Some Thoughts on Christian Faith

[Bosh]

note: I'm staying out of the "is god impossible" debate since my posts are getting too long already, but I'm definately on the theists' side on this one.

Hume was wrong.

About some things but about the differences between what he called "relations of ideas" and "matters of fact" he was spot on.

everybody makes some initial assumptions

there is a God, there is not a God, ect

That's Presuppositionalist thinking. Back! back! *pokes Jon with a stick*
I couldn't disagree more, you shouldn't build your world view off of unfounded assumptions, and if you have unfounded assumptions you should at least recognize them as such and not trust them too much.
But then your Churches annihilationist makes more sense, I'll forgive you because of that

Your moth to the flame argument sounds very much like Gnosticism.

Sufism ripped off Gnosticism extensively so there's a reason for that.

What about those who say god exists but it is possible that he/she doesn't? What denomination would that be? Deist?

Well in most religions its more OK to have weak belief since they care about actions than beliefs. I think you could be a good Muslim if you only had weak belief in Allah as long as you stuck to the Sharia well.

I think you, Boshko, have had strange yet common experiences with christianity. Not all denomination, sects, what-have-you are as you have set them up to be.

Actually, what I'm saying isn't so much that all Churches are all hell and brimfire, I'm more saying that a lot of those who aren't don't have a philosophically defensible position. I've yet to hear a good definition of faith and why it makes a difference/is necessary from a Liberal Christian. Sure Liberal Christianity is a lot nicer and friendlier and they're generally great people, but what they basically due is fall into the "Ignoring It" bit in second half of my analysis and thus aren't too convincing philosophically.

If God is probable, than one ought to believe in him based on that reasoning alone. If God is improbable, you can only say that the evidence does not favour either side.

That doesn't make any sense. You're saying that if its probable that God exists you should be sure he exists and if its improbable that he exists you should be completely unsure. There's no logical symetry there.

Back to the 'sign of Jonah' and the Resurrection. We believe in Christ because of this sign, which God provided to aid us in our faith.

You're missing what I was saying. I was saying that is Christian morality is good on its own terms (and not because Jesus says its good) then that's not a reason (in and of itself) to believe in Jesus' divinity.

Everyone who believes in Christ will be saved.

But what does "believes in Christ" mean and why is it so important? That's what I'm looking for here. I'm working on the assumption that the only explanation for why faith is important that makes any sense is that its a special/rare/hard transformative experience that connects you intimately with God.

And on what biblical grounds do they cite this proportion?

None that I know of. But it makes sense philosophically.

Yes. Why does it seem too easy and too fake?

Because in every other religion (and in most Christian denominations) people claiming any kind of vaguely mystical communion with God are damn rare. I don't see why Pentecostals should be special

I think this is the cruicial complaint you file against Christianity, that they have all believers equally valuable, regardless of their particular talents.

What I'm trying to dig at is that for faith to mean anything it has to be something big, important and transformative and this doesn't square well with the whole community of believers. The vast majority of Christians are decent well-meaning people for whom faith didn't really transform them and who don't really think all that much about their connection with God on a daily basis, but still honestly believe that Jesus is God.
Is this not really faith or is faith really that easy and low-maintenance. And if that's not really faith it seems a bit harsh to send all those people who hell and if faith is really that easy and low-maintenance why is it so important? See what I'm getting at here?

Faith requires no justification by reason.

Then what is it justified by?

you can't even justify your believe in the existance of a world outside of your own head, on purely logical grounds either.

Yes I can I have a provisional weak belief that things exist beyond my head because every single second of my life is a bit of evidence (however inconclusive) that this weak belief is true.

[Bosh]

I thot the "eternity in torment" would end Judgement Day

Actually, according to a lot of denominations that's when the torment begins since before Judgement day everyone's just dead and in their graves and nobody's been judged worthy of heaven or hell until everyone gets resurrected and judged.

Also, what about natural evil? Why does God cause (or allow the causation of) miscarriages, natural disasters, sinking ferries etc.?

There's a Muslim story about Jesus asking God to bless a man and cure him of his various afflictions. God says that those afflictions ARE the blessings that God has bestowed upon him since they're forgeing him into a man worthy of paradise. This makes sense, since what does our short life matter in comparison to eternity?
I really don't buy the "life sucks, so God can't exist" argument. I have better reasons for not believing in God

The bible speaks to us of G-d softening hardened hearts

And hardening soft hearts.

I'm glad to see I was so inspirational. This is going to be a tough one to answer though.

