Dutch rethink Christianity for a doubtful world
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 00:29
VIEWED: 9348
PAGE 3 of 12
Happytrader, this guy doesn't seem to understand 1 Cor 15:19:
"If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied."
For some context, here are the preceding verses...
"If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That's a very convoluted paragraph, I couldn't quite figure it out. What I got was if Christ wasn't raised, faith is useless. That's strange to me, for everything to rest on that one thing. Why would faith, with all the wonderful things Christ preached, become "useless" if he wasn't raised? I don't get the "If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied" --does that mean that if we only have hope in Christ in this life? Still confusing. Could you explain, please?
I'm not fond of the idea that unless I believe someone was raised by a god, I'm in sin and to be pitied. That's the part of religion I DESPISE, the "unless you believe what we do, you're trash". No, thank you! I don't think anyone is trash, whatever they believe, if it helps them be a better person. Any god who tells me otherwise is no god I want to know, much less worship.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That's a very convoluted paragraph, I couldn't quite figure it out. What I got was if Christ wasn't raised, faith is useless. That's strange to me, for everything to rest on that one thing. Why would faith, with all the wonderful things Christ preached, become "useless" if he wasn't raised? I don't get the "If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied" --does that mean that if we only have hope in Christ in this life? Still confusing. Could you explain, please?
I'm not fond of the idea that unless I believe someone was raised by a god, I'm in sin and to be pitied. That's the part of religion I DESPISE, the "unless you believe what we do, you're trash". No, thank you! I don't think anyone is trash, whatever they believe, if it helps them be a better person. Any god who tells me otherwise is no god I want to know, much less worship.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
You and I are pretty much the same page on this issue, Niki. That's the part of certain types of Christianity (and other religions) that I abhor.
As for what is fundamentally (excuse the term) Christian, here are some variations on a theme.
Deism (Listeni/'di??z?m/ US dict: de'·izm)[1][2] in the philosophy of religion is the standpoint that reason and observation of the natural world, without the need for organized religion, can determine that the universe is a creation and has a creator. Furthermore, the term often implies that this supreme being does not intervene in human affairs or suspend the natural laws of the universe. Deists typically reject supernatural events such as prophecy and miracles, tending to assert that a god (or "the Supreme Architect") has a plan for the universe that this god does not alter by (regularly or ever) intervening in the affairs of human life. This idea is also known as the Clockwork universe theory, in which a god designs and builds the universe, but steps aside to let it run on its own. Deists believe in the existence of a god without any reliance on revealed religion, religious authority or holy books. Two main forms of deism currently exist: classical deism and modern deism.
The earliest known usage in print of the English term "deist" is 1621,[3] and "deism" is first found in a 1675 dictionary.[4][5] Deism became more prominent in the 17th and 18th centuries during the Age of Enlightenment — especially in Britain, France, Ireland and North America — mostly among those raised as Christians who found they could not believe in supernatural miracles, the inerrancy of scriptures, or the Trinity, but who did believe in one God. The Founding Fathers of the United States were heavily influenced by Enlightenment philosophies, and it is generally believed that many of them were deists.[6]
Gnostic systems (particularly the Syrian-Egyptian schools[which?]) are typically marked out by:
"And the Sophia of the Epinoia [...] brought forth. And [...] something came out of her which was imperfect and different from her appearance, because she had created it without her consort. And it was dissimilar to the likeness of its mother, for it has another form.
"And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance."
From The Secret Book of John (long version), Nag Hammadi Library, Codex II, tr
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Gnosticism is some really occult stuff (in the meaning of obscure, the same way kabbalah is obscure and occult).
What I was meaning particularly here is that in gnosticism there is a belief that the soul itself, even human souls, are divine, and that humanity is in this sense god-like or can become LIKE god. It's the shell that the souls are trapped in that is flawed, and those shells were created by something called the Demiurge. The Demiurge was a false reflection of a part of god called Sophia, and Jesus was her true reflection.
Deism also has a belief that the human soul is or can become divine, and it's not exactly unsupported in either the new or old testiment. And there's also belief systems that interpret quite a bit of the references to a heaven or afterlife as metaphorical.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, I've heard that many of the founding fathers were Deists.
