In my previous note, I responded to Chris' comments about why I should go to church unless I am absolutely certain that there is a God (in other words, unless I can show tangible evidence for the existence of God). My response amounted, more or less, to "Why not?"
As I've continued to think about that, I've decided I'm not satisfied with that answer. I think there is a certain amount of validity to the assertion that I've got to be doing something with my life and I am finding satisfaction in going to church, but I realize that that is not the whole answer.
A reason for going to church is to learn about God and to give myself an opportunity to experience God. I don't cotton to the notion that someone who knows nothing about God or the church can have a "born-again experience" and be completely transformed into a new being who is able to lead a completely Christian life (whatever that would be). At best, such a conversion experience would produce a new-born Christian who has a lot to learn about God and what God wants for people, just as any new-born baby has a lot to learn about all aspects of life.
Learning about God is a life-long activity, not an instantaneous event. As such, the only way to learn more about God is to try to learn. I think that I am better able to learn about God in a community of believers than I would be able to by myself. I'm still questioning some of the things that are being taught in church, but at least it gives me something to talk about and people to discuss ideas with.
I guess I would turn Chris' question on its head. Why shouldn't I go to church unless I am convinced (in the same other words, unless I have tangible evidence) that there is no God. As I said in my earlier post, I don't think we have seen that evidence. We have seen evidence that there are churches and Christians who are wrong about God, but I have not seen any evidence that convinces me that there is no God.
Posted by JoKeR at April 27, 2003 03:21 PM | TrackBackYou should read some books by Prof. Steven Hawking. He grew up religious and got into science to [in part] proove that god could exist. This guy is hailed as one of the smartest people on Earth and he now says science can and does proove that god can not exist. It's not conclusive that no one couldve created the universe but if one did so he could not then ineract with that universe. Because he would have been outside the universe to create it and since it has been prooven that the universe is in a "no boundery" condition, well thats the end of the god idea. However.....The bible is emensly important in answering questions about creation. Givin how much of the bible is found in earlier cultures almost word for word when compaired to the old testement it becomes very clear that the bible was indeed based on these earlier stories. We know the compilers of the bible had access to a library containing all these earlier stories.So then logic demands one goes to the earlier source material. Going back 5 or so cultures [babylon asyria etc] befor the time of Christ we can find every story from the old testement [x 1000] for the most part still very nearly word for word confirming that the old testement is based on Summerian texts. From those nearly identical texts we should be seeing the originals and so obviously the most accurate accounts of the biblical stories. What the Summerian texts say turns a belief in god upside down. There are warehouses full of these original texts which are interconfirming of their accuracy [ they are after all the source material of the bible] I gotta hurry now.... They say Enki was the creator and he is known in the bible as the serpent. The biblical god wanted man dead but the serpent saved our bacon. Look it up for yourselves. The truth is out there in mass compaired to the lack of proof regaurding jesus.
Posted by: jay on September 6, 2003 04:15 PMIf God, could make the Universe, why the hell couldn't he be in it? I consider myself to have more of a scientific mind than an artistic one, but I can't agree with the (rather condensed) theory above. Some things we do just not know, and will never know.
Assume for a moment there is a God. If he can make a Universe, how can we constrain him to any physical boundary. Someone capable of making this universe is certainly capable of entering into it.
Now for a moment, assume there isn't a God. What could possibly have created the perfect conditions we have on earth to support life. What for that matter, could create the finely balanced laws of physics that make it possible for the universe to exist.
I once watched a great CD-ROM by "Matthias Media" (search google) called "The Choice We All Face". This goes some way to providing Christian arguments to what some se as flaws in the biblical way of thinking.
I'll hold my hands up and admit I don't know all the answers. I mean, come on, I only became a committed Christian a couple of months ago. But when I look around me (especially in the Lake District, UK) I am awed by the landscape that surrounds me. It can't possibly be coincidental. There must be someone greater than myself that created this. And by create, I don't necessarily mean physically putting a mountain where it happens to be or anything daft and "Luddite". I mean creating the ideal conditions for that mountain to form.
Hope this was useful to you. God bless.
Posted by: Matt Fletcher on January 19, 2004 12:35 AM