Haha, I pulled this from the old dusty memory banks, so it was probably a little like The Life of Christ in Stereo. But I suppose its no different than the gospel writers writing from their memory!

You know, I’ve read the Great Commission I don’t know how many times and this is the first time I noticed the phrase “but some doubted”. It was not in my mind at all when I wrote this post. I still see no mention of the Ascension in Matthew’s gospel, but your guesses at why the doubt was mentioned make sense.

I was sifting through old archives and have to say this is a brilliant post.

I too wondered why at the end of Matthew, after Jesus rose into heaven right before the disciples’ eyes, it says that some of them still doubted.

Honestly? How do you watch the guy fly up to heaven right before your eyes and still doubt it. This doesn’t make any sense.

Unless the person who wrote Matthew felt they had to do one of two things:

* Reassure readers that even if they did see Jesus rise they would have still doubted. Hence, they should not doubt.
* Explain why some of those who supposedly were there at the resurrection now were denying it. By showing that they were doubters they could be dismissed.

What do you think?

Juries do not testify.

But if you, or anyone, has believed at all then your faith has already surpassed Thomas and The Disciples because you have not seen the risen Christ after the crucifixion

Somehow it is not comforting to know that one’ faith, two-thousand years later, supercedes that of the people we supposedly gain our only source about the religious tradition one is to have faith in.

With all due respect, I’m afraid I have to disagree with you on this one. Thomas only believed when he had seen Christ after the crucifixion. But if you, or anyone, has believed at all then your faith has already surpassed Thomas and The Disciples because you have not seen the risen Christ after the crucifixion (and you didn’t see Jesus feed the poor, heal the sick, or raise Lazarus, either). And this I think is made clear in John 20:29.

The Seeding

On October 4, 1957 the Soviet Union launched the first of humanity’s machines to reach my realm. Sputnik means “co-traveler” so I hitched a ride and waited 92 days to plummet to Earth on the burning Star of Sputnik exactly 9 months before I was born on October 4, 1958. I entered the developing egg of a random woman and waited.

So…a new player arrives on the field. 92 is such an important number…

“When you say that you are skeptical of the church, what do you mean?”

I was not raised in the church, and most of my experience with it before becoming a Christian was not all that great. I’m sometimes critical of the church (as a whole, or many Christians in general), because we have dropped the ball on a lot of things… making battles of things that need not be (both within and outside the church), and generally not loving the world like we are called to do. I also have a great hope for the church to be what God desires it to be: a people who live their lives in such a way that it brings blessing and love to all the nations of the world.

“Are you skeptical about these same matters?”

Yes and no… (Hehe, as a musician myself, I HEAR you on the need to have some decent music…) I have absolutely no problem accepting that we are biologically “wired” for all the things you mention. None at all. But instead of seeing it as proof against authentic experience, I see it as God wiring us in such a way as to provide natural means to connect to Him. The important part is where we direct those means (i.e. to Him instead of to ourselves a la “spiritualism,” or towards escape a la buddhism, etc.). This opens us, practically, as an act of submission and trust for Him to do supernatural work in our hearts. Because God created us, and our world, it just makes sense that He would use many of the designs He put in place to take care of us. But He doesn’t HAVE to.

That said, I am skeptical when Christians say that we must worship/pray/meditate THIS way or THAT way. God wired us all similarly but differently, and would say that this is an excellent foundation from which to explore relationship with God. For example, I’m sometimes mildly ADD (which is why I love blogging). I can’t sit down and pray. I have to be walking. I prefer to hike up a massive hill, or something equally physically strenuous. But that doesn’t make my prayer any lower quality, or any less heard. God works through that.

“I like the rituals and stimuli provided by religion, but am whole-heartedly skeptical about all of the supernatural pronouncements.”

To be honest, I am sometimes as well… I mean, it’s HARD to believe it sometimes. It’s just not as easy to verify because it is irregular (hence “super”-natural). But then there are times when God comes out of left field and I have no other explanation (and not for lack of searching).

“I was a minister for ten years of my life, and now I can’t stand to hear the Roman Road (it’s an old gospel tract that led you through the book of Romans).”

Puke. I don’t blame you. When handed a tract, I would argue with the person for sheer entertainment. It’s sad and amusing all at the same time.

“Preaching Hell is really, really repulsive and unattractive to me…”

Hell is the one thing I wish weren’t in the Bible… but it is. And while I can’t ignore it, it is also not a tool for guilt-tripping people into believing in a God that joyously sends you there unless you get your sh*t together. Christians should not preach Hell, they should preach Grace.

That said, Hell is fundamental to understanding Grace (what is grace if we do not need it?). But the basis for our faith should not be fear, but love. I know it sounds like I’m mincing words, but it is a HUGELY important distinctive… I’d love to go into more detail on this, but I think it would take a lot more time and thought on my part to do it justice.

Does that answer your questions? I can definitely relate to where you are coming from. Thanks for the conversation, bro.

When you say that you are skeptical of the church, what do you mean? As a skeptic, do you doubt your salvation? What are you skeptical about? Also (because you seem intelligent and I devour these conversations of faith) what church are you referring to?

I am very aware of a need I have for the things the church offers (Christian). I need the community. I need the enlightening that comes through worship (our church has the whole buffet of instruments and I’m a music major who won’t go to a piano/hymn church ever again.) I need the time in “prayer”, and the connection that church brings to my childhood and family. I really don’t mind going to church at all. In fact, I rather like it. (Sunday mornings is enough for me, though.)

With all that said, I don’t BELIEVE ONE WORD of the supernatural claims made by the pastor. Last Sunday’s sermon was a “Salvation Sermon”, and I tuned it out, read the footnotes in my study Bible, and entertained myself after the music was over. I think the Biblical claims of afterlife, original sin, the Garden of Eden are ALL Ancient musings with NO TRUTH. I take the Bible’s claims as God’s Word as FALSE. No book on earth was authored by God. People can say otherwise, and the book itself might say it, but I don’t believe it.

I think there IS something about our brains, however, that need the things that only religion provides at this point in the brief history of mankind. Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris are BOTH respectors of religion to that extent. Religions DO provide for people elements that make our brains “happier”. To hear them speak, or to read their books, you find that Dennett and Harris both admit that religions do have elements to them that satisfy some deep needs that we all have, but that religions’ claims to metaphysical truths beyond the natural world are myth. For example, prayer/meditation is deeply imbedded in the need for our brains to procees our thoughts, music is emotionally satisfying, community satisfies the need to “fit in”. These are human needs satisfied by religion’s rituals and features, not by it’s doctrines. And the religion of your father will do just fine, in most cases.

Are you skeptical about these same matters? I’m just curious, because I may be more like you than I think. I’m not trying to be provacative. I like the rituals and stimuli provided by religion, but am whole-heartedly skeptical about all of the supernatural pronouncements. I was a minister for ten years of my life, and now I can’t stand to hear the Roman Road (it’s an old gospel tract that led you through the book of Romans). Preaching Hell is really, really repulsive and unattractive to me, and it’s all I can do to sit through when someone starts in on it. Would love to hear your thoughts.

James