Defending a religious person...

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
What I may drive at any specific time I allude to the Creator is nothing at all like what you refer to as a "God concept."

Funny thing is, all the words are English, the word order is vaguely English, with perhaps a smattering of Star Trek influence, but the end result is not at all English. I see three bits attempting to be verbal phrases, but no real sense from the whole.

Is this MetaChristian language? If so, can I have a translation, because I must have missed that class somewhere along the line.
 
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
While that can certainly be used as your excuse for getting all huffy, its not at all in line with your promise to not attempt to state my views for me, but rather to let me state my own.

From my POV it is YOU who are twisting the language via trying to apply modern usage to sacred terms, in use for 100's of years before either of us were born. I have spent the better part of my life developing my Faith and with that comes learning its language. What makes you think I would forfeit that for you? You didn't start out by picking a fight about re-defining words used to relate sacred concepts, you started by asking questions about those sacred concepts.

If all you want to do is pick a fight, pick on someone you can win against like every other bully does. If instead you want to do as you say and learn something new, don't be so surprised that you might have to acquaint yourself with a few new terms first.

Nice try.

Choose a language, choose a century, and let's talk.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Quite right; I would put that one at the top of the list, as having the widest divergence between secular and sacred usage / meaning.

Well, let's just take a look, shall we?

From my OED (Compact Edition of complete OED):

Faith
1 Belief, trust, confidence
1 Confidence, reliance, trust (in the ability, goodness etc of a person; in the efficacy or worth of a thing; or of the truth of a statement or doctrine). In earliest use only with reference to religious objects; this is still the prevalent application, and often colours the wider use.

First recorded use in written English; 1300. From Old French, adopted into Middle English.

There is a lot more, but that is, I think, sufficient for now.

What reason do you have for thinking that atheists need a different definition of 'faith' from this one?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Specifically I would like to know

What your religion teaches on the subject of what happens to people who lack faith.

I am not sure if this has been answered or not. I think I would have two answers.

If by 'lack faith' you mean 'having insufficient faith' then we all qualify; believers and non believers alike. In this case Christians have the option of praying; 'Lord, I believe. Help thou my unbelief.' Then we can either wait for the faith to arrive, in which case we might have a long wait, or else we can act 'as if.'

This might sound daft, but it isn't. People do it all the time. If we are afraid of not being adequate for a particular task we can either wait until we feel ready, or else go ahead and give it a try, in the full awareness that we might succeed, or we might fail. Either is ok, as long as we learn from it. What is not ok is to hide at home and never take any chances because we are too afraid to try. (This is my preferred behaviour, and I have to fight against it all the time. Except when I don't bother to try.)

So, God will very often NOT give us full assurance before we do things. He will ask us to try, and sometimes even let us fail, because this helps us to grow and to learn, the same as in any other area of life. Bakers have to make a few flat cakes before they learn to make light fluffy ones. Christians have to learn to get a lot of things wrong, before they learn how to get some things right. The Christian life is a process; it is not handed to us complete from day one.

If the question relates to those who do not have any faith in God, then I think I would return to what I said earlier. Very often people are disillusioned about religion because of the example of believers around them. It is not God who lets them down, but his followers. Sadly, they throw out the baby with the bathwater on this one.

But as for what happens to them; nothing. God will not punish anyone for being disillusioned by other believers; why would he? Otoh, he has a rather unpleasant surprise in store for those doing the damage. We do not know what it is, but a clue is found in the words of the Lord; 'Woe unto him who causes one of my little ones to stumble. It would be better for him that a millstone be hung around his neck, and he be thrown into the sea.'

Not really an area to venture into, therefore. Any atheist here who can think of such a person does not need to fear. If you once had faith, that is still credited to you. If you were caused to stumble by a minister or someone in authority in faith, you have nothing to fear. People might let us down and act callously. God never does.

Those who have never had any faith, never known any version of Christianity and don't have any bad experiences to worry about; well, nothing will happen to them either. God doesn't punish people for being who they are.

If I have missed something, please let me know.
 
Upvote 0

Verv

Senior Veteran
Apr 17, 2005
7,244
624
서울
✟31,762.00
Country
Korea, Republic Of
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married

Thanks! I am glad you posted a link showing that white evangelicals are more knowledgable on the Bible & Christ than atheists.

Perhaps there are some issues with what was defined as 'white mainline' (whatever that is?).