Thanks, I really appreciate your responce.

much like the trinity is three distinct persons of a single conjoined essence. We are not great spirits shackled for a time in a primitive body, nor are we energized aggregates of matter.

Interesting perspective, don't think I've heard this one before. Bit more pleasant than the common "divine spark in a material prison" perspective.

Boshko came surprisingly close to our theology with his first post way back there, but didn't follow all the implications of the ideas through

Exactly, I agree with your premises completely but reach different conclusions.

The truth of it is, the moths that don't follow the "flame" are in hell enough, no punishment required, without any voluntary punishment.

This basically means getting rid of hell as physical torment. Are you saying that I'll have an everlasting life where I'll be about as happy as I am now? Don't consider this to be much of an inconvenience (except for the boredom inherent in any kind of eternity) since I'm pretty happy right now (except for my evil work schedule).

It's always just a place that happens to really, really suck. I think that's significant.

Why?
Just being separated from God isn't enough since there are plenty of happy nonbelievers and miserable sincere Christians. If you can explain this adequately than I'll concede that Orthodoxy makes a hell of a lot more sence philosophically than the vast majority of Christian denominations since it has a definition of faith that I can understand.

A human without free will is less than fully human. More like a biological machine.

I think we basically are biological machines, but that's another argument.

BTW, note that "Basking in God's presence forever" might not be the same as you think.

I know, what exactly heaven entails is a complicated issue. I know a good bit about the different options due to having read a good bit of Sufi philosophy in college (Sufis care a lot about this issue).

thanks Elok!

[Jon Miller]

you have to make initial assumptions

you do it in Science too

Jon Miller

[Theben]

I can't say how much of my basic etherview is molded by peers and the entertainment industry and how much by Episcopalian upbringing. But over the years I gathered 4 basic places your soul winds up:
Heaven: THE place to go. Always pleasant, and the souls present have access to omniscence.
Limbo: Where souls go when waiting to be reborn. Not sinful enough to go to hell, but not in tune with God so no pass to heaven. A lot of nothing and the souls are "disconnected", as described by Elok re: hell, w/o the awareness.
Purgatory: The actual lake of fire. Souls are here only because they preceded the coming of christ, or were for some reason unable to worship God thru Christ. The souls burn in the lake for x thousands of years, finally their sins are 'burned' away, and the cleansed soul can ascend.
Hell: A conglomerate of your worst nightmares x1000. No chance to escape.
Limbo, Purgatory, and Hell are all destroyed on Judgement Day, leaving only Heaven.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What do you make of Matthew 25:37-46 ?

I don't think it matters. To quote the bible or any religious text is useless as the text is irrelevant.

I've got 2 general lines of thinking. 1st is the 'atheist' thought, which has for the most part been covered here and doesn't relate to the question at hand. I only mention it because that's the stronger of the two re: how I am vs. theism.
Number two is 'If I believed in God, this is what I'd think.' 1st and foremost would be a perfect God vis-a-vis imperfect humans. Christians refer to the bible as the Word of God: yet it by definition CANNOT be the Word of God as the WoG would have to be perfect-otherwise it didn't come from God. Man is imperfect, and therefore cannot fathom perfection. So any prophet attempting to transscribe the WoG, however close, will always fail. This is what leads to multiple versions of the WoG (King James, Old Testament, New Testmaent, Torah, Quran, etc.) as well as contradictions within the same texts. So while the texts are useful for historical study and are useful for interpreting religious law and study of culture, they aren't acceptable in providing insight into the 'mind' of God nor proof of it's existence.

Another thing I'd like to think is that 'God' is inherent in all religions, which would make being a member of any religion pointless. If God is omnipotent and omniscient, it would seem to me ridiculous (if not blasphemous) for a mere human to put limitations on God. And that's exactly what we do: one can only worship God in such a fashion (thru Jesus, thru a member of clergy, praying towards Mecca, etc.) and we disavow others who worship differently (or kill them). Who are we mere mortals to say how God intends to be worshipped? Would one really think that God would intentionally allow so many diverse religions to be on the planet knowing fully that only one, or a limited few, could possibly gain access to heaven? Don't think so. IMHO all religions have equal access, which makes the ritual (Sunday church) trite and the actual (true belief in God, helping others) the only things that matter.

[TheStinger]

Just a few thoughts.

When did Man stop getting the right to argue with God As Abraham did.

If God is all knowing/powerful why did he not know that there were other people to be saved as well as Lot.

When is the destruction of the cities supposed to have taken place.

Also how could new born babies in those cities have been deemed to be sinful.

