Lemme take a stab at it:
What you’re saying is, if there IS a God, you don’t believe he would be so cruel as to send people to hell, simplying for not believing in Jesus Christ, our Savior, who was Born of the Virgin Mary and Became Man, etc etc…Corpus Christi…blah blah blah and all that fancy stuff? Keerect?
Because a person cannot force themselves to believe something, no matter how hard they try, or for whatever reason they don’t want to?
Because if that’s the case, Stoid, then, not all Christian dominations are like that. And for the record, I do not believe that anyone is truly going to Hell, or God would be that cruel. Most of the people who push that sort of thing are your Pat Robertson, Jack Chick types. And think about it-if THEY are going to Heaven, I’d gladly go in the opposite direction!
Andros:
Please explain to me how one can choose to believe. Pretend for example that you desire to believe that the Earth is flat. To help, imagine that I will give you $1,000,000 if you can convince yourself that the Earth is indeed flat, as demonstrated by successfully passing a polygraph test. Could you do it? How? I don’t think that I could, except by perhaps reading up on how to fool polygraphs. 
Libertarian:
Please support your assertions. The words “faith” or “believe” appear in the NT more than “love.” Not a scientific assessment, I know. But what about Paul’s admonitions that it is through faith in Jesus that we are saved, not love? Or Jesus’ statements that with faith, one can accomplish anything? Or the numerous NT claims that one must believe in Jesus–not love him, God, or other people–to attain salvation?
Well, depending on what flavor of Xianity you are talking about, here is one flaw in your arguement: many Christian’s make no attempt to claim that God gives everyone an equal chance for salvation. Heathens never exposed to God’s word? Hellbound, through no fault of thier own. The idea is something like this: salvation is a gift, not an entitlement. At one point it was an entitlement, but then Adam and Eve screwed it up. If you refuse to accpet God’s gift of Salvation, then that is your problem, not God’s. In offering a gift, he is under no obligation to offer it equally. As for why some people have an greater chance to be saved than others due to personality and up-bringing–that is the ineffable part.
The focus of much Christian thought is not on whether or not you are saved. The Puritans, for example, accepted that God was saving a select few for no reason disernable by man. You weren’t supposed to question it, and you were supposed to live by God’s laws becasue it was the right thing to do, not to get into heaven. So whether or not you as an individual can get into heaven is a small part of the overall message, which is more about glorifing God/Jesus and living a godly life.
Furthermore, I suspect many Christians would suggest that God is a better judge of what you have choice over than you are–I can see someone arguing that you did have a choice somewhere, sometime even if you didn’t realize it, you oculd have grown into a person capable of faith in the Christian God.
I am not particularly fond of the “all heathens to hell” type doctrines, but they do exisist, and they are accepted as Christian. Under that version of Christian Dogma I don’t think your arguement holds up.
From personal experiences the born againers I have had the misfortune to encounter were at personal lows in their lives. They were easy prey to the lurking predators hovering around them and were swept up into their charms. They were promised a better life and eternal salvation in return for a lifelong committment to a loving God.
Since I had not been exposed to religion or Christianity at a impressional age do I too have to sink into the pits of despairity to find God? I hope not.
**Stoid wrote:
According to every Christian I’ve ever heard or read, the core of being a Christian is faith.**
Okay, citation time. Simply because you’ve spoke to a lot of Christians doesn’t necessarily mean you’ve thoroughly exaimined their doctrine. I’d hardly call it a representative sample of Christian thought.
Can you show us official quotations from the various churches that call themselves Christian that this, indeed, is their doctrine?
WAY too easy, man:
Let’s start with the Bible, eh?
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, ** that whoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. **
John 3:16
“For by grace are you saved through ** faith ** and that not of yourselves…it is the gift of God.” Ephesians 2:8
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life: No man cometh to the Father, but by me.”
John 14:6
“He that ** believeth ** on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that ** believeth not ** the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”
John 3:36
From the Lutheran homepage:
Faith alone
“By His suffering and death as the substitute for all people of all time, Jesus purchased and won forgiveness and eternal life for them. Those who hear this Good News and ** believe it ** have the eternal life that it offers. God creates faith in Christ and gives people forgiveness through Him.” (Apparantly, God sometimes * creates * fatih. Well, he ain’t created it in me. And why did I get gypped?)