There is also the definition of who actually is a Christian... major issues exist when many people rarely go to Church or when they do do not have in-depth preaching. Some people just are utterly indifferent to their own religion and while that is largely uninspiring I feel that is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

But at the end of the day I base my chuckle fest at the common, arrogant perspective that atheists know more about Christianity at the very concept of how Christianity is attacked by them.

The overwhelming majority of attacks are done so with seemingly utter disregard for the fact that these topics have been covered at length and getting worked up about such is essentially irrational.

= 'atheists think we are stupid, but really they are puffed up and arrogant, because Augustine said so 1500 years ago.'

Is that really how you think the Lord would want us to talk about those who happen not to have faith? Do you really think that those of us with faith have arrived, and those without are lost forever? Or is it not more the case that we are all on a journey of faith, and that some are further along that path than others?

Why blame anyone for only being in Doncaster, when you are already half way to Newcastle? Is your faith to YOUR credit or God's? Did you deserve your salvation? As long as a person is still alive they are still on their journey, and that is all that matters. What they believe is, I think, far more often a reflection of what they see and dislike in believers. It does not always have anything whatever to do with God.

If we want people to share our beliefs, then imo the first step is to show that our beliefs make a difference to the way we relate to other people. If we want them to know that God loves them, we have to love them first. And that means not calling people puffed up and arrogant, simply because of their beliefs.


OK...

Forgive me for defending the idea that Christians are not idiots. I was unaware that you enjoyed atheists claiming to be more knowledgeable about Christianity than Christians.
 
Upvote 0

FrenchyBearpaw

Take time for granite.
Jun 13, 2011
3,252
79
✟4,283.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Thanks! I am glad you posted a link showing that white evangelicals are more knowledgable on the Bible & Christ than atheists.

Perhaps there are some issues with what was defined as 'white mainline' (whatever that is?).

There is also the definition of who actually is a Christian... major issues exist when many people rarely go to Church or when they do do not have in-depth preaching. Some people just are utterly indifferent to their own religion and while that is largely uninspiring I feel that is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

But at the end of the day I base my chuckle fest at the common, arrogant perspective that atheists know more about Christianity at the very concept of how Christianity is attacked by them.

The overwhelming majority of attacks are done so with seemingly utter disregard for the fact that these topics have been covered at length and getting worked up about such is essentially irrational.




OK...

Forgive me for defending the idea that Christians are not idiots. I was unaware that you enjoyed atheists claiming to be more knowledgeable about Christianity than Christians.

Survey: Atheists, Agnostics Know More About Religion Than Religious : The Two-Way : NPR
 
Upvote 0

TheyCallMeDave

At your service....
Jun 19, 2012
2,854
150
Northern Florida
✟11,541.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I am not religious myself. However, oftentimes I encounter online messages from people who seem to be extremely anti-religious. They may say things like "Religion is useless" or "God is dead" or "I disproved God" or "I disproved religion", which I find extremely hurtful. Yes, I do agree with religious skepticism, but some extreme forms of religious skepticism seem to be just morally unacceptable and overly insulting. (Fortunately, people tend to do this online. People in real life tend to be more friendlier, possible because of the face-to-face interaction.) Recently on this forum, I felt that this ex-Catholic atheist with whom I conversed had some awful anti-religious sentiments. She claimed that she disproved God by performing a "science experiment" and trying to see whether or not God would pass the test. She claimed that the lack of effectiveness of prayer in health care was due to the absence of God. When I asked her whether or not she prayed to God for forgiveness, she replied that she never had and instead prayed once to a Catholic priest, because that's what Catholics do (according to her words). Having read Religion for Dummies, I became awfully suspicious of her behavior and her claims and attempted to debate her. Didn't work. Actually, she just claimed that I had some sort of anti-atheist bias. Personally, I view atheism/agnosticism as a personal choice that same way I view practicing a religion as a personal choice. If a person just doesn't feel that religion is right for them, then they do not practice it rather than screaming out to the world that "Christianity is false!" Ironically, I still thank her for providing me an unique experience. After talking with her online (it was only an online forum conversation), I began to realize the importance of prayer myself. She showed me (quite unintentionally) how prayer was not going to work, and I felt I understood the meaning of prayer and how prayer was supposed to work. I referred to Corinthians 13 and thought that pertained to my experience with that pitiful ex-Catholic atheist girl, especially the part about "moving the mountain" thing, which she seemed to interpret as "literally and physically moving a mountain by God's works". Eh... I thought I got really spiritually enlightened at that point and made me wonder whether God was really worth praying to.

