Why don't Christians like to talk about the basis of their belief?

[Shadowfax503]

As I understand your OP you are wanting to know why Christians do not want to talk about their faith and why they have faith in Jesus Christ?

I have never had a problem talking about my faith. However remember I said faith and that is the real issue here. Faith is believing in something that is not really provable in human terms or with human understanding. Faith is the driving force of any religion.
What does faith mean to you?

 

[FundiMentalist]

Among other things, my life lines up with John 2:5; 1 John 2:15; 1 John 2:19; 1 John 3:2-3; 1 John 3:9; 1 John 3:14; 1 John 3:22; 1 John 4:1; 1 John 4:13

John 2:5, Do you really do all that the Bible claims Jesus said to do? That would be amazing. I do most of it. Other than the believing part, I think I do more than ever of the teachings of Jesus (perhaps save the not turn over any of the Law, not sure how many modern Christians follow all that much of the Law any how).

1 John 2:15, Cool. I'm not very materialistic. Less so than ever. I think that's part due to age, part the process of the intense search which resulted in my deconversion.

1 John 2:19, Cool. Still fellowship. Still go to church. Still tithe more than 10% of gross. Only a small number of people IRL know of my apostasy.

1 John 3:2-3, I'm hosed. Pure (hagnos) can be interpreted as having quite a high standard. But then again, Strong's as a possible "figurative" disclaimer so I really don't know. Maybe being "figuratively" pure is good enough.

1 John 3:9, Now there's a serious standard. Are you suggesting you don't sin at all??? This is one of those verses that makes me wonder how much the authors simply used hyperbole as a literary technique.

1 John 3:14, Good stuff. Do you consider me your brother?

1 John 3:22, You're suggesting whatever you ask for you get? So people who don't get whatever they petition for is not "born again" in your book?

1 John 4:1, No that's a verse I love! In fact, that's what we're doing. It's a good question asking whether the Bible is of God or of men. A very good question.

1 John 4:13, Poetic. Not really sure what it means though.

Anyhow, those verse look a bit all over the map. The definite don't seem to say the same thing to me. I used to think it was all "a mystery" and "who am I to know God."

But then a "this makes no sense" overtook that.

Anyhow, I take it, based upon these verse and your emphasis of them as evidence of being "borin again," there's no sin in your life and whatever you petition God for comes to pass.

Wow. No wonder you're so certain.

You're right. I never had that.

 

[FundiMentalist]

As I understand your OP you are wanting to know why Christians do not want to talk about their faith and why they have faith in Jesus Christ?

I have never had a problem talking about my faith. However remember I said faith and that is the real issue here. Faith is believing in something that is not really provable in human terms or with human understanding. Faith is the driving force of any religion.
What does faith mean to you?

Good post and good question.

Faith, to me, means hoping something to be true but not really knowing it.

 

[cerette]

So how do you know that was the Holy Spirit and not just a voice in your own head?

First of all, I never hear a voice in my head which I interpret to be the Holy Spirit. That sort of "...and God said to me blah blah..." can be very bad for your faith. It is a subjective experience and not based on Scripture. How could I know if it is God or the Devil or whoever who whispered things in my ear? No, no, this is not the sort of religion I am into. (I noticed you have been involved with Oral Roberts Uni... that sort of denomination is into the "God said to me" stuff)

My faith and beliefs are based on Scripture alone. I cannot base my faith on some personal experince I had in my head. That is too subjective. My mind could easily fool me. But the Bible cannot fool me. The Bible is God's own Word to mankind, and I can trust it.

The Holy Spirit works through the word and the sacraments. This means, when you read the bible, listen to biblical teaching, take part in the sacraments as a believer, the Spirit works through these means to open or increase faith in your heart.

Christian faith is not something we understand with our minds, but something we trust with our hearts.

We cannot save ourselves, we cannot decide to give our hearts to Jesus and start believing in him. The Holy Spirit is the one who opens our hearts and makes us trust Jesus and know him as our Savior. To God be all the glory. We are saved by his grace alone and not our own decisions or choises.

 

[Shadowfax503]

Good post and good question.

Faith, to me, means hoping something to be true but not really knowing it.

Yep, Every single day I have doubts and wonder if God is real if I am just lying to myself even if I may be crazy.

Then I sit and pray. I think of all the things written in the Bible. I ponder it all, I rationalize it and everyday I come up with the same answer.

It just fits. Yea I can pick it apart here and there but the overall message from Genesis to Revelation fits together to show that to me God is real and that he is reaching out to us.
I have turned my back on him many times and most likely will do it many times more before I meet him face to face. In all those time and I sure in the times still to come there has always been something to call me back to him.

