Why can't the understanding of the christian God evolve over time?

Mr. Hamtastic

whackawhackado!
Registered Senior Member
This is just a simple question. I always get confused when talking to atheists or agnostics when they suggest my understanding of God, Christ, and the Bible's intent cannot be different from previous generations.
 
This is just a simple question. I always get confused when talking to atheists or agnostics when they suggest my understanding of God, Christ, and the Bible's intent cannot be different from previous generations.

Well, where did you acquire this new understanding ?
If the concept of God itself is flexible it seems to indicate that God is not actually real, or at least that theists have no clue.
 
Perhaps because th ebible has been more or less unchanged for thousands of years:shrug:
 
by my reading of the bible, I would suggest that the requirements for salvation are a) belief in God and b)belief in Jesus Christ. By these beliefs the commandments are all boiled down to love God, treat others as you would be treated. The rest is all chrome and polish.
 
skaught-

actually the bible is only about 1500 years old. Before that it was Jewish law and treasured notes and sermons.
 
skaught-

actually the bible is only about 1500 years old. Before that it was Jewish law and treasured notes and sermons.

The bible as a whole is a compilation of many books, some of them ancient, some of them not so ancient, but I'm pretty sure that all of them are more than 1500 years old...
 
I'm sorry, I thought you were referring to the bible as the compilation, not the age of the individual books... I'm not sure that having the books rewritten accurately would prevent us from understanding them differently, or have a direct bearing on our relationship with God. God is not the bible or the sum total of the books, the books of the bible and the bible itself is/are about God and man's relationship to God.
 
by my reading of the bible, I would suggest that the requirements for salvation are a) belief in God and b)belief in Jesus Christ. By these beliefs the commandments are all boiled down to love God, treat others as you would be treated. The rest is all chrome and polish.

I agree. I hate arguing with atheists because they simply can't understand the difference between scripture and concept.
 
that's kind of the point. We gain knowledge through scripture. We apply reason and otherwise attained knowledge to it and gain in understanding. The otherwise attained knowledge available is different than the otherwise attained knowledge available previously. Thus: Constant+Variable=Variable

A constant scripture does not preclude a changing understanding.

not Constant+Variable=Constant unless variable is 0. Perhaps christians are just afraid to apply the variable knowledge to the constant, as are Atheists, because it's hard to hit a moving target.:p
 
I've presumed a bit here.. allow me to presume further...

The worst thing that happened to christianity is it becoming a state religion(Rome 470ish AD... Constantine?) So much ritual was added to an extremely simple belief it became something it shouldn't have. Rather than furthering our relationships with God it set those relations back a thousand years or more. Jesus Christ wanted to strip away the unnecessary foolishness from the Jewish faith to make it reasonable(I mean really, they had laws against tying your shoes on the sabbath with both hands because it constituted work.) I am merely suggesting that christianity is not going to church on sunday(or saturday if that's your flavor) and belief in oversimplifications of what happened at creation. The rote and ritual does not enhance christianity, it merely makes it heavier and more unwieldy(sp?).
 
This is just a simple question. I always get confused when talking to atheists or agnostics when they suggest my understanding of God, Christ, and the Bible's intent cannot be different from previous generations.

People like the idea of a FLYING ZOMBIE
 
You get scripture from concept, not the other way around.

Not so! People feel a need to believe or are trained to believe at an early age. Then the Bible , the Koran and other scriptures are read to confirm what they already believe. There are always experts on hand to explain that what you read does not mean what it says. They know because they are scholars.
 
Why can't the understanding of the christian God evolve over time?

Because:

the requirements for salvation are a) belief in God and b)belief in Jesus Christ

Which implies that all those who do not believe in God and in Jesus Christ will be burning in hell for all eternity.


To say that the understanding of the Christian God might evolve over time might mean a change in what the requirements for salvation are. And you Christians can't have that, can you?
 
since the bible was translated from latin which was translated from hibrew and greek the exact wording is very different, the bible has been rewriten by english monarchs to suite their needs and there are more than 10 different translated versions

on top of that the different gospels each give a different slant on events

this all differs from the jewish scriptures bacuse they are in the origional language, un channged for millenia which is why some people belive it is stagnant.

To sum up the bible has already been changed and to add to that the understanding has changed too. who was the last person you heard talking about being dambed to hell?
 
Why can't the understanding of the christian God evolve over time?

It does on a personal level as ones understanding is either enhanced or dimmed. It can go from either to the other depending on so many things. It can even go from one dimmed state to a different but equally dimmed state.

As for society level or faith block level. The evolution seems to follow the needs of the powers that be on earth.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
 
Greenburg- I do not discount the potential for change at any level. If constant becomes variable then variable+variable=variable. Thus we have catholic to protestant. I may be unknowingly espousing a pre-catholic version of christianity, but I am not familiar with any pre-latin texts to discuss this.

Cybenetics-I have to say that hell and damnation are alive and well in the christian community, but I don't discount that the possibility that repeated translation of scripture could, in and of itself, change our understanding of God.

Enmos/Norsefire- As I understand the meaning here we have concept as knowledge scripture is a record of that knowledge, so if that is the case then we have to accept that God interacted directly with man for man to gain the knowledge to put into scripture, later generations you have man using scripture to gain knowledge. I guess it goes both directions, really. Secular texts are used in much the same way. Maybe I don't understand your argument, could you expand on this?
 
Enmos/Norsefire- As I understand the meaning here we have concept as knowledge scripture is a record of that knowledge, so if that is the case then we have to accept that God interacted directly with man for man to gain the knowledge to put into scripture, later generations you have man using scripture to gain knowledge. I guess it goes both directions, really. Secular texts are used in much the same way. Maybe I don't understand your argument, could you expand on this?

You can only gain a concept of God through the scriptures, be it directly or indirectly.
 
Back
Top