Ethically speaking, have you ever defended a person with a faith commitment different from you? For example, a Christian defending a Jew from anti-Semitic attacks?

We are ALL religious on something, and thats a fact. The professed 'Atheist' is religious toward his beliefs that there is no Creator for creation / the car owner is religious about changing his oil every 3000 miles / and I religiously go to Starbucks every morning for my caffiene shot to start my day. But in the divine sense... genuine Christians really arent 'religious' in the sense that all they do is practice religious acts, piety, perform traditions, etc... but they have a daily RELATIONSHIP with someone who is alive both physically in a location called Heaven and in their Souls ; it is a relationship just as you would have with a very very close loving Family Member -- no one would dare call that type of relationship 'a religious encounter' ..lol...

To your last point, yes, Christians often take a proactive stand for others who have a different view of God or no view of God at all , based on standards of morality, ethics, and the fact that they have intrinsic worth and dignity from being made in the very image of their Creator...even if they dont yet know their Creator on a personal intimate level. If i see a person getting ridiculed to no end and watching the pain come to their face...I dont first ask : ' Hey, what is your Faith persuasion ?' or ' Hey, what is your view on a personal theistic Creator existing ?' ... instead, we should stand up for them because it is objectively correct to do so. And this is daily applied to such causes as peaceful abortion demonstrations , standing up for the rights of Others, intervening in a domestic situation where we are watching a wife get pummeled to near death , or, trying to help an atheist woman who just got her handbag snatched .

What you will find under closer examination, is that Christians..that is the genuine type... WILL go the extra mile because their lives have been drastically changed by the love of Christ , and that love gets transferred outwardly to Others , freely and willingly .

Thanks for asking. And, i hope you will become a Seeker/Skeptic where Christianity is concerned and examine it with an open mind, and objectively. If you do, and if you are willing to actually go where the evidence is leading...then God promises he will reveal more of himself to you. Thats what hes done already to billions upon billions of Evangelical Christians thru the ages. But the choice is yours. If you are willing, this is the best book i can highly recommend for where you are right now in your life : http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Have-Eno...rds=i+dont+have+enough+faith+to+be+an+atheist

Regards.
 
Upvote 0

FrenchyBearpaw

Take time for granite.
Jun 13, 2011
3,252
79
✟4,283.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
They live their life, the same as anyone else; go to work, come home, spend time with their friends and family, have fun, go on holiday, whatever.

What would you expect? A thunderbolt from heaven to strike them dead? That kind of thing really doesn't happen.

I don't expect anything (unless of course Zeus was the man in charge) of the sort. seekingChrist/razeontherock made a positive assertion, to which I asked for clarification, as he has demonstrated that defining terms in any meaningful way is difficult for him.

His assertion that those who reject Jesus may not burn in hell is at odds with traditional Christian doctrine, to which he feigns surprise when others make this assertion. His unwillingness to use accepted definitions and inability to provide his own definitions are contemptible. From what I can gather, his personal views on religion and faith have been so drastically changed from traditional doctrine to the point that it only makes sense to him to keep his head copasetic and his cognitive dissonance to a minimum.
 
Upvote 0

FrenchyBearpaw

Take time for granite.
Jun 13, 2011
3,252
79
✟4,283.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
We are ALL religious on something, and thats a fact. The professed 'Atheist' is religious toward his beliefs that there is no Creator for creation / the car owner is religious about changing his oil every 3000 miles / and I religiously go to Starbucks every morning for my caffiene shot to start my day. But in the divine sense... genuine Christians really arent 'religious' in the sense that all they do is practice religious acts, piety, perform traditions, etc... but they have a daily RELATIONSHIP with someone who is alive both physically in a location called Heaven and in their Souls ; it is a relationship just as you would have with a very very close loving Family Member -- no one would dare call that type of relationship 'a religious encounter' ..lol...

To your last point, yes, Christians often take a proactive stand for others who have a different view of God or no view of God at all , based on standards of morality, ethics, and the fact that they have intrinsic worth and dignity from being made in the very image of their Creator...even if they dont yet know their Creator on a personal intimate level. If i see a person getting ridiculed to no end and watching the pain come to their face...I dont first ask : ' Hey, what is your Faith persuasion ?' or ' Hey, what is your view on a personal theistic Creator existing ?' ... instead, we should stand up for them because it is objectively correct to do so. And this is daily applied to such causes as peaceful abortion demonstrations , standing up for the rights of Others, intervening in a domestic situation where we are watching a wife get pummeled to near death , or, trying to help an atheist woman who just got her handbag snatched .

