Here’s a recap of some of my favorite postings from 2005 2006 in this category:
• Resurrection Appearances: What Did the Disciples Really Experience? [link]. It seems fairly clear that at least some of Jesus’ disciples believed they encountered him after his death. We don’t really know the nature of their experiences, but people have offered some intriguing speculations.
See also:
- Pentecost: A Cognitive-Dissonance Phenomenon? [link]
- Know Jesus, Know Peace: What’s the Real Cause? [link]
- Religion, Mysticism, and Brain Chemistry [link]
- Ghostly Experiences: Neurological Hiccups? [link]
• Jesus is Still Worth Emulating [link], even if he wasn’t God Incarnate.
• Can the Holy Spirit Contradict Himself? [link] Perhaps it’s not that the Holy Spirit is contradicting himself, but that he has had different things to say to us at different times, like a sighted person guiding a blind person across a busy street. It would be pretty prideful, not to say blasphemous, for us to declare categorically that it cannot be so.
• Fluoridation and the Way to God [link]. Traditionalists claim that Jesus is the only way to God. They also claim that God is infinitely loving. If both of those statements were correct, however, you’d think God would have caused the evidence in support of the Christian message to be so persuasive that the majority of the world’s people would have quickly accepted it. It’s been 2,000 years now, however, and that hasn’t happened. In contrast (to cite one trivial example), it has taken less than 50 years for people in this country to become persuaded about the benefits of fluoridated water.
• World Doesn’t End, Sect is Upset [link]. Failed predictions usually hurt the predictors’ credibility. Yet, traditionalist Christians keep finding excuses for the failed predictions of the Church Fathers. (See also Is Jesus Coming Again? The Predictors’ Track Record Doesn’t Inspire Confidence [link], from 2005.)
• Vitriol Insults [link]. The good stuff in this posting, which gets into the merits of different religious views, is in the later comments. Some rabid traditionalist Christians are very proud of the logical arguments they construct to justify their beliefs. But they can never quite establish that the underlying premises of their arguments are even defensible, let alone persuasive. It’s as though they’re bragging about this wonderful house, with lovely architecture, landscaping, etc., that they’ve built on a steep hillside with mudslides all around; small wonder so many people decline to live in it.
• The Sin Model’s Weakness [link]. We have so little idea why people do the things they do, that it seems pretty foolish to insist that ‘sin’ is attributable to humanity’s inherent wickedness.
• Sin = Failure to "Get It"? [link]. It seems reasonable to conjecture that ‘sin’ might best be thought of as merely a label for our cosmic inadequacy, our inability to truly grasp what ought to be and what we need to do to get there.
• Sin as an Evolutionary Side Effect? What we call ‘sin’ may in fact be a side effect of a trait that has proved to be a useful survival tool in human evolution: the ability to
focus relentlessly on things we personally happen to regard as important at a
given moment. [link]
• What Did "Messiah" Mean to the Apostles? [link] Hint: Jesus and the apostles were Jews. To them, the term "messiah" most assuredly did not mean a particular Person of a Triune God, made man. That particular doctrine seems to have been developed by latecomers who never knew Jesus when he was alive. (See also The Apostles’ Teaching Didn’t Seem to Include a Divine Jesus.)
• The Trinity: A Football Analogy [link]. Traditionalist Christians insist that the New Testament mandates a trinitarian view of God. The New Testament authors, however, seem to have regarded God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit much as we would some of the key leaders of a football team. (This one triggered a lot of discussion in the comments.)
• Synoptic Christians versus John Christians: A Critique [link]. The author of the Fourth Gospel asks us to accept a lot, purely on his say-so. We should respectfully decline.
• Another Way to Read the Creed [link]. Maybe we should treat much of the Apostles’ Creed and Nicene Creed as outdated, but still-useful, figures of speech, along the lines of ‘sunrise’ and ‘sunset.’
Leave a Reply