Niki yeah I'm a bit prejudiced on this issue. I don't think one's beliefs should be based on a popularity contest, sounds too much like high school for my liking, I'm done with high school after all and don't want the world to go back there. I think its important to be honest about what you believe, I think its good for people, when they take these surveys to be forthright, how they choose to believe is their choice and the more categories we offer on those surveys the better we understand how people believe. I think the religeon box should be left blank for people to write their belief system of choice in, though using as few words as possible is preferred.
So back in the day everyone thought the world was flat, does that mean that if you believe its round you should just dull that down because "everyone else is doing it?". Note that I'm using that as an example in content only, back then you sort of had to try and conform if you wanted to stick around in life. What I mean is that people shouldn't just dumb down what they believe to look more fashionable or to look cooler or to be more popular, back to my high school reference.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That whole Corinthians thing ... it wasn't was Jesus said. It was about Jesus.
I can see how some people need to believe in the divinity of Jesus in order to accept the teachings, either b/c without it he's just some dude saying stuff and what makes him so special; or b/c in order to be good now they need to think they will be rewarded later; or b/c without god underpinning the universe existence is too inhuman and chaotic.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah those crazy Corinthians and their fancy columns....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hope this isn't a double post...
1Kiki: You mentioned something about Corinthians lacking validity in some way because it was about Jesus and not what he said. To that I would say, we are reliant on the New Testament authors for Jesus' quotes as well as his life events (meaning, it could all lack validity, because it could all be made up -- even his quotes. Why doubt one thing but not the other?) In addition, 1st Corinthians was written before several of the gospels (which contain most of Jesus' quotes) were written. Even if it was "about Jesus", it is still a foundational book for the formation of Christianity and tries to flesh out the theological underpinnings of Christ's existence. Paul's reason for writing to the Corinthians was not to write an eyewitness account of Jesus' life. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Corinthians Paul does discuss several ideas that Jesus talked about though.
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That's a very convoluted paragraph, I couldn't quite figure it out. What I got was if Christ wasn't raised, faith is useless. That's strange to me, for everything to rest on that one thing. Why would faith, with all the wonderful things Christ preached, become "useless" if he wasn't raised? I don't get the "If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied" --does that mean that if we only have hope in Christ in this life? Still confusing. Could you explain, please?
I'm not fond of the idea that unless I believe someone was raised by a god, I'm in sin and to be pitied. That's the part of religion I DESPISE, the "unless you believe what we do, you're trash". No, thank you! I don't think anyone is trash, whatever they believe, if it helps them be a better person. Any god who tells me otherwise is no god I want to know, much less worship.
Niki, I agree the paragraph is awkwardly written. I think you are getting the jist of it, but I will try to flesh it out. Remember that this was written to a fledgling church that was still trying to figure out how to apply what Christ had taught.
Let me start with some background. Christianity built upon Judaism as its foundation and claims to be the fullfillment of Jewish Law. It starts with the same premise, that mankind is not perfect, that we are not only not able to love perfectly, but also actually deliberately choose to defy what God wants of us (starting with Adam and Eve). As a result, there is a gap between God and man, that no amount of good works can compensate for (because no one is perfect and they will continue to do unloving things as well as good things). In addition, mankind deserves punishment in the form of death for their continued defiance to God and continued unloving thoughts and behaviors. In order to assuage this punishment, the Jews established a sacrificial system by which the blood of animals acted as a substitute for their own blood. A strong example of blood protecting from God's judgment occurs in the Passover story, during which Jews, who were enslaved in Egypt, painted their doors with lamb's blood, thus protecting them from the 10th plague (the angel of death killing the firstborn sons in Egypt because Pharoah would not let the Hebrews go). This system, however, was not truly adequate, however, and really only foreshadowed what was truly necessary to bridge the gap between God and man: a perfect, willing, sacrifice that would last for eternity and cover all of an individual's imperfections (past, present and future). That is why Christ, God's firstborn son, was sacrificed -- to allow the punishment for mankind's transgressions to be properly paid, and create a means by which the gap between God and mankind would be permanently bridged.
