Forgive me if this topic has been broached in the past, but can I be Christian without believe in God? The logical answer is "No" because the existence of God is more than paramount in the Christian religion, but I'm still so in love with the teachings of Jesus and the values of Christianity. It's just that I believe is science- Darwin and all that jazz. I was in fact raised Jewish, but I'm falling into Christianity and really liking it all. So, is it just too wrong to call myself Christian?
I don't suppose you could be both athiest and christian... However that's nothing to stop you from doing as you please... You don't have to be part of the any religion to follow it's values and teachings...
here ya go: http://www.atheists-for-jesus.com I've no doubt Jesus, the charismatic ordinary human being, existed. So did King Arthur - but he didn't go around slaying magical dragons.... Jesus himself had some sensible things to say. Many of those that came after him were just meglomaniac greedy hypocrites. Paul for example. ~
I am of the opinion that 'the magical' King Arthur did not exist too. Just that a Chief from the west Celt kingdom corresponding to Cornwall and Devon fought off valiantly some Romanised tribes left behind after the fall of the empire. As with the Celtic mode of historical recording, his story was passed down oraly (thus embelished). ~
No you can't be an atheist and a Christian. Christianity depends on belief in god, belief in jesus (usually as god) and the belief that jesus, by himself, erased our sins with his blood. (personally, i can't see how an honest person can believe the last thing, since it removes personal responsibility). Anyways, one can be "in love with" the philosophy attributed to jesus, but that doesn't make you a christian. It just makes you a philosopher impressed with the gospel philosophy. Anyways, what jesus taught isn't anything very new, preachers and prophets have been saying that for a long time. The resurrection wasn't new either (see Horus of the Egyptian mythology, among many others). The new thing is that the resurrection erased all sins of mankind. That's the stand out characteristic to Christianity, as far as i can see. I like jesus message as I like the Buddha's, or the message in Hinduism or whatever. But that doesn't make me a buddhist or a hindu or a christian. I borrow ideas and practices from them all and that's how I like it.
I think you should just make a new category for yourself how about Christian Moralist Athiest (athiest that follows the teachings of the bible)
Isn't belief in G-d only one of the 10 commandments? How many 'true christians' break one or more commandment? I don't see anything wrong with you being an athiest christian at all, good onya I think. You can really learn a lot from the bible and other religious sources, and if someone's going to tell you you're wrong for believing in parts of the bible and disbelieving others, I say that they have the problem, not you. I am yet to find one christian who faithfully believes every passage in the bible as it was originally meant, bar of course the fundamentalist christians who also believe things like dinosaur bones were planted by the government.
ellenfunkel: sure, you can join the UUA... shalom... roly: i hope you are kidding... (but i rather think you are not...)
UUA ? Ungirdled Udder Attack? Uninterested Unimpressed Aardvark? Unfettered Unscrupulous Avacado? Unexplained Unknown Acronym? ~
I'm flattered by your offer m'lady but I'm afraid I must decline for I am bereft of udders; being a gentleman 'n all.
Disarm you are reading the 1st commandment wrong and thinking the wrong way of the commandments. The commandment states you shall believe in only God and only worship God. A real christian would recognize the fact that just because people don't follow the commandments doesn't mean you shouldn't try your hardest to. Plus the definiton of christian is "Professing the belief in Jesus as Christ and Lord of all"
I disagree. Historians, contemporary with Caesar, wrote of him in many sources. No one contemporary with Jesus wrote of him (while he was alive). And aside from the gospels, there are only two sources of historians writing about Jesus in the first century. And these passages appear very much to be later additions. And the contradictions in the Gospels also work against you. Thus, "the evidence for Jesus is shaky" though not completely absent. But you say there's all this proof of Jesus? Prove it. Show me the historical sources. Maybe you know more than I do.