On the Issues of Christianity

Remember I said that I would post a list of things that I believed within Christianity? Well, here it is.

• I believe that the Bible is God's inspired word. I believe the original manuscripts were inerrant. I do not believe some or all of the current ones are, though, in the sense that there are some scribal errors, as in, numerical or word translation mistakes. I also do not recognize inerrancy as a sacred tenant. If someone were to proved an error or contradiction in the Bible, then bully for them. But that doesn't change that it still has to be critically examined just like it would have been.
• I believe most if not all of the contradictions skeptics frequently cite have answers, and aren't true contradictions. 75% of them can be solved with a simple, contextualized reading. The other 25% need more historical background knowledge, like old Hebrew customs, etc.
• More about God's inspired word...I believe that inspiration does not mean dictation. I have a few friends that believe that God literally said every word of the Bible, but that's rather strange. Why would there be phrases like, "Not I, but the Lord?" if God were saying it? Why, also, would there be certain passages in, say, 1 Corinthians, that say in essence, "Well, I don't have a clear word from God about this, so here's my opinion?" Furthermore, if God dictated the Bible, there would be a uniform style to how they were written, which is obviously not the case, as each author was different in the way they recorded things.
• Due to these two points, please don't try to get me to answer such statements as, "Well, if God were trying to give us a message, he'd make it understandable to everyone/perfect/etc," or any other drivel like that, because to say "God wrote the Bible" is a misunderstanding of what "inspiration" is.
• I believe God is all-powerful, but not beyond the realms of logically or actually possible things. For example, I believe God can't create a rock so big he can't lift it, or can't create a circle with corners. I believe this because the true meaning of omnipotence is to be able to do anything logically possible.
• I believe the Gospels are eyewitness accounts, written by the men they're attributed to. I believe this because of textual criticism of scholars and internal evidence.
• I don't buy the Christ-myth hypothesis (Jesus never existed) because I also don't buy that the US didn't go to the moon or that Elvis is still alive today, or practically any other conceivable conspiracy theory, come to think of it. I do not believe that the Jesus story was an assembly of pagan myths, because to say that and be sincere, you have to be ignorant of the myths and uncritical in your research methods, copying straight from the likes of Acharya or Kersey Graves. I also do not believe that the lack of evidence of Jesus Christ while he was alive is evidence for his lack of existing, because there aren't really any good reasons why there should be, due to his status as a peasant, heretic, run-of-the-mill "prophet" in an honor and shame society.
• I don't buy the whole, "God's plan" thing as much as some people do. In a sense, I believe that God largely lets us make our own decisions rather than setting out a game plan for our lives. When bad things happen, I try not to say "God has a plan for this to work through the good," like others do, because in all reality, he probably doesn't. It's just a mistake that some person made that caused it, which God allowed because he's under no obligation to fix any mistake humans make, and he lets humans have free will. For those of you who think that omniscience is contradictory to free will, I'll undoubtedly get to that later. For now, know that your argument rests on the modal fallacy, and consider Molinism (see works by William Lane Craig) or even Open View Theism if you want to go that far.
• For future reference, I don't capitalize "he" when in reference to God a lot. That's not because I don't find God to be what He is or don't think God is holy or anything. It's simply because I forget, or I'm lazy and it's easier to not capitalize it. :-)
• I think reading Harry Potter as a Christian is perfectly okay.
• I think when people cite Leviticus or Deuteronomy as sources for law, (especially skeptics, who find things cruel and demand to know why we dont follow them today) they don't understand that those laws were given to specific people and that we all didn't sign the Deuteronomic Covenant. Those books are, today, just to serve as a window to our past to see what kind of laws they followed.
• Does this mean I also believe that none of it is relevant? Yes, unless it's repeated in the New Testament. So does that mean that I think when people cite verses about homosexuality from books like that, they're being hypocritical? Yes.
• I do think homosexuality is a sin, though. That's repeated in the New Testament, making it still relevant to our daily lives. That doesn't make me a homophobe, though. I like gay people a lot, in fact, some of my closest friends are gay and I have nothing against them as people. Most of them are incredibly nice people, some of the nicest around. I also prefer to not cause controversy by voicing my opinion to them and saying, "Turn from your ways!" because I acknowledge that it's the epitemy of "Easier said then done" and I don't want to provoke any unneccesary conflicts. So, in essence, my policy is: "Love the sinner, hate the sin, don't talk about their sin, and let them live their own life," in this case. Do I support the legalization of gay marriage? I'll give a reluctant "Yes," here, because I feel that religion doesn't really have a place in legislation and politics. I feel pushing your religion on someone, no matter in what way, is wrong. I also feel, though, that pushing away religion is a terrible mistake as well.
• I'm a preterist. That means that I believe some, or all, or the book of Revelation has already occured in early Jerusalem, and all we have to wait for is the final coming and resurrection. So, naturally, I don't buy the Left Behind series, or the rapture for that matter. I'm not an expert on this yet, so I won't be posting a lot of material about it as of now, but it makes the most sense due to the fact that it solves some Biblical issues (Jesus saying, "All this will happen in this generation," etc)
• I don't believe Hell has literal fire. It's more of a state, rather than an actual place of physical torment. I think J.P. Holding at Tektonics.org explains this nicely: "Biblical pictures of flame are clearly metaphors, first because if taken literally they result in contradiction (how can there be flames, yet also darkness, as the Bible says?); second, because as metaphors they fit in with other metaphors (flames and thirst as the opposite of water, which is in Scripture a metaphor for God's Spirit) and also fit a literal experience of shame (think of being ashamed and your face burning). Furthermore, other descriptions of hell, such as people weeping and grinding their teeth, match with expressions of shame in the ancient world, but not physical pain." So, if you say anything about "God would be cruel to send me to hell and have me burn for eternity," I'll shake my head and say, "I don't buy that."
• My youth pastor commented on that by saying, "Brimstone/sulfur doesn't burn with a flame, so there could be darkness." But as it turns out, when burned it does emit a flame, a blue one in fact. Sorry man.

That's all for now. If you have any specific questions on where I stand on other issues, feel free to email me and ask.