just treat evolution as a universal scapegoat for everything we don’t like today. Society’s issues are not reducible to a single scapegoat, and the problems won’t magically go away if we have more “religion”.
thanks for commenting. I know I have trouble making myself understood and I feel like I might miss something here with regards to evolution leading to what or a being a scapegoat. Looks like I say something or that others read something into my comments that I can’t see so I’d appreciate your help. Were do I infer to evolution leading to “this”. Sorry for looking a bit daft but I feel like I need a translator.
The problems of society have nothing to do with evolution apart from the strategy of those who want to use their particular understanding of evolution as an argument to claim that it explains away God which is an irrational argument relying on the argument that the bible would claim humans were made by God sitting on the riverbank making mudpie men. Whilst the bible describes reality in a poetic language thus making it understandable to illiterate people on a conceptual level, by doing so it can also transmit emotional information scientific books fail to deal with. Even the pope last century stated that genesis and the theory of evolution are two different ways to describe the same truth.
My understanding goes to existence being constraint by the word of God and whatever tries to ignore it eliminates itself as ignoring the logic of God is foolish.
Problems will only go away if we apply more logic and less selfishness. Teaching about worldviews and comparing them is the best way to get a common understanding of truth. However considering the wealth of Christian denominations alone makes it difficult to get a consensus here which, if looking at them logically should distill them down to one Christian worldview common to them based on his teachings.
I feel it is necessary to change what was here.
whatever “nothing but a deist” means to you, but "nothing but"sounds very judgemental. I am a Christian that believes in the divinity of Jesus. However I do not measure divinity by bending the rules of reality to our materialistic desires but by the ability to create the rules for reality and make reality understood. If it takes a miracle for someone to let Christ in their heart they can’t really love him for having taken on the cross but for doing magic. And that is too vulnerable a position to be in.
If Christians believe the everlasting life promised by Jesus is just material again as to be resurrected in our material form they lack the faith in a supernatural God. And if so, are we born again in our frail old geriatric body or wrinkle free as a younger self, preferably post puberty in our sexual prime. Similarly,if Christians believe Jesus paid for our sins to appease God, e.g. to quench Gods desire for revenge for the sins of Adam and Eve they do not understand the abandonment of human sacrifice to God that is central to the Abrahamic religion, nor that God did not demand the death of men but told them that if they ate from the tree of self realisation they would die. Thus Christ’s death could not have done anything to please God, apart from him becoming fully one with the father again. He died for us as to make us understand how to return to become one with God again and to be reconciled with him by accepting that thy will be done and submit to his authority again. Death is a logical consequence of eating from the tree of self realisation, e.g. rejecting God’s authority over you, thus removing yourself from being one with the eternal God. God did not say “if you eat from the tree I will let you die / kill you”
Considering that Jesus live in my heart and that I can interact with God through prayer and by trying to follow his word I would say I am a complicated Christian. But so you think I am not a Christian in your eyes because I do not believe in God doing magic but doing logic instead? I hoped that I find a few more “logicians” here at biologos.
P.S. If you want to see a miracle watch the birth of a child. That truly is a miracle but one that is seen just as a normal by those who think miracles to be the abnormal things in nature. To expect miracles with fireworks and all the trimmings happening outside ourselves makes us forget what a miracle God created in us. But that miracle is the logical consequence of the word of God.
I am certainly not a Deist. 
The only Deist I admire is Tom Jefferson, do you remember him over there?
Marvin,
You really don’t make Christianity very appealing. If an educated 21 years old non-Christian read this, they would probably run as far away as possible. 
Just like a 21 years old non-Jewish male thinking of converting to Judism, - you want to do what to my what?
Henry,
Do you know any Deists who believe in the efficacy of prayer?
George
I am a confirmed lutheran very much going by these 90
Diese äußerst peinlichen Einwände der Laien nur mit Gewalt zu unterdrücken und nicht durch vernünftige Gegenargumente zu beseitigen heißt, die Kirche und den Papst dem Gelächter der Feinde auszusetzen und die Christenheit unglücklich zu machen.
What makes a God in your eyes? To be all powerful with the ability to create miracles by breaking your own laws or the ability to make laws. A God that is seen as God by breaking the rules he made himself is an impotent God as we have plenty of people on earth that fail to follow their own rules. To do so is irrational and only the fool wants a God that is irrational so he can get his irrational wishes fulfilled.
If your God needs a magic wand to fix his reality you may as well teach Harry Potter under Religion of make belief.
I told you I am no ordinary Christian, but by what measure do you standardise them to be “true”? If I tell you that he was raised from the dead means that he became part of God and not another self again you may struggle to follow but in being a self apart from God lies your mortality. If you do not learn to let go of your self you will not be able to enter into the presence of God to be raised into the everlasting life, the will that moves all energy and matter.
Are you a materialist?
by the way if you agree that I make people run away from my brand of thought you may help me to make them sound less frightening to you so tell me about your fears I invoke other than telling you that you have to let go of your material self willingly to come to everlasting life. Jesus had authority over death by the simple fact of not demanding authority over it. All our western culture is still build on the fear of death as we have not learned from Jesus.
As Haegar said in the Dick Brown cartoon
"The secret of happiness is to be satisfied with what you have got." only then to tell Hamlet “So make sure you got enough in time”
thanks for helping me out. As you have noticed - I would like to know what I am myself and what makes people frightened of my thoughts. there is perhaps nothing worse than trying to explain how I understand a loving God but seem to frighten people with my understanding. God is a frightening concept for sure if it involves having to justify yourself but what do I say that would frighten people? That there is no magic of that the everlasting life is not a materialistic one?
I think I must have missed an important post or two …
Can you state in a sentence who was frightened? (Atheist, Creationist, a member of a specific denomination)
And what it was you said/wrote that triggered that reaction?
George
I’ve edited your post and deleted another. Please refer to the forum guidelines: FAQ/Guidelines
We are to assume legitimate Christian faith on the part of other commenters unless they identify otherwise. This is not the place for making judgments about who is a true Christian and who is not.
@marvin
Please try to avoid negatively categorizing entire groups of people based on their beliefs. You are free to reject belief in miracles, but there are ways to do so without including backhanded insults directed at those who don’t reject them.
Yes my wife is a phenomenal cook especially at Christmas time. Regarding me teaching Religion class, well I actually do touch on religious fanaticism in the Homeland Security Classes that I teach.
I was referring to circumcision. Try convincing an adult male to do that. 
I have no idea what’s happening on this thread anymore. I’m closing it. Start a new thread if you want to continue the conversation, with a clearly defined topic of conversation.