Faith Hope and Love that is what Christianity is to me.
God loves us and sent his Son Jesus.
It is in him and his word that I have hope.
And that is how I justify my Faith.


But it still comes down to Faith. And who are you putting your faith in. Without my hope in God, life would be very dark, there just wouldnt be much to hope for. Humans need hope, hope that things will get better that things wont get worse. I hope that I am not crazy . That is why I place my Faith in Jesus.

What do you hope for?
</IMG>

 

[FundiMentalist]

First of all, I never hear a voice in my head which I interpret to be the Holy Spirit. That sort of "...and God said to me blah blah..." can be very bad for your faith. It is a subjective experience and not based on Scripture. How could I know if it is God or the Devil or whoever who whispered things in my ear? No, no, this is not the sort of religion I am into. (I noticed you have been involved with Oral Roberts Uni... that sort of denomination is into the "God said to me" stuff)

My faith and beliefs are based on Scripture alone. I cannot base my faith on some personal experince I had in my head. That is too subjective. My mind could easily fool me. But the Bible cannot fool me. The Bible is God's own Word to mankind, and I can trust it.

The Holy Spirit works through the word and the sacraments. This means, when you read the bible, listen to biblical teaching, take part in the sacraments as a believer, the Spirit works through these means to open or increase faith in your heart.

Christian faith is not something we understand with our minds, but something we trust with our hearts.

We cannot save ourselves, we cannot decide to give our hearts to Jesus and start believing in him. The Holy Spirit is the one who opens our hearts and makes us trust Jesus and know him as our Savior. To God be all the glory. We are saved by his grace alone and not our own decisions or choises.

It's subjective and not based upon scripture.

Then it's based upon scripture alone because your mind could fool you.

Then it's something we don't understand with our minds, but our "hearts."

Do you see the circularity in this?

Besides, I'd be very interested in how you concluded which scripture is the word of God.

Isn't that the bootstrap issue?

Half of what you're saying is to not trust those subjective feelings but to trust "God's word." That all sounds well and good, just how did you arrive at the conclusion that it is God's word?

I'm completely willing to discussion this from either a Thomistic or Presuppostically apologetics point of view.

Just I don't get it.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Yep, Every single day I have doubts and wonder if God is real if I am just lying to myself even if I may be crazy.

Then I sit and pray. I think of all the things written in the Bible. I ponder it all, I rationalize it and everyday I come up with the same answer.

It just fits. Yea I can pick it apart here and there but the overall message from Genesis to Revelation fits together to show that to me God is real and that he is reaching out to us.
I have turned my back on him many times and most likely will do it many times more before I meet him face to face. In all those time and I sure in the times still to come there has always been something to call me back to him.

Faith Hope and Love that is what Christianity is to me.
God loves us and sent his Son Jesus.
It is in him and his word that I have hope.
And that is how I justify my Faith.


But it still comes down to Faith. And who are you putting your faith in. Without my hope in God, life would be very dark, there just wouldnt be much to hope for. Humans need hope, hope that things will get better that things wont get worse. I hope that I am not crazy . That is why I place my Faith in Jesus.

What do you hope for?
</IMG>

A most excellent post. That well articulates where I was a few years ago.

Problem though, now it doesn't "just fit" as you put it. It doesn't seem all that believable.

I did a lot of reading in different scientific fields as well as a lot of reading in biblical scholarship and I could go into lots of details. But suffice it to say, the whole story (supernaturalism, talking snakes and donkeys, virgin birth, resurrection, afterlife, etc.) seems mythical.

How does the overall message "fit" for you any better than the overall message fits for believers of slightly or vastly different faith traditions?

How does well does naturalism "fit" for you for instance?

(BTW, I think you'd like reading the presuppositional apologists Francis Schaeffer. Or even Dr. Timothy Johnson's book. You're pretty close to where Johnson is based upon your post.)

Also you asked, what do I hope?

Epistemologically, what's the significance? Analyzing one's hopes leads to understanding of one's dreams, one's psychological needs, one's question for fulfillment.

Analyzing the evidence is what leads one to the real facts.

If one's understanding of "truth" is grounded in the former, that's subjective. Fulfilling, wonderful. But subjective.

Prior I had thought the human quest for truth and the quest for fulfillment were one in the same. They're not quite.

As for hopes... It is my hope that some day again my wife and children will love me despite no longer finding the truth in that which they find their fulfillment in.

 

[cerette]

It's subjective and not based upon scripture.

Then it's based upon scripture alone because your mind could fool you.

Then it's something we don't understand with our minds, but our "hearts."