Moving on to the Corinthians verse, the apostle Paul is making the doctrinal point that Christ had to be resurrected from the dead (because it demonstrates his divinity and confirms the perfection of his sacrifice). If Christ had not been resu
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Riona, I think you've got it kind of reversed, tho' I take your point. No, I don't think anyone should believe anything because it is the "fashion", to be clear. But IF (just if) someday it can be definitively determined that there isn't a god (how such could be done eludes me), should we go on believing there is just because we want to? Your flat-earth theory is reversed; if the world is PROVEN to be round, it IS dumbing down to say it's not. Therefore, should you go on believing it's flat despite evidence that now shows it's otherwise?
Man evolves. There are a lot of us who believe religion was something humans NEEDED when the world was full of so many things they couldn't understand and needed some kind of explanation for to ease their fears. As we evolved and learned more and more, that need is fading. Nonetheless, believing in SOMETHING is inherent in man, so I see it as a move forward to accept that there is "something" in the world, but to be willing to accept that we don't know what it is--maybe can't--without needing to be part of a religion whose dogma doesn't fit with logic and hasn't changed much through the centuries. From my observations, it seems to me tha the Church maintains so many things that aren't reasonable, it makes it impossible for me to accept it on face value. I don't KNOW what happens after death, but I can live with that and just try to be the person I believe I should be, without any expectation of reward or punishment, just because it's RIGHT and I know what's right; I don't need someone else telling me to believe in a specific way because otherwise I am condemned to hell or something. I see that as evolution in thinking.
No religious dogma all makes sense, pure and simple, whatever the religion. It's logical to me that early man didn't understand why so many scary things happen, and mankind has ALWAYS feared death, so coming up with explanations for all of that is comforting. I just don't need that comfort, and I don't think I or anyone else who doesn't need it should be condemned.
For me, I admire someone willing to have an open mind, to say "for me our life, our task, is before death", and "the Bible's account of Jesus's life as a mythological story about a man who may never have existed, even if it is a valuable source of wisdom about how to lead a good life". I see ""I don't think he was a god or a half god. I think he was a man, but he was a special man because he was very good in living from out of love, from out of the spirit of God he found inside himself" as a step FORWARD, not backward--and all too often I've met "Christians" who don't follow--or even in many cases KNOW--Christ's teachings, but feel self-righteous because they've got it "right". I abhor that.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanx Malachite (I MISSED YOU!) for trying to explain it to me. It still doesn't make sense to ME, but I kind of follow the logic it contains if you believe in God and original sin, etc. The sticking point for me is that one HAS to believe Christ is a divinity of some sort; for me it's sufficient to be "perfectly imperfect" and try to do the best I can to be the best person I can, while accepting my failings rather than judging myself negatively on them. I reject the idea that I need someone else to be sacrificed FOR me, because that abdicates the necessity of me striving to know myself and improve. If merely believing Christ was a divinity and there is a judgmental God absolves me of my sins and gains me entry into some sort of heaven, I can't live with that. I don't view anyone else, divinity or otherwise, being sacrificed FOR ME as being connected in any way with the need for me to be self-aware and grow, and while I know many Christians try to be the best person they can anyway, that convenient "out" is abhorrent to me.
I guess essentially through working at trying to be as self-aware as I can (which helpse me understand others and not judge them, as well), I KNOW when I've done right or wrong, and I'm fulfilled by continuing on my "path" while knowing I can never attain perfection. That's something many don't understand about buddhism...few, if any, of us can ever even hope to achieve Nirvana; we don't. It's the path of trying to get there which teaches us and helps us try to keep growing. If I don't HAVE to strive to be who I want to be, and am "saved" just because someone else was sacrificed, it's all too easy not to try. Does that make any sense?
I guess I'm saying that I better understand it now, but I choose to reject it. I do believe in Christ, by the way, but believe he was a great man with SO many wonderful things to teach humanity, just as was Buddha, but no more a "diety" THAN Buddha.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME