Ask an Evangelical IV

[El_Machinae]

Most people today are interested in science and other things to explain God away, they do not need demonic forces to do so.

True, "obviously demonic" miracles would degrade current skepticism regarding supernatural forces. Modern disbelief in God is certainly (partially) caused by general acceptance of materialism (the theory that the only thing that exists is matter or energy). If Satanic priest had observable power, the 'case for God' becomes stronger too.

A great part of the skepticism regarding God (as well as the lack of observable supernatural forces) is that the universe does not look like it matches with what the Bible describes.

Do you think God intentionally made a universe that looked to be billions of years old to 20th? Do you think He accidentally made it look billions of years old to 20th century humans?

 

[peter grimes]

Yes, evidently it is possible for people to do some things by that kind of power, but I don't know of anywhere in the Bible where it was used for good.

Do you have a source for this?

 

[Borachio]

A great part of the skepticism regarding God (as well as the lack of observable supernatural forces) is that the universe does not look like it matches with what the Bible describes.

Not that I disagree with you particularly, but this intrigues me. What would a supernatural force look like?

If some extraordinary phenomenon (and I can't think of any good example of what one might be) occurred, wouldn't scientists just set about trying to explain it?

The scientist's default position seems to be that nothing is inexplicable. Ergo there are no supernatural forces.

 

[El_Machinae]

Peter, the average Evangelical is regularly exposed to ancedotes regarding demonic and divine supernatural intervention. It's a function of credibility: the witnesses to these event report on them personally (to the congregation), but not one of them have evidence that would budge a skeptic's mind. This is similar to the UFO field: sane and normal people have reported amazing things. They seem credible, but they have no real evidence beyond their sincerity and their apparent normalness

 

[caketastydelish]

No one really responded to my question, other than _Random_, who simply agreed with me.

So I'll ask again:

Why do so many evangelical Christians completely ignore people like Constantine even though they were critical to spreading Christianity into what it is today?

 

[Borachio]

I, of course, have no idea. What exactly are you getting at? Do they ignore people like Constantine?

Constantine_I_and_Christianity

 

[caketastydelish]

They never bother to bring up Constantine in either Sunday school or during sermons. Many of them don't even know who Constantine was, and those that do seem to view him as relatively insignificant, or at the very least, not worth studying.

 

[schlaufuchs]

They never bother to bring up Constantine in either Sunday school or during sermons. Many of them don't even know who Constantine was, and those that do seem to view him as relatively insignificant, or at the very least, not worth studying.

...Because it's not really relevant to Sunday School?

 

[Heerlo]

Do you have a source for this?

If you mean proof, I guess I don't have any.I just believe the Bible, and people did things like this in the Bible.

No one really responded to my question, other than _Random_, who simply agreed with me.

So I'll ask again:

Why do so many evangelical Christians completely ignore people like Constantine even though they were critical to spreading Christianity into what it is today?

I don't know.Maybe it's just because he doesn't have anything to do with the Bible.Maybe you're right that most Christians don't know who he is.

Just a theory:I think it's possible that his alleged vision was a plan of Satan's to corrupt the Christian Church by giving it favor from Rome.I'm not sure if that's what even caused it, but the Church did eventually become corrupt.

 

[caketastydelish]

...Because it's not really relevant to Sunday School?

Were it not for people like Constantine they probably wouldn't even be in sunday school.

I don't know.Maybe it's just because he doesn't have anything to do with the Bible.Maybe you're right that most Christians don't know who he is.

Just a theory:I think it's possible that his alleged vision was a plan of Satan's to corrupt the Christian Church by giving it favor from Rome.I'm not sure if that's what even caused it, but the Church did eventually become corrupt.

Rome was the very state that compiled the bible into what it is today. They preserved the bible throughout the middle ages. They actively spread Christianity.

 

[_random_]

Just a theory:I think it's possible that his alleged vision was a plan of Satan's to corrupt the Christian Church by giving it favor from Rome.I'm not sure if that's what even caused it, but the Church did eventually become corrupt.

What do you see as evidence of this corruption and why was splintering necessary to overcome it?

 

[uppi]

Not that I disagree with you particularly, but this intrigues me. What would a supernatural force look like?

If some extraordinary phenomenon (and I can't think of any good example of what one might be) occurred, wouldn't scientists just set about trying to explain it?

The scientist's default position seems to be that nothing is inexplicable. Ergo there are no supernatural forces.

Any scientist would agree that there are things that cannot be explained right now and some things that will never be explained. But for these things there is always the possibility that there is an explanations that nobody knows right now and that may never be known to anybody. So there is no way to prove something is supernatural, because that would require the impossible proof that no explanation can exist. So in the end unless an explanation is found, it is a matter of personal conviction what is natural and what is supernatural.

Why do so many evangelical Christians completely ignore people like Constantine even though they were critical to spreading Christianity into what it is today?

Constantine is seen as the starting point for the unholy marriage between state and church, which led Christianity away from the One True Path. Sometimes it feels like there is some sort of persecution complex: There is the feeling that a real Christian will be persecuted for his beliefs. So Christians becoming favored by the state instead of being persecuted is suspect. So the results of Constantine's actions are seen ambiguously.

Another reason is that the only authority Evangelicals accept is the the Bible. So in particular they do not ascribe any authority even to the church fathers. So even they are only mentioned very rarely. Constantine was not even that, so it isn't very unusual that he gets ignored.

 

[El_Machinae]

You could also say that Paul's vision was a plan of Satan's, or that John of Patmos's vision was a plan of Satan's.

Here's evidence of what I mean

For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect

And by the hands of the apostles (i.e., Paul & co.) were many signs and wonders wrought among the people;

And because of these signs & wonders, we have people putting a Pauline slant on Christianity.

 

[timtofly]

Do you see miracles in every way?
Do you see miracles everyday?

To me being able to breath is a miracle. Not that I have trouble breathing. What came first; the breathing in of air or the pushing out of carbon dioxide?

True, "obviously demonic" miracles would degrade current skepticism regarding supernatural forces. Modern disbelief in God is certainly (partially) caused by general acceptance of materialism (the theory that the only thing that exists is matter or energy). If Satanic priest had observable power, the 'case for God' becomes stronger too.

A great part of the skepticism regarding God (as well as the lack of observable supernatural forces) is that the universe does not look like it matches with what the Bible describes.

Do you think God intentionally made a universe that looked to be billions of years old to 20th? Do you think He accidentally made it look billions of years old to 20th century humans?

I would have a better grasp at an answer, if I knew what the universe looked like 10,000 years ago. I don't even want to hazard a guess, since I do not know.

Not that I disagree with you particularly, but this intrigues me. What would a supernatural force look like?

If some extraordinary phenomenon (and I can't think of any good example of what one might be) occurred, wouldn't scientists just set about trying to explain it?

The scientist's default position seems to be that nothing is inexplicable. Ergo there are no supernatural forces.

Uppi (post 212) answered this better than I could, but here are my thoughts:

Spoiler :

If there were such a thing as a wherewolf, would it be natural or supernatural. If we could transport an automobile back in time 300 years, would native americans view it as natural or supernatural? Something that is supernatural to me just means it does not happen on a consistent natural basis for us to accept it as an every day occurance. What if a wherewolf was a human that was so influenced by a demonic force that he turned into a ravenous beast. Science may perhaps explain that the genetic makeup had changed. If it had not, then would they just call that supernatural? I doubt they would call it a demonic force.

They never bother to bring up Constantine in either Sunday school or during sermons. Many of them don't even know who Constantine was, and those that do seem to view him as relatively insignificant, or at the very least, not worth studying.

Uppi (post 212) covered this one also, but here are my thoughts.

Spoiler :

Some people discredit Columbus who was much later in history. Since Constantine took the church in the wrong direction IMHO, I see no reason to place him in any higher importance than Columbus. I am pretty sure they both did what they could, and probably had no clue how influential they really were. I learned about both of them in school, but that was before the internets, where every one gets their learning from today.

 

[Heerlo]

What do you see as evidence of this corruption and why was splintering necessary to overcome it?

The Catholic Church emerged from this situation and distorted the Scriptures and added their own traditions and things that were not Biblical, thus corrupting the Church.