Do you see the circularity in this?

Besides, I'd be very interested in how you concluded which scripture is the word of God.

Isn't that the bootstrap issue?

Half of what you're saying is to not trust those subjective feelings but to trust "God's word." That all sounds well and good, just how did you arrive at the conclusion that it is God's word?

I'm completely willing to discussion this from either a Thomistic or Presuppostically apologetics point of view.

Just I don't get it.

I had to read your post a few times to see how you could think there was circularity in what i said. Now I think I see what you see.
Let me try to clarify:
When I said that we believe with our hearts, it is in opposition to 'believing with our brains because it all is so clear and logically simple to understand'. Believing with our hearts, does not, however, mean that my heart believes X, your heart believes Y and Mr Jones's heart believes Z. It means, that all of us believers' hearts believe the same thing: namely, the teachings of the Bible.

Now you wonder, how do I know what the teachings of the Bible are, if Mr Jones says they are X and Mr Carlson says they are Y.. Good question! Here is where Scripture Alone comes in. Let Scripture explain Scripture. Do not let your own mind, or someone elses!, tell you what the Bible teaches. Let the Bible tell you what it teaches. Everything we believe must be founded in Scripture! If it isn't Scriptural, it isn't Biblical. Then.. there are many good documents that explain the teachings of the Bible... those are good to read (The book of Concord, the Nicene & Apostolic & Athanasian Creeds etc) but don't believe them just because they sound good, but because the things they teach are also taught in the Bible.

 

[cerette]

It's subjective and not based upon scripture.

Then it's based upon scripture alone because your mind could fool you.

Then it's something we don't understand with our minds, but our "hearts."

Do you see the circularity in this?

Besides, I'd be very interested in how you concluded which scripture is the word of God.

Isn't that the bootstrap issue?

Half of what you're saying is to not trust those subjective feelings but to trust "God's word." That all sounds well and good, just how did you arrive at the conclusion that it is God's word?

I'm completely willing to discussion this from either a Thomistic or Presuppostically apologetics point of view.

Just I don't get it.

"Half of what you're saying is to not trust those subjective feelings but to trust "God's word." That all sounds well and good, just how did you arrive at the conclusion that it is God's word?"

I did not arrive at that conclusion by doing brainwork. I arrived at that conclusion by the Holy Spirit opening my heart to it. When we read the Bible, it is a living word we are reading, and the Holy Spirit uses it to increase your faith in that Word.

Like I said in an earlier post, this is all foolishness to the unbeliever. But when a heart has been opened to faith in Christ, that heart hungers for more of God's word. And how does that heart know the Bible is God's word? By faith in that very word! The Bible says it is the word of God. And a believing heart believes and trusts that.

 

[FundiMentalist]

I mentioned that I graduated from Oral Roberts University. Perhaps some concluded I came from solely a Word of Faith name-it-claim-it-Robert-Tilton-esq background.

Mike said I didn't know a lick about Christian doctrine.

My background is that I started out as a kind in a mainline Baptist church and from there my family switched over to Assembly of God. That's where I was baptised. From there I went to ORU. Most of the last 20 years I've attended a few different non-denominational (slightly Charismatic) Evangelical Protestant churches as well as one more Ecumenical perhaps significantly Anglican influenced churches overseas while on an ex-pat assignment. Also along the way I've taken time to learn some of the basics of the Catholic catechism and pieces of what's different in Orthodoxy, on the other side of the Great Schism. Can't say I know much other than a few incidental tidbits about the theologies of the likes of LDSs and JWs.

Mike said I was never "born again." I'm not sure all of those groups agree so much on exactly what such a term means. I was simply using it as a in-group label. In North America, there's a group of Evangelical Protestants who self-label themselves as "born again." Other groups of Christians seem to use the term more or less as yet another theological term than a self-identifying label.

My point on bringing up the snippits of 1st century rabbinical literature related to the term was to emphasize that the gospel writer (depending upon exegetical method) meant something perhaps more along the lines of that historical context.

Sorry for all the confusion.

 

[Shadowfax503]

Thank You. And I have read some of Dr. Johnson.

I have to say I laughed when I read what you said about talking snakes! And I do agree some of what is in the bible is funny, maybe God put it there just to see if we have a sense of humor? I know we take ourself way to serious sometimes. Anyway just a crazy thought.

As for me and how it "fits" better than say Islam or Zoasterism or Wicca or the host of other religions out there; is that in Judea Christianity you have God reaching down to man and not man reaching to God. Does that make it the "True" religion? No it doesnt. But it does make it different and that to me says something. For me I just do not have the fortitude of spirit to reach "nirvana" or the time to become one with "Gaia", and I really want to see my departed loved ones again so to think this life is all I have leaves me hopeless and that is depressing.

