There is a strong movement within Christendom to question the Bible (Higher Criticism), and specifically question fundamental Christian givens, such as the Virgin Birth and the Death-and-Resurrection of Christ, and other similar metaphysical wonders recorded in Scripture.
The main protestant denomination in South Africa is the Dutch Reformed Church, commonly referred to as the N.G. Kerk (“Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk”). A recent (2007) documentary exposes how leading professors within the N.G. Kerk and many other denominations deny the death and literal resurrection of Christ. This includes the internationally known Archbishop Desmond Tutu (of the Anglican Church).
St. Paul warned: “…if Christ is not raised, your faith is foolish; you are yet in your sins. Then also those that fell asleep in Christ were lost. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are all men most miserable. But now Christ has risen from the death, and has become the firstfruit of those who slept” (1 Corinthians 15:17-20).
The Christian faith would be “foolish” and “miserable” if Christ did not literally rise from the dead.
I think part of the reason for such questioning lies in the pagan dogma of the innate immortality of the soul, adhered to by most of Christendom. If one believes that at death a thinking rational soul separates from the body and goes to heaven (or hell), then why is a physical literal resurrection necessary – not only of Christ, but of anyone?
However, the Bible does teach of a physical resurrection. Christ being the “firstfruit of those who slept”.
The unbiblical idea of an innate immortal soul is leading to other unbiblical theories such as “The Historic Jesus” and the “Jesus Seminar”, which propagate ideas such as that Jesus did not die at the cross, but married Mary Magdalene and other such fantasies.
When people cling to unbiblical doctrines (like the innate immortality of the soul) it is inevitable that they will come up with other false theories to uphold the silliness they already adhere to.
4 comments:
I read somewhere, when i was studying ethics at the good ole Pukke, that the nature of study as a science, is to ask questions, and stimulate students to search for answers.
so, in that sense, it made sense to me personally, that a lecturer would ask these questions.
For example, did the crucification really happen, was it a virgin birth, etc.
it is then up to the student, to go search for the passages, and basically do research on the subject, to get a better understanding. and, hopefully, stronger faith.
well, that was my experience, anyway.
i do not think institutions of higher learning turns their students into atheists.
and, i dont think questioning ideas is a bad thing.
the fundamental point tho is, the bible is the Word of God. It's been manipulated and translated by fallible humans.
but, the message remains the same.
Love. Love. Love.
Why would anyone WANT to be an atheist?
I guess one of the reasons people would "WANT to be an atheist" is because of the disillusionment they suffered from those that uses religion for personal gain. I, for one, find it very difficult to associate myself with most religious folk, even though I am, what would be considered, religious myself.
Also, I agree with your comment that good teachers facilitate students to find answers for themselves and some of these teachers would play Devil's Advocate to achieve this. But that is not the case with the people I referred to in the post. They weren't "teaching"...
yes.. "jesus freaks" freak me out.
it's like my partner says, your religion is between you and God. God will judge you one day, He knows you best, what you've been thru, what you base your decisions on.
Shouldn't care what other people think. They judge too easily.
I'm pretty religious on the inside. But, it's not something i thrust down others' throats.
which is why this forum (blogosphere) is awesome. I get to voice my opinions, and you get to share your thoughts, or not. as you choose.
Post a Comment