[Jon Miller]

it is not that we can only worship God in a certain fashion

it is that there are some ways of worshiping that are better than others

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

in my church's doctrine there is a time (1000 years) between judgement and the final of making everything

in this time we sort of put God on trial if it were, we ask him why things happened and the like

I am not sure where the doctrine comes from (And I probably did not get it entirely right)

Jon Miller

[Theben]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
it is not that we can only worship God in a certain fashion

it is that there are some ways of worshiping that are better than others

Jon Miller

Not according to most fundamentalist thought.

And if all methods allow access to heaven what difference does it make?

[Jon Miller]

because some do it better than others

like I expect that there will be a far greater precentage of Jews in heaven than followers of Zeus

also, I think some religions (worshiping Zeus for example), may not be worshiping God at all

in addition, it is good to know God, I beleive that the Christian religion reveals the most about God, therefore I try and get others to be Christian

Jon Miller

[Theben]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
because some do it better than others

like I expect that there will be a far greater precentage of Jews in heaven than followers of Zeus

also, I think some religions (worshiping Zeus for example), may not be worshiping God at all

That's the limiting I'm talking about. How do you know that Zeus isn't an aspect of God? Pretty arrogant for a mortal.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
in addition, it is good to know God, I beleive that the Christian religion reveals the most about God, therefore I try and get others to be Christian

I think you're wasting your time and theirs. You're trying to change someone from worshipping God into someone worshipping God.

[Jon Miller]

here is an example

let's say that there are two bums

one is eating old moldy bread that he finds on the ground

the other has recently found a bakery where the day old bread is put in the garbage at the end of the day

now they are both getting something from what they are eating

but one of the bums has it far better

isn't it right for him to share?

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

and I dont' know that Zeus is not an aspect of God

I merely think so, based upon the character Zeus is said to possess

you can' worship a lot of things that are not aspects of God

there are people who worship money for example, they are not worshiping God when they do so

it has nothing to do with arrogance, merely in the God I choose to worship

if there is a god with the character of zeus, I would not choose to worship him, just like I do not choose to worship money

there are deffinitely things in life which are not good, and I choose not to glorify those things

there is also difference between nature, and God

while I see His hand in the workings of the universe, I don't worship the workings

Jon Miller

[Elok]

Well, Bosh, we don't see Christians as those who ARE reconnected with God. Christians are the ones who are trying to reconnect. Since the fall the world has become much less clear, and a true knowledge of God is almost impossible, especially since sin causes suffering, and the temptation to sin to escape suffering naturally causes more...and so on. There is a goal, in my faith at least, to find peace in this life, not merely to wait for it in the next. Heaven is probably something like the spirit of the ascetic monks who have nothing but live in perfect peace and contentment, desiring nothing and living to marvel every day at the continuing beauty of the world. The difference is the increasingly clear and fully understood happiness that they only glimpsed before, and without the distractions of sin. By the way, the reason there are so few ascetics, aside from the fact that they don't do as much for society as dedicated workers, is that it's pretty frigging hard to be an ascetic, and not just in terms of bodily discipline. Hesychasy is like the spiritual equivalent of SEAL training, and not everyone has the strength and faith to see it through.

Hell is the wicked having to tolerate their own odious presence for eternity, without hope of an end to it, without decent people to manipulate, without mercy. I don't think there's anything in Hell but the damned themselves and possibly the devils to join them.

Note that I do not endorse the "believe in Jesus and everything is instantly fixed" blurb. I'm pretty sure you know already, but I wanted to make it totally clear that the reason for Christian faith is to guide us back to God, not as an end in itself. Nonchristians may yet come to salvation but it's a lot easier to get somewhere when you have an accurate map.

[Bosh]

you have to make initial assumptions

you do it in Science too

Jon Miller

Depends on what you mean by assumptions. If you mean by assumptions tentative axioms that you have Weak Faith in because they seem to work and fit with reality despite being unprovable then yes. If you mean things you have absolute faith in because you have a hard time building up a worldview without doing so then no. Having strong faith in anything without some kind of really dramatic leap of faith doesn't make any sense (and I don't think leaps of faith are too much better) have Strong Faith in some random assumptions is just silly.

But over the years I gathered 4 basic places your soul winds up:

Seems like a somewhat arbitrary agglomeration, pretty interesting though.

Another thing I'd like to think is that 'God' is inherent in all religions

Even non-theistic religions?

it is not that we can only worship God in a certain fashion

What about "there is no way to the Father but for me" (or however its phrased exactly)?

I wish I had a copy of my book about Ibn Arabi with me, he said some damn interesting things about the multiple aspects of the divine.