If there is a group, such as the Catholic Church, that teaches unScriptural things, then how can a True Christian rightly stay with such a group?If was the same with the Protestants.They rediscovered that the Bible was God's Word and that the things Catholics were teaching were not Biblical, and so they broke up with the Catholic Church.

You could also say that Paul's vision was a plan of Satan's, or that John of Patmos's vision was a plan of Satan's.

Here's evidence of what I mean





And because of these signs & wonders, we have people putting a Pauline slant on Christianity.

Acts Chapter 5 was before Paul was converted.And how could Paul's Vision have been from Satan?If you study the whole Bible, you will find, that the whole Bible, even the Old Testament, was in line with what Paul taught.I think God said the same things in the Old Testament as He did in the New.And why would Satan give Paul something that would change the lives of people for good, like Paul's Message did?

And I believe John's Vision is in total agreement with the other end-time Prophecies in the Bible.And why would Satan give John a Vision that foretold his own defeat?John's Vision clearly says that Satan will be defeated.

 

[_random_]

The Catholic Church emerged from this situation and distorted the Scriptures and added their own traditions and things that were not Biblical, thus corrupting the Church.

If there is a group, such as the Catholic Church, that teaches unScriptural things, then how can a True Christian rightly stay with such a group?If was the same with the Protestants.They rediscovered that the Bible was God's Word and that the things Catholics were teaching were not Biblical, and so they broke up with the Catholic Church.

What particular things do you object to about the Catholic Church? And what about the Orthodox Church? And what has this to do with St. Constantine?

 

[caketastydelish]

I also don't see why you all have bypassed my point.

The Catholic church compiled the bible.

If it wasn't for the Catholic church, the bible itself wouldn't exist to begin with. More importantly than that, they ensured Christianity would be spread throughout Europe. The british would have never been Christian were it not for the Catholic missionaries converting that island, and thus, were it not for them, the British would have not been Christian when they came to the new world.

So, by effect, you (supposing you're American) probably would not have been Christian. Constantine was extremely critical to making Christianity the religion of Europe.

 

[Perfection]

What's your thought on exorcisms/demonic possession?

 

[Heerlo]

What particular things do you object to about the Catholic Church? And what about the Orthodox Church? And what has this to do with St. Constantine?

Well, I think the Catholics think too much of Mary.The Bible does not say the Mary was Divine or anything like that.I'm not sure if that's what the Catholics believe about her.I'm not sure exactly what they believe about her, but I'm pretty sure that they think too much of her.Even though she was the one Jesus was born through, she was just a person like anyone else.Jesus is the One that should be lifted up, not her, and not anyone else.

I think the Catholics also taught the unBiblical doctrine that people who participated in the crusades could earn forgiveness of sin, or something like that.I think they also said that anyone killed while on a crusade was guarunteed entrance into Heaven.The Bible does not teach these things.

I don't really know too much about the beliefs of the Orthodox Church.But I suspect that they too have doctrines that do not completely agree with God's Word.

Your question about Constantine;People were talking about why so many Christians never mention him, seeing as how he did so much to help Christianity.I was just saying that it's possible that his vision was given by Satan to cause Rome to be good to the Church and ultimately to cause it to be corrupted, as it was.That's just a theory.

I also don't see why you all have bypassed my point.

The Catholic church compiled the bible.

If it wasn't for the Catholic church, the bible itself wouldn't exist to begin with. More importantly than that, they ensured Christianity would be spread throughout Europe. The british would have never been Christian were it not for the Catholic missionaries converting that island, and thus, were it not for them, the British would have not been Christian when they came to the new world.

So, by effect, you (supposing you're American) probably would not have been Christian. Constantine was extremely critical to making Christianity the religion of Europe.

It is good that they compiled the Bible, even though they may have distorted it, and it may be good, in some ways, that Constantine helped to spread Christianity.And it may be true that some people(including me)that are Christians would not be Christians had it not been for those things.

But my point is that the Catholic Church has doctrinal error.If there had never been anyone who rose up to oppose that doctrinal error, then I might still be a Christian, but then I might be a Catholic, and thus, might not really be saved.

 

[Heerlo]

What's your thought on exorcisms/demonic possession?

I don't know what exorcisms is, but I believe that demon possesion can still happen.