Hi Kenny,
I think the penny just dropped for me about your issues with belief in God.
It is seems to me quite similar to HappyFlappyDeist's.
Given that no religion has the correct idea of God, then God is irrelevant.
God may as well not exist. And so it's a what then...
You're issue seems less about whether God exists, and more about so what?
You know, much like you (I'm assuming), I was a Christian my whole life.
Understood the religious language and all that... or so I thought.
Then after I left home, I had a revelation.
It was while reading Romans along side a commentary by Martin Lloyd-Jones.
Christianity made sense for the first time. What it means to be saved. Christ dying on the cross.
You know I'd say things like "Christ died on the cross for my sins" and believed such, but I didn't understand.
Religious language like that I understood, and yet... really didn't grasp.
It is strange to explain.
I can't help but feel, you understood the religious language and all that.
Heard people preaching this and that. But, then, you never had the moment where a fuller realisation was had.
What it all really meant. Why we are saved. Why we need saving. Oh, because we're going to hell otherwise.
That's why we need to be saved "by the blood of Christ", umm, yeah ok.
And we both just went along with all those religious phrases once upon a time.
Maybe it's the difference between a cultural saturation and indoctrination, versus truly understanding.
We breathed the words each and every day, such that we grow up taking them for granted. We understand, and yet don't.
You know, a lot of Judaism appeals to many Christians today, because they see in their religious practices and the like many foreshadows of Christ and God's purpose. It's like Christ completes Judaism. Please don't debate that point. What I'm highlighting is that these Christians knew their faith or so they thought, but it was very perhaps 1-dimensional. Such 1-dimensionalness isn't very deep, but often superficial.
Bah, if it's not coming across what I'm trying to say, I'm not sure how to say it.
What I would encourage you to do, is just read through Romans.
You know, this Christian, or that Christian, will tell you this and that. Seemingly according to their taste.
So why not go to the source? If you have the time and feel it's relevant even to your exchanges and time here.
Romans was the book where I find meaning in all the Christian language, meaning I thought I understood but then realised I just took it all for granted in a very 1-dimensional manner.
Paul really deals with so many issues in Romans. If you want to understand the Christian message, Paul was the person who went to the Gentiles (non-Jews) and spoke about what Christ meant over and over again. He even set Peter (the "first Pope"
) straight, and Peter conceded to Paul.
I find that quite amusing. Peter seemed to want to play the religious game, and Paul just took a no-bs approach in taking the foundational message to the people.
Anyway, would it be too hard to have a read through Romans? What could it hurt? It is an interesting book.
But, especially so when it comes to a Christian understanding of their being saved, sinning and the like -- this is all dealt with in Romans.
So if you want a direct understanding. Throw in the bin what some side alley preacher screamed, put on hold what you believe you were taught, forget what we all try to tell you here, and just go direct to the source.
" (err, ignore that one)
