Penguin Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 I was talking with a Christian friend recently. He is a highly intelligent individual, very reserved, and very respectful of others. He has his faith and enjoys sharing it, but he is also very happy to talk about other things around those who don't want to hear him talk about God. He is also honest to a fault. When I talked to him about my hangups with God, he said: "I struggle as well with the idea that God could order killings en masse, and yet we're supposed to worship Him. I look for that answer constantly, but I also have faith that God exists, and that Jesus was and is the sacrifice to placate God's anger. As to how we're supposed to excuse God for what He did prior to His anger being satisfied, I don't know. I can tell you, you cannot believe in God without faith. For as much as I love science, I can tell you that when you get down to it--in spite of all the historical evidence--you must have faith to believe in a God you cannot and most likely will never see in this life." I thought it was rather refreshing to hear such a thing from a Christian (via e-mail). 1
Moderator Joshpantera Posted March 10, 2015 Moderator Posted March 10, 2015 He's probably experienced intellectual debate to the point where he knows where Christianity stands in terms of dependence on faith. The evidence route is a real dead end. It is refreshing to get that sort of honest answer, because among apologists these days they seem to want to push for evidence based arguments that always fall lacking. William Lane Craig comes to mind.... 2
sdelsolray Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 I've said this before and I'll say it again: Religious faith is for cowards, the willfully ignorant, intellectual sloths, those with delusions of self-importance and/or those with emotional dysfunctions. 2
Geezer Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Faith is a foundational requirement for any religion. Without faith religion could not survive, because faith requires no supporting evidence for its beliefs, teachings and traditions. Sometimes the obvious escapes the masses. Religion is about believing things that cannot be proven and in some cases would not be taken seriously because they are so ridiculous. That requires faith and faith requires significant indoctrination. It is only by faith that anyone could believe the story of the Garden of Eden, Noah and his Ark, and dead people popping out of their graves, It requires faith to believe that because Adam was lead astray by his "mate" that mankind is doomed to suffer eternal damnation and that can only be reversed by believing God became human and allowed himself to be crucified on a cross so he could come back to life and save mankind from Adam's sin. Yeah, believing that kind of stuff definitely requires faith.....and a lot of it. It also requires a huge amount of brainwashing too. 1
Thackerie Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Might as well just say, "You cannot be swindled by a confidence scam without faith." 3
Guest Furball Posted March 14, 2015 Posted March 14, 2015 God, any god, take your pick, cannot be proven to exist with rational logic, evidence, or any information based in reality. I agree, you cannot believe in god without making up some magical belief (faith) that he/she/it exists. 1
StJeffTheIncomprehensible Posted March 14, 2015 Posted March 14, 2015 Hi Penguin, hope all is well with you. This is somewhat refreshing to hear--epistemic humility isn't really a Christian virtue, so it's always nice to hear a Christian acknowledge ignorance. However, there are a few things in your friend's email that I would oppose. First, the idea that God (the Father) killed God (the Son) to appease God's (?) wrath at the people he created from an overflowing love. Second, the idea that God (the Father)'s actions before the butcher of God (the Son) are inexplicable, but that since that time God (the Father) has behaved himself rather well. Third, the idea that faith is a kind of "higher" knowledge, and that it is somehow a virtue to believe in god in spite of not having ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. Fourth, that there is any historical evidence for god at all. But, again, a healthy dose of doubt from someone claiming to be a Christian is always welcome! 1
disillusioned Posted March 14, 2015 Posted March 14, 2015 From a certain perspective, it is refreshing when Christians are honest about their assumptions. Personally, however, I no longer find the retreat to faith to be satisfying. I actually find it very disturbing. It seems to me that when someone says "I am a Christian because of my faith", what they are really saying is that they know the will of God, that they have no way of justifying this assertion, and that they are okay with this. I find this deeply troubling. It is unhealthy intellectually, and it is also very dangerous. It gets even worse when they claim that this is a humble stance for them to take. They are claiming that the creator of the universe has a special interest in them personally. This is not humility. It is the essence of hubris. 2
RipVanWinkle Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 What does the faith requirement say about the god who requires it to avoid eternal damnation? And particularly a god who knew in advance what would happen to his creatures after he gave them life with the conditions he set. Before he created humans he knew that they could not or would not be able to resist the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil". Yet he set the penalty of eternal torture for when (not "if") they violated this rule. He knew this would happen even though he supposedly gave them "free will". a contention of Xtians that I dispute. He also knew that the vast majority of humans would not have faith in JC, whom no one but a handful at best supposedly saw 2000 years ago. In the name of mercy (literally), why then did he create us? With all that being the case, his creation amounted to unimaginable cruelty. Just think, he put two trees in the Garden of Eden, the tree of knowledge and the tree of eternal, thereby deliberately tempting them, knowing they would fail and what he would do when they did. This is so obviously a myth that I cannot understand why I ever believed it for a minute. If it weren't a myth, we would all be under the control of the worst monster that could be imagined. Rip 1
sdelsolray Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 I was talking with a Christian friend recently. He is a highly intelligent individual, very reserved, and very respectful of others. He has his faith and enjoys sharing it, but he is also very happy to talk about other things around those who don't want to hear him talk about God. He is also honest to a fault. When I talked to him about my hangups with God, he said: "I struggle as well with the idea that God could order killings en masse, and yet we're supposed to worship Him. I look for that answer constantly, but I also have faith that God exists, and that Jesus was and is the sacrifice to placate God's anger. As to how we're supposed to excuse God for what He did prior to His anger being satisfied, I don't know. I can tell you, you cannot believe in God without faith. For as much as I love science, I can tell you that when you get down to it--in spite of all the historical evidence--you must have faith to believe in a God you cannot and most likely will never see in this life." I thought it was rather refreshing to hear such a thing from a Christian (via e-mail). Note the projection your e-mail friend uses when he shifts from the first person to the second person. His statements should all be in the first person and avoid the projection of his beliefs upon "you" the listener. Thus, his statement: "I struggle as well with the idea that God could order killings en masse, and yet we're supposed to worship Him. I look for that answer constantly, but I also have faith that God exists, and that Jesus was and is the sacrifice to placate God's anger. As to how we're supposed to excuse God for what He did prior to His anger being satisfied, I don't know. I can tell you, you cannot believe in God without faith. For as much as I love science, I can tell you that when you get down to it--in spite of all the historical evidence--you must have faith to believe in a God you cannot and most likely will never see in this life." should be: "I struggle as well with the idea that God could order killings en masse, and yet I'm supposed to worship Him. I look for that answer constantly, but I also have faith that God exists, and that Jesus was and is the sacrifice to placate God's anger. As to how I'm supposed to excuse God for what He did prior to His anger being satisfied, I don't know." I can tell you, I cannot believe in God without faith. For as much as I love science, I can tell you that when I get down to it--in spite of all the historical evidence--I must have faith to believe in a God I cannot and most likely will never see in my life."" The difference is subtle, but necessary to limit the virus to only the believer and not to infect the listener with it. Also note how the statements become quite deflated once it remains in the first person -- as it should be. Those are his issues, not yours or mine. 1
Recommended Posts