Man, religious doctrine and language sometimes really cracks me up…check this out from the baptist.org pages: "Being spiritually dead, man can do nothing positive in the spiritual realm. Indeed, it has been aptly noted that the only thing a dead man is capable of is stinking. Apart from God’s electing and regenerating grace, all men are ** a stench in His holy nostrils ** . " Well, hell, I don’t wanna be a stench in His Holy Nostrils!
Well, this is interesting, seems to support what some others have said:
"Regeneration is NOT the result of repentance and faith. A spiritually dead man is incapable of such acts in the spiritual realm. Repentance and faith are the results and evidences of regeneration.
Christ Died for His People and His Death Assures Their Salvation
Christ died for His elect sheep and for them ALONE.
(John 10:11) I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
Not all men are His sheep. Contrary to most modern preaching, it is NOT belief that makes one a sheep, rather belief MANIFESTS (or reveals) one to be a sheep. "
Well, I gave the cites…and it looks like there’s still no answer that seems very fair. Either those of us who do not believe must somehow ** make ** ourselves believe…OR…we don’t stand a chance anyway, because God didn’t CHOOSE us.
Either scenario completely blows, as far as I’m concerned, and completely belies the idea of a conscious creator that is in fact, a god, representative of all that is good, vs. a demon, representative of all that is evil. the whole thing is a Stench in My Mortal Nostrils, frankly.
stoid
Maybe you missed my answer.
You forgot the Mormon answer, that Stoid doesn’t have faith because she hasn’t heard the whole truth yet (yes, real zealots make you all look like amateurs). Note: The god that bleeds was always dead.
. . .
Hang in there Stoid, if there is a god, he would never, ever demand faith, but gleefully exterminate those that sell it as posers and deceivers. If there is a test to life, it is actual, not artificial. God would never reward faith, but rather would reward the lack of it as being rational, as he must be assumed to be if assumed at all. Faith is a dumbass trick coming and going.
**Stoid wrote:
Let’s start with the Bible, eh?**
You’ve quoted from the Lutherans and the Baptists and a sprinkling of other Bible verses (but not telling us which Bible you quoted from).
Nice try, but go back and re-read my question. I was asking for what the various churches believe, not what the Bible says. Not all of the churches agree on which Bible is correct or which interpretation of the Bible is correct. A few arguments have been fought over this very topic.
Add to this, the interpretations of the various philosophers thru the ages and you can see how the problem multiplies.
Well, I gave the cites…and it looks like there’s still no answer that seems very fair. Either those of us who do not believe must somehow make ourselves believe…OR…we don’t stand a chance anyway, because God didn’t CHOOSE us.
You’re overlooking the other alternatives. There is more than one God. You’ve tried the Judeo/Christian version, now try reaching out for something else.
I tried the “ask Jesus into my heart” thing many years ago and ended up with a long argument that lasted for 3 days, all inside my head. Not pleasant at all. Christianity wasn’t for me. I found something better, later on.
Religion is not a “one size fits all” proposition. Just because one shoe doesn’t fit, it doesn’t mean you have to be barefoot for the rest of your life.
**
Why single out Christianity? I can’t think of to many other religions that don’t require faith at its core. Certainly Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism all require one to believe that there’s invisible beings living somewhere that control things that we can’t. You’ve gotta have faith to have any religion.
**
Why single out one particular religion? Is the dogma of Judaism any better?
Marc
**
I don’t see much of a debate here. Maybe a general question.
**
There are people believe things which aren’t true on a regular basis. Parents sometimes refuse to believe that their kids do anything wrong despite a long list of evidence to the contrary. There are folks out there who don’t believe that man has walked on the moon.
**
Have a little faith in yourself. If you tried really hard I bet you could do it.
Marc
No, I didn’t miss it. It just didn’t seem to offer that much in the way of explanation.
This looks like a copout. It boils down, in my view, to the very thing I was complaining about in the OP: I don’t have faith, when I should have faith. So I must be choosing not to have faith. Well, I don’t have that choice, as I have explained in detail. How convenient to simply write it off to my being “in denial”. Bull. (Who believes this, anyway? Catholics?)
