Clouseau

A Christian is someone who believes in an after-life; and that one's fate in the after-life is dependent upon one's attitude in this life. So there is already a strong measure of the supernatural in Christianity. Then there is the very common definition of a Christian as one who believes that sin is accounted for by the death of the Christ. However, the Christ does not exist unless he rose from the dead. So the supernatural can be said to be fundamental, essential to Christian belief. The Christian is one who believes he/she will rise from the dead because Jesus the Christ rose from the dead. That is what distinguishes Christians from Jews, Muslims and all others.

Now if it is true that Jesus rose from the dead, there is no reason to believe that any other miraculous event, as chronicled in the Bible, did not occur. So all Christians must believe in at least the possibility of miracles, the virgin birth, the raising of Lazarus, the feeding of the five thousand, the water into wine. These have always been mainstream beliefs in 'official', denominational Christianity, though individuals in some denominations have expressed doubt. Moreover, all these denominations regularly kneel to pray, corporately. The basis for belief is really that the deity is not confined by the laws of nature that he himself created. God can 'break the rules' in order to break into the consciousness of mankind, and in order to respond to faith expressed via prayer. For Christianity, it is the very orderliness and regularity of common experience that makes the supernatural what it is.

VoxRat

If this has any meaning to any other readers of this thread, could they kindly try to rephrase it on the off-chance that I might then be able to make some sense of it? Thanks in advance.

Roger Pearse

Well, I know of at least one very committed Christian posting to this group who has an IQ of 152 and holds an Oxford science degree! It would of course be inappropriate to make this a question of individuals, but you will appreciate that there can be no dispute that a very large number of extremely intelligent and well-educated people today and for centuries have held a different view. Indeed it might be asked whether your own alternative view would stand examination, or merely turn out to be some form of conformity to some subset of the societal values of our time.

But not in this forum, I think.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

VoxRat

Well, then, help us out here. What supernatural elements of christianity does this Oxonian subscribe to?

• Young earth creationism
• miracles described in Exodus
• Homo sapiens being the purpose of the universe
• virgin birth of Jesus
• resurrection of Jesus
• existence of a "soul"*
• power of "prayer"* to do influence events (outside of the uncontroversial psychological effects of quiet, rest, contemplation...)
• the reality of a "personal relationship with Jesus"*, in some sense beyond having a "personal relationship" with, say, Napoleon
• life after death*
• any other "magical"/supernatural elements I've forgotten about but you consider important.
  

*needs to include some useful, intelligible definition. E.g: does a "soul" entail consciousness? What's the difference between "prayer" and meditation?

DISSIDENT AGGRESSOR

You have to lack a sound imagination, not to understand the post, mind you, but to believe all or any of the previous sentences before that one.

Not necessarily. I have met Christians who believe that there is only this life we live now.

I'd like to hear what Clousea, believing in an after-life, believes that after-life is going to be.

Personaly I don't put much thought into an after-life, if there is one what would be supernatural about it happening?

The supernatural what? Rising from the dead is not supernatural. Believing that it is shows a lack of a sound imagination.

Why shouldn't they express their doubt?

When I didn't know how to read and people told me about
I definitely expressed doubt [without foot-stamping].

This is interesting! What do you and your corporate kneelers pray for?

I know people who prayed for rain, and it rained.

I know people who prayed that a sick child would get better, and the child got better.

Supernatural

Roger Pearse

You'll just have to guess.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

VoxRat

Well, as I noted, you can't really address questions about an "afterlife" without
My life, by any definition that makes any sense to me, ends when my metabolism does. What is supposed to live on? Is it non-physical? People's memories of me? OK. I can buy that. But I'm almost certain that what Christians are normally talking about is something that involves consciousness. Anything that even remotely resembles consciousness requires a body. And metabolism. Any kind of awareness, or ability to do anything, without a physical substrate of matter and energy, would be "supernatural" - so far as I can make out.

Hex

The way I read this comes from the Anthropological view-point, so it may differ from the intent of the writer.

What I get is that a religion (Christianity in this case) provides explainations for occurances within the world, and gives a means by which to interpret and feel safe within the 'chaos' of the chance that surrounds humanity's existance.

If the explaination as to -why- you hit a patch of water on the road and hydroplaned off to the side is that Yahweh/an angel/Jesus interveined so that you missed that on-coming car that was in your lane, thus saving your life, and when you relate the story to others, they recognize it in the same way, then when a similar life-saving incident occurs, they interpret it the same way, you've got an orderly world (universe).

Now, it might have been chance/muscle-memory reaction/odd alignment of your car's front end, but that would leave you wondering as to the odds that things would work out the way they did.

Since humans love to understand cause and effect, shared stories of the supernatural as explaination can fill the gaps that understanding of natural laws/biology/etc cannot explain, and thus give a reason 'why'. The more people have the same view, the more they bolster each other with anecdotal evidence, laying the seeds for like interpretation of future events be people who have never experienced them before.

In my classes, I describe this as 'primary' and 'secondary' belief. When someone tells you the anecdote and gives the supernatural explaination, it opens up the possibility in your mind that that could be the cause - it gives you an option. When/if you experience the phenomena, if the explaination does seem to fit the occurance, then you have experienced it first-hand. You "know" it works, and thus it becomes 'primary' belief. As you relate your experience and give your explaination, your anecdote becomes the basis for someone else's 'secondary' belief.


So ... Rambling aside,
Christianity is viral and needs to have it's beliefs refreshed within the body of believers so that they may all live in a world where chance is not a factor and they can feel more secure?

Toto

I may regret not shipping this thread to ~E~, and it may end up there eventually.

There are many highly intelligent people who believe in miracles. They "compartmentalize" their world into the materialistic world and the faith world, they exemplify "cognitive dissonance" to live with the contradictions. If you ridicule their beliefs, you do not change them, but you may make them cling to their beliefs even more strongly.

The sociologists of religion think that human society depends on organizing itself around an unsupportable or possibly even irrational belief. The difficulty of organizing atheists might seem to support this. There have been a lot of rationalists, going back to Plato, who have supported some version of the "Royal Lie" because they think that their fellow citizens can't figure out where their best interests actually lie.

A key value in our modern society is "tolerance" - that we have to respect other people's beliefs. It would be preferable to phrase this as respect for other people's rights to hold their own beliefs, but there are now lots of people who think that it is impolite to imply that someone else's beliefs are irrational or wrong, and lots of people who claim the right to hold a belief, however irrational, as if that belief is part of their cultural or ethnic identity.

How do you relate this to BCH? From the earliest era, it appears that intelligent people realized that parts of the Bible could not be literally true, and instead of calling them "false," they labeled them "metaphor" or "allegory." It is only in the modern period, where it looks like the entire book might be metaphor, that a movement has arisen to insist on the literal truth of the Bible. Why?

And which forum would you suggest for this thread, or selected parts of it?

Hex

General Religious Discussion, perhaps?

I mean, if it's really just about belief, no one religion's got a lock on that ...

Do they?