What you will find under closer examination, is that Christians..that is the genuine type... WILL go the extra mile because their lives have been drastically changed by the love of Christ , and that love gets transferred outwardly to Others , freely and willingly .

Thanks for asking. And, i hope you will become a Seeker/Skeptic where Christianity is concerned and examine it with an open mind, and objectively. If you do, and if you are willing to actually go where the evidence is leading...then God promises he will reveal more of himself to you. Thats what hes done already to billions upon billions of Evangelical Christians thru the ages. But the choice is yours. If you are willing, this is the best book i can highly recommend for where you are right now in your life : http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Have-Eno...rds=i+dont+have+enough+faith+to+be+an+atheist

Regards.

By definition, atheism is not a religion. So I'll take your first sentence to be an uninformed opinion.
 
Upvote 0

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Nice try.

My degree is English Language. I am familiar with New English, Modern English, Middle English and Old English (aka Anglo Saxon). I am also familiar enough with Latin to discuss how it relates to words in English. I am comfortable with any version of the Bible you care to mention, and will discuss the use of sacred words at any period you care to choose. I also speak French, German, Russian and some Greek.

So, choose a language, choose a century, and let's talk.

I have a pretty good grasp of English too by all accounts.

I generally insist on usual definitions or up front explanations of how one differs.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I am not sure if this has been answered or not. I think I would have two answers.

If by 'lack faith' you mean 'having insufficient faith' then we all qualify; believers and non believers alike. In this case Christians have the option of praying; 'Lord, I believe. Help thou my unbelief.' Then we can either wait for the faith to arrive, in which case we might have a long wait, or else we can act 'as if.'

This might sound daft, but it isn't. People do it all the time. If we are afraid of not being adequate for a particular task we can either wait until we feel ready, or else go ahead and give it a try, in the full awareness that we might succeed, or we might fail. Either is ok, as long as we learn from it. What is not ok is to hide at home and never take any chances because we are too afraid to try. (This is my preferred behaviour, and I have to fight against it all the time. Except when I don't bother to try.)

So, God will very often NOT give us full assurance before we do things. He will ask us to try, and sometimes even let us fail, because this helps us to grow and to learn, the same as in any other area of life. Bakers have to make a few flat cakes before they learn to make light fluffy ones. Christians have to learn to get a lot of things wrong, before they learn how to get some things right. The Christian life is a process; it is not handed to us complete from day one.

If the question relates to those who do not have any faith in God, then I think I would return to what I said earlier. Very often people are disillusioned about religion because of the example of believers around them. It is not God who lets them down, but his followers. Sadly, they throw out the baby with the bathwater on this one.

But as for what happens to them; nothing. God will not punish anyone for being disillusioned by other believers; why would he? Otoh, he has a rather unpleasant surprise in store for those doing the damage. We do not know what it is, but a clue is found in the words of the Lord; 'Woe unto him who causes one of my little ones to stumble. It would be better for him that a millstone be hung around his neck, and he be thrown into the sea.'

Not really an area to venture into, therefore. Any atheist here who can think of such a person does not need to fear. If you once had faith, that is still credited to you. If you were caused to stumble by a minister or someone in authority in faith, you have nothing to fear. People might let us down and act callously. God never does.

Those who have never had any faith, never known any version of Christianity and don't have any bad experiences to worry about; well, nothing will happen to them either. God doesn't punish people for being who they are.

If I have missed something, please let me know.

Thanks for that explaination of what you believe.
 
Upvote 0

Gadarene

-______-
Apr 16, 2012
11,461
2,507
London
✟75,247.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Labour
Funnily enough, it looks unpalatable to me as well. :)

'Twas never in doubt ;)

The nearest analogy I can think of is a gang in a playground telling a new child that he can't play on the swings because he doesn't know the password, and he can't know the password because he is not in the gang. I have no time for that kind of game.

Indeed so. Far too often it is not language that is inadequate, but the person attempting to hide behind it. I have no word that will describe certain aspects of God, but I certainly do have words to describe trying to find those words. I think as long as I am honest, an equally honest person who happens to have no faith would understand it.

I don't really have an issue with that. As long as any existent god isn't joining in with that kind of playground-ganglike behaviour, then that's fine. Condemning me for something that can't really be communicated but for experiences that the god can only administer if he chooses - no wish for anything to do with that, and those who agree with it have no right to claim goodness.
 
Upvote 0
S

seeking Christ

Guest
What reason do you have for thinking that atheists need a different definition of 'faith' from this one?