Well, obviously I cannot predict one way or another…people experience this conversion every day. It could even happen to me. But there’s nothing to debate or consider or examine in this…it comes across as another copout. “Oh well, you just haven’t had your chance yet.” Well, that’s not what I’ve been hearing from Christians all my life.
Well, I stated at the top that this is what I’ve always heard and what I’ve always read. I never stated that this is what all Christians everywhere believe, but it is absolutely what a lot of them do. And I have yet to hear or read anything significantly different. And considering the language of my OP, I don’t think it’s on me to find it.
The Christians that have proselytized to ME, and that I have read, have come from this basic premise. And since they are the ones who are selling, trying to get me to buy, I’m just stating what I find defective in the product.
I’m fully aware of this. I’ve been on a path for over 20 years. I have looked at other ideas, religions and belief systems. None annoy me to the degree that Christianity does, because what I have learned of others doesn’t seem as fantasitical and, well, silly. Not that any other particular religion has ever struck me as perfectly logical, but none has ever struck me as being so perfectly ILlogical. Not to mention the fact that no other religion seems so interested in getting everyone else to join in. (I have to say, the single most wacked-out religion I have ever looked into is the LDS flavor of Christianity. But I do understand its appeal… different thread, tho.) I’ve come across some things that feel more right than wrong. But nothing has ever struck me as perfectly true, only that if there is a supernatural aspect to existance, some things make much more sense to me than others.
Have you ever heard that story about the kid who asked his teacher…
“Can you see the sky?”
Teacher: “yes”
Student: “Can you see me?”
Teacher: “yes”
Student: “Can you see your mind?”
Teacher: “No”
Student: “Then you must not have one”
Of course the students question has varied from mind/personality/brain and such, but it is the same basic message. You cannot see God. One must have faith. The same faith used to believe in the human mind, conscience, personality…
hope this helps. I apologize if somebody has already posed this “argument”.
Stoid,
I have no faith either! (NO religion does it for me…)
DesCartes proved:
Assuming there is no God:
Belief in God has no consequence.
Lack of belief in God has no consequence.
Assuming there is a God:
Belief in God makes entrance to Heaven possible.
Lack of belief guarantees eternal damnation.
So, ultimately, the only rational choice is to believe in God. (It can’t possibly hurt you…)
Knowing this, I still can’t bring myself to worship in accordance with the rules of any religion out there.
I still think that it’s all bullshit.
If God, Jesus, Buddha or Allah intended for us to worship in any structured manner, why did they enlist the help of the infinitely fallible humans to write down all the rules and regulations in some religious text? Why not burn the message into a mountainside, or make it all appear as an elaborate birthmark on some “chosen one”?
We humans tend to have this unduly grandiose view of our significance, even in the scope of the universe. We believe that we are SO clever and wonderful. In reality, we aren’t likely the only intelligent life in the universe. In fact, it’s improbable. Why then, is there no mention of our other-world brethren in any religious text? Why would God, in all His(?) wisdom, devote all of His energies to the dead-end task of observing the tribulations of a bunch of naked monkies on this little planet, when the vast sea of possibilities that we call the universe would serve as a more interesting playground?
Wouldn’t it effectively dwarf God’s power and greatness to even IMPLY that we on earth constitute his chief concern?
I am not saying that there is no God, but I believe that if I go through life, doing good deeds in acceptance of the possiblity that I am merely an organic robot who will one day cease to exist, (in every way not in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics), knowing full well that there is no reward in practicing ‘the golden rule’, (other than knowing that I’ve made someone’s life a tad smoother), then I am MORE deserving of an afterlife reward than those who expect Heaven (or whatever) will come to them for being Good Christians (or whatever).
If there is a God, he is likely a scientist conducting an experiment that answers all questions simultaneously.
…And if after all the good I do without any expectations, God turns out to be real, and decides,“Well this stubborn fuck is going to Hell regardless of all the good stuff he did and bad stuff he didn’t do…”, then, to a God that would do that, I say: “You are a sick and cruel piece of shit! I’d rather burn in Hell with Satan and his minions, up to my balls in sewage with maggots erupting from my eye sockets than spend one moment with a self-righteous, egocentric scumbag like You!!!”
Stick a fork in me, I think I’m done!
I beg to differ. Strip away reincarnation from Buddhist doctrine and you arguably have a faith-free religion. (I would argue that even with reincarnation, Buddhism could be faith-free, though it would require accepting arguments that I personally do not.)
And Stoid: a) Just an observation: your quotes of the bible are rather John-dependent. The other gospels are less fundi-friendly.
b) It’s not clear to me whether Catholicism is vulnerable to your critique. And your exposition of Christianity doesn’t match particularly well with my Episcopalian upbringing, although I don’t pretend to have a more than a hazy idea of what Episcopalian dogma entails. Sorry that this agnostic can’t offer more info.
Personally, I would like to see a comparison of the number of Bible citations that espouse faith and the number that espouse love.
Context and significance of the quotes is important, as well.
Oh, and Stoid…?
Right there, in your OP, when you said…
Bolding mine.
Even if you didn’t intend for the implication to be there, other people see it. (I really doubt it was intentional).
Mr. Bunnyhurt (the epitome of wisdom if there ever was one)…
I take it, sir, that you know nothing of Mormon beliefs and practices other than what anti-Mormon web sites spew?
Here’s a thought regarding not only faith, but God–or whatever you would choose to have faith in, but for my example, I’ll say the Christian God, as it is in Him Whom I believe:
If one sincerely asks the question, “Can you prove to me God exists?”, the curious mind must be willing to entertain the possibility of the veracity of the questionee’s convictions.
For example, Bruce Lee was willing to “empty his teacup,” as he put it, in order to study out and determine whether or not a differing system of martial arts was superior or inferior to his nucleus art, Wing Chun, and to the acquired modifications/additions to said art. When he asked “Is American boxing a valid form of fighting,” he did not enter into the question with the mindset, “I must prove it is not.” He entered into the question with the mindset “I am not only willing to examine the possibility, I eagerly seek to benefit from the found results, be they in favor of, or opposed to, a positive finding.”
In the matter of God, it must be understood that, if someone asks me, as a “believer” I answer from bias-and if asked, they must be willing to entertain that bias. If not, why waste the time, mine or theirs? This is like a man who goes to the show dead-set against becoming involved in the story.
Oftentimes I’ll hear “you can’t use the bible,” “you can’t use nature,” you can’t use this or that–but this is moot; if the seeker desires that a Christian prove God exist, the seeker must be willing to allow for the means by which the believer presents his case. Instead of “You cannot prove it,” he who genuinely wishes to find an answer must don the attitude of “How would you prove it to me?”, and consequently open the door for any means the “believer” wishes to use to present his case.
That said, I myself would use not simply the Bible (but it would be used), not simply nature, (it, too, would be used), not exclusively personal testimony (definitely used), but I should be willing to give whatever means necessary to answer each successive question from the seeker as they arise, relying upon the Holy Spirit (which, as “believer,” I count on as my guide) to grant me the clarity, discernment, and humility, that I might “show myself approved.”
Prayerfully, as prayer would be in constant employment, the seeker would assess my efforts as sincere, if nothing else, and reflect upon the “good seed” sown.
If you, Stoid, or anyone else addressed me with specific questions as to how I came about having faith in God, I would readily respond. But for me to state a generalized ‘how one comes to faith’ would be a gross disservice to the myriad ways in which God leads people to Himself–as well as trying to create a specific formula in which God operates for every man. (Jesus Christ not being formulaic in that man can know Christ existed but having faith in Him is something different–yes, He is the Way to salvation in the Christian belief, but He is not necessarily the way to faith itself.) As you have already quoted, this faith is not our own, lest any man should boast, but a gift of God.
For me to try to dictate how you should come by your faith, I might just as well attempt to tell you that your perception of the color yellow is wrong and you should do it my way. However, if you wished to know how I came to mine, and chose to take a step toward discovering your own by implementing select facets of my own experiences as a measuring meter, this could be an entirely valid venue toward getting to the root of where your own faith dwells.
