If you look deep enough into your faith, it is based on the word of some Human who said God said, or did some things, so in reality you are believing in humans not a divine being (who no human can prove was God) or that this God did or said anything. It is a matter of faith so if God just hopped into Mary’s womb and became a man, then died God would be dead and no God would be alive to ressurect him, and if He had it set ahead of time that His death would just last 35 hours or so it could harly be counted as a death.
My belief is that if some ones faith helps them to be a better person, not harm others with it then it is a good thing for them and doesn’t matter if they have a belief or not.
As for free will, then if that were so, then there should be no punishment for sin, because if Adam and Eve had free will and chose to eat the fruit then God knew they were going to eat it, and he is at fault for taking back their free will long enough at least, so they could decide to eat the fruit. He punished them for something he knew ahead of time they would do, and according to Genesis it was the death pelnalty, a harsh punishment for a small disobedience, when He allowed satan to do all sorts of evil things and even allows this monster to destroy His children…not a very lovinf being in my opinion would do such a thing.
Then this same God was said to destroy all living things (except a few chosen ones that he let on an Ark) because he regretted creating man…it just doesn’t add up as far as I am concerned.
A human parent doesn’t know all things so the difference between a God and a human is quite different.
I know Christians do that and in doing so they ignore or explain away the verses concerning being judged according to deeds , a belief that Jesus himself taught when he stressed that your actions revealed the true person within.
IMO you overlooked an important line in your quote. No moral people should not complain when sinners see the errors of their ways, but in the quote the father tells the moral son, “everything I have is yours” so it would appear his behavior did matter.
To clarify, speaking as a former Christian priesthood member whose studies led me to no longer believe Christian theology, I am not saying morality leads to salvation. In my studies of the NT and what Jesus taught, our actions are the true demonstration of the condition of our spirit. Over and over again the point is made that regardless of what you believe or what love for the Lord and others you profess to have, your actions will reveal the truth.
IMO, and logic, that means anyone who exhibits sincere love and compassion , regardless of any religious or non religious label, is following the teachings of Christ. It also seems logical that a God who created all mankind and loved us all equally, would judge us equally as well. If it’s about choosing love and truth,{1 Peter 1:22, 1 John 3:18 John 4:24} and the inner transformation that comes from that journey {Eph. 4:15, 2 Thes. 2:13} rather than choosing the correct prophet. It’s seems much more logical to me that if choosing love and truth are the keys to our spiritual condition then that’s what counts in anyone, and man made religions and traditions don’t matter at all.
and it doesn’t address reality very well either, or at least generates more questions. We know that people who sincerely accept JC do not immediately become ideal. There is still jealousy, pride, judgment, prejudice. People are complex and multifaceted and the person who does good works one day, may show their prejudice another day. Just imagine all the nice people in the old south who thought they were being good Christians as they discriminated and even despised their fellow man.
Are you saying that Christians who continue to sin don’t really love God and aren’t saved? I doubt that because you just said Christians are forgiven all their sins. So, evidently the mix of some good fruits and some bad is okay, but there’s not really a scale right? Do you begin to see the conflict in logic?
It is not illogical to believe we do not live up to perfection. That seems apparent. It’s not even illogical per say, to assume a debt, noting that it’s not particularly logically either. It’s just an assumption.
The problem I see is that for a logical chain to actually be reasonable it cannot contain so many assumed truths that are basically pulled out of the air. Perhaps someone more schooled in the rules of logic will correct me and it’s possible to create a chain of logic from entirely fabricated points. That still leaves your claim that Christianity is reasonable and logical , rather than blind faith, in question. If so much of Christianity is baseless assumption about the nature of our universe then it does require a lot of blind faith.
This is not even touching on the logical conflicts about love and justice the Christian salvation theology presents.
Sorry, although we may do things we think we shouldn’t there are reasons we ultimately do them which translates into, we ultimately wanted to.
Weren’t you just talking to another about punishing your child and there being consequences for disobeying? It’s not about fear of punishment. It’s about consequences for our choices. According to you, once we are saved we continue to sin and are still given the ultimate reward. Those who choose to love and be compassionate to others can still be condemned because they didn’t choose the correct prophet. How is that justice and proper consequences for choices?
I understand that part of the theology and I maintain it does not fit with concepts of God as just and loving, or , as I just said, the concept of free will and consequences for actions.
If our actions reflect the true conditions of our spirit then the sincere love expressed by anyone, regardless of labels, is just as spiritually correct as any Christians. This is fairly clearly expressed in the NT, that the true condition of your soul, made evident by your actions, is what matters.
That would also lead to the logical conclusion that Christians will have consequences for their bad choices regardless of belief. Read the parable of the sheep and goats again in Mat 25.
By itself it’s just an assumption, neither logical or illogical. Something you accept with blind faith since there is no reason to assume it otherwise. It’s the number of key points in Christian theology that are exactly this that led to eventually reject them.
and ftr, that does not mean I reject Christ. I reject certain aspects of the Christian vision of Christ and am still able to revere his teachings. I decided to take Christ’s warning of not following to the traditions of men seriously.
That’s incorrect so let me explain.
I see blind faith as accepting certain theological tenants as fact with no evidence to indicate they are true. Those tenants cannot accurately be called logical when they are assumptions without any evidence. Accepting God exists is one but even getting past that one to specific religious doctrine, we see far to many crucial tenants of Christianity to be exactly that type of pure assumption for it to be referred to as logical and reasonable.
They are, but even granting that they are no more faith based than many other world views , that’s not really a defense.
I don’t think Christians have thrown out their brains. I just think the power of tradition and the reinforcement by peers {lots of peers} creates a comfort zone they live in.
I’ll give you another example. The Bible as the word of God. There is nothing to indicate that it was God’s master plan that we have this one particular collection of writings to serve as our ultimate guide and authority. It’s tradition plain and simple. It’s tradition that contradicts the actual hard evidence we have about the Bible and as such is clearly illogical.
Other religions also have their sacred writings and at least one major one believes we still receive inspirational instructions from God. Personally, I think it’s more logical to think God would continue to commune with us than assume a 2000 year old book is it, but I think it shows the power of religious tradition and how it overcomes reason in even well intended intelligent people.
You’re right we’re not going to reach any conclusions here. I’d say that Christianity sincerely tries to address certain issues through reason and scholarship but ultimately, because so many tenants are just assumed truths, it is a lot of blind faith.
I think there are a lot of reasons unconscious and otherwise that a particular religion becomes meaningful to someone. For myself, I eventually came to the conclusion that I could still hold what I valued most and seemed the most crucial concerning any spirituality {love and truth} while letting go of the things that were unnecessary and just didn’t make sense to me anymore.
I know plenty of great people who are Christians, some Muslims, atheists and other sundry belief systems. If some religion is someone’s vehicle to growth and service more power to them. My objection is that too often, while preaching brotherhood and unity, organized religions like Christianity actually create division with the assumed truths that become focal points of their theology. By clinging to the idea that their assumptions are better than some other religions and “what God really thinks” they set up the division. By deciding they must teach these assumed truths to others as factual they create division.
IMHO of course.