Because that stale dictionary definition has been 100% thoroughly inadequate to do me one ounce of good, over a period of 30+ years of following the Lord. I can't speak from what YOU know, only what I know. Obviously those are 2 different things, albeit with significant overlap.
 
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
'Twas never in doubt ;)

I don't really have an issue with that. As long as any existent god isn't joining in with that kind of playground-ganglike behaviour, then that's fine. Condemning me for something that can't really be communicated but for experiences that the god can only administer if he chooses - no wish for anything to do with that, and those who agree with it have no right to claim goodness.

Well, here we can call on the wisdom of St Anselm. The blessed saint said that God is that, greater than which we cannot conceive. Therefore, if anyone presents you with a version of God which you can see to be lacking in any way, then that version must necessarily be insufficient.

This is useful in overcoming all sorts of problems in relation to other people's concepts of God. Take any prejudice you like; perhaps one against black people. One person might say, God does not like black people. This one is easy to see; as long as there is one single person on the face of the earth who is able to say, hang on, that looks like racism to me; surely it cannot be right to judge people on the colour of their skin? God will also say so. According to Anselm's words, the existence of this one man is evidence that God is himself not racist; man cannot outdo God in virtue.

Therefore, any bigoted views that may be held, no matter how many thousands of people hold them, cannot be held by God as long as even one single person on earth can see them for what they are; bigotry.

So we can conclude lots of things about God; he is not bigoted, he is not racist, he is not vengeful, he is not murderous, he does not condone abuse of any kind, he does not hate anyone, he does not call anyone an abomination, he does not anathematise anyone. All of these are human behaviours which we have projected onto God so that he gets the blame, not us. But they actually belong to us, not him.

God is that, greater than which cannot be conceived. Any other God at all - any bigoted or angry version - is simply not big enough. If it is those versions that atheists reject, then so do I. But I don't swap an inadequate God for no God. The only difference is that I swap him for a bigger one; the God revealed most perfectly in Christ. After all, if you are going to have an Omnipotent Deity, why settle for second best?

:wave:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
S

seeking Christ

Guest
From what I can gather, his personal views on religion and faith have been so drastically changed from traditional doctrine to the point that it only makes sense to him to keep his head copasetic and his cognitive dissonance to a minimum.

And yet you are 100% wrong: my independently arrived at conclusions of doctrinal matters match up with Orthodoxy. Of all flavors. Sorry to dissappoint you.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
S

seeking Christ

Guest
I have a pretty good grasp of enlish too by all accounts.

I generally insist on usual definitions or up front explainations of how one differs.

This is not always possible. Some things need to be developed, and that can require interaction. The subject matter under discussion here is inherently NOT concrete.
 
Upvote 0
S

seeking Christ

Guest
As long as any existent god isn't joining in with that kind of playground-ganglike behaviour, then that's fine. Condemning me for something that can't really be communicated but for experiences that the god can only administer if he chooses - no wish for anything to do with that, and those who agree with it have no right to claim goodness.

All this you have been discussing is simply false as you have both been trying to assign it to me. I'll take responsibility for that error, due to not being able to communicate such abstract things clearly enough that you couldn't possibly miss it.

Specifically, there is none of this "exclusionary mindset" you both yearn to tack onto me. You may have both experienced it at some time and I think we all have, but that has no place in me. That's one important distinction. Far more important is this false picture you paint of God here: I know of nothing in God that can be described as "experiences that the god can only administer if he chooses." Life simply doesn't work that way. There is an expression I hope you are familiar with, that it "takes two?"
 
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Because that stale dictionary definition has been 100% thoroughly inadequate to do me one ounce of good, over a period of 30+ years of following the Lord. I can't speak from what YOU know, only what I know. Obviously those are 2 different things, albeit with significant overlap.

Very well. Start from the OED, and expand on it. What do you have that others do not have? My faith is older than yours, and yet the word is adequate for me. What is missing in your version?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
And yet you are 100% wrong: my independently arrived at conclusions of doctrinal matters match up with Orthodoxy. Of all flavors. Sorry to dissappoint you.

It is not possible to match all doctrines of orthodoxy of all faiths, for the simple reason that not all faiths agree with one another. Here are just a few examples to start with:

What is your view on the filioque, for example?

Leavened altar breads? Yes or no?

The date of Easter; Julian or Gregorian?

Transubstantiation? Yes or no?

Infant baptism?

Modern charismatic manifestations?
 
Upvote 0