And this goes for anyone, to whomever you would ask an earnest question. Humans receive stimuli from outside sources which affect their future decision making based upon the results they garner from said stimuli. And the people they meet will influence their decision making, positively and negatively, whether they like to admit it or not. Some wax eloquent about ‘discovering themselves’ in and of their own devices–I would be heartily willing to lay odds that these individuals had parents, teachers, and media related stimuli which shaped the very personalities they claim to have carved of their own niche. Whether they be entirely secular or overtly fanatical, they were influenced by those who went before.
In matters spiritual, humans can eschew religion all they like. But it is pure folly to make grandiose statements regarding the same unless a man has made the effort to empty the aforementioned teacup to fill it, for a time, with new experience.
Unfortunately, this is where much bias against God and faith rests. Too many have been scarred by hypocritical or over-zealous proponents of religion, casting a tarnish upon the value of the faith they claim to hold so dear, rendering it useless. People talking the talk, but when it comes to walking the walk they mosey off in the other direction, often leaving a trail of confused and heartbroken people behind.
I’m sorry–I’m rambling. It’s been a long day.
Take care, Stoid, and peace to you today as you read.
Opus1:
No problem.
“By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” — Jesus (John 13:35)
“And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.” — Paul (I Corinthians 13:13)
You know, I’ve heard a lot of people say this about the Christian virtue of faith, and I think that it is based on a misunderstanding of what faith is. Mind you, there is a lot of reason for this misunderstanding. Unscrupulous preachers and characters have been misusing the virtue of faith for as long as there have been people to keep folks in line. Don’t question, have faith. Many sects use it today (including, I’m sorry to say, some ignorant Catholic priests). But the virtue of faith has nothing to do with accepting something your reason tells you is wrong, or questioning things, or even having doubts. We use faith frequently in our everyday lives, we just don’t label it that way.
If a scientist does an experiment and comes up with results that seem to violate the conservation of energy, he doesn’t send a great paper off to Nature. He redoes his figures, redoes the experiment, gets someone else to help him see what he did wrong, checks the equipment, even gets new glasses before he concludes he has upset the laws of the universe. Why? He has faith in the law of conservation of energy. And so he should.
Faith is not rejection of reason and experience. Faith is taking reason and experience and not overturning them because of a momentary jolt or a dry spell. The opposite of faith is not reason, but laziness. We need faith, not to fend off scientists and logicians, but to fend off the death of a loved one, long lonely evenings in a silent apartment, prayers that seem unanswered (in spite of hindsight that has shown why prayers have not been answered before), and seductive arguments that draw us to take just one more drink. Faith should never produce belief. Faith should protect belief from momentary buffets (but not from reasoned, continuous examination).
Often our contacts with God come in quiet times of comtemplation and prayer. Faith is needed to buttress these and apply them in the office, the freeway, the battlefield, the supermarket, or even the Internet. It is no wonder that faith is remarked so much in the Bible; it is the virtue that takes the small, whispered leadings and turns them into actions that change our lives. Yes, faith is necessary to our spiritual lives, but it is never opposed to reason. Instead, it supports reason. Indeed, it is faith that applies reason during those times when emotion and doubt would take our reasoned stands and blow them all to hell (literally).
I know there are fundies who pose faith against evolution, or physics, or anything that makes them question their pronouncements. Screw 'em. At least according to my understanding, and the understanding of Christian writers I respect, that is not what faith is.
I think you misunderstand most “organized dogmatic religion”; certainly Roman Catholic, certainly Episcopalian, and certainly most others with which I am familiar. Check out the thoughtful writers of some of these religions and what they write about faith. At least, I can say that what you say faith is does not agree with my understanding.
I suggest you go from there. I am much happier about the soul of someone who consistently seeks what is True than I am about the soul of a bible-thumper that judges anyone who disagrees with him to be doomed to Hell. Examine what the different religions really say and see where you agree and where you disagree. Christianity isn’t the only one around, you know. Better a Wiccan, or even a convinced atheist, than a wishy-washy nothing-at-all, in my opinion (but that’s only my opinion). You, of course, will do what you want. But I’m glad to see you thinking about it.