To be honest, you said I am where you were at a few years ago. Well I was at where you are now about 5 years ago and it took almost 4 years of searching (both real and soul) to get where I am now.

If I may ask what was the point when you started to question your faith? Mine was due to me actually reading the Bible and understanding it without being told by someone else how to interrupt it.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Cerette, hearts pump. Brains think.

What exactly are you talking about? Can you try to explain it without the metaphorical language?

And again, please try to avoid the circularity. Please try a few "I find the Bible truthful because..." without metaphors. And if a voice/influence showed/told you it was truthful, how did you asess whether or not it's claims were truthful.

 

[MikeMcK]

Mike said I didn't know a lick about Christian doctrine.

And you were nice enough to prove it for me.

Mike said I was never "born again." I'm not sure all of those groups agree so much on exactly what such a term means.

Doesn't matter. We don't determine truth by what Roman Catholics, JW's, or Mormons believe, but by what the Bible says.

My point on bringing up the snippits of 1st century rabbinical literature related to the term was to emphasize that the gospel writer (depending upon exegetical method) meant something perhaps more along the lines of that historical context.

First of all, it isn't what the Gospel writer meant, but what Jesus meant, and if Jesus hadn't meant to be reborn spiritually "from above", then He wouldn't have said to be reborn spiritually "from above".

Sorry for all the confusion.

No problem. It's actually kind of funny to watch the train wreck that occurs when the atheists come here and claim to have been Christians, but then show that they don't have a clue what Christianity teaches.

 

[cerette]

I mentioned that I graduated from Oral Roberts University. Perhaps some concluded I came from solely a Word of Faith name-it-claim-it-Robert-Tilton-esq background.

Mike said I didn't know a lick about Christian doctrine.

My background is that I started out as a kind in a mainline Baptist church and from there my family switched over to Assembly of God. That's where I was baptised. From there I went to ORU. Most of the last 20 years I've attended a few different non-denominational (slightly Charismatic) Evangelical Protestant churches as well as one more Ecumenical perhaps significantly Anglican influenced churches overseas while on an ex-pat assignment. Also along the way I've taken time to learn some of the basics of the Catholic catechism and pieces of what's different in Orthodoxy, on the other side of the Great Schism. Can't say I know much other than a few incidental tidbits about the theologies of the likes of LDSs and JWs.

Mike said I was never "born again." I'm not sure all of those groups agree so much on exactly what such a term means. I was simply using it as a in-group label. In North America, there's a group of Evangelical Protestants who self-label themselves as "born again." Other groups of Christians seem to use the term more or less as yet another theological term than a self-identifying label.

My point on bringing up the snippits of 1st century rabbinical literature related to the term was to emphasize that the gospel writer (depending upon exegetical method) meant something perhaps more along the lines of that historical context.

Sorry for all the confusion.

"Mike said I was never "born again." I'm not sure all of those groups agree so much on exactly what such a term means. I was simply using it as a in-group label. In North America, there's a group of Evangelical Protestants who self-label themselves as "born again." Other groups of Christians seem to use the term more or less as yet another theological term than a self-identifying label."

Very good point! Most American Evangelicals are not aware of this.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Shadow, questioning my faith was really unintended.

I changed jobs and traveled a lot. Lots of flights. Including international. Lots of time to read.

I started reading all the other things I wished I could have studied in college. Linguistics, cosmology.

Tower of Babel was the first to topple as myth.

That reading begat more questions. Which begat more reading and more questions in a cycle.

All the while my pastor was hyper confident in his conclusions, so much so, he'd say stuff from the pulpit like, "in the free market of ideas, let the best idea win!" He was convinced Christianity would come out on top.

So was I.

But I had to answers these questions for myself first.

Biology. Finally "got" evolution.

Psychology. Finally "got" cognitive biases and vulnerabilities.

History.

Church history.

Hermeneutics and exegesis.

Elements of other Christian faith traditions outside my own.

Apologetics. Development of the canon.

Reason. Getting to know my way around logical fallacies.

And then after four years it all toppled.

And yes, reading the Bible, with insight into history, development of theology over time, knowledge of all those other things doesn't really help. If you read the bible to inspire you, you're probably fine. But seriously trying to understand what it says and make sense of it all with itself and with the broader world around (aka Creation), is a bit different challenge.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Mike, that's for sharing.

As you considered me insincere and as the one who started this thread I kindly ask you to bow out.

 

[cerette]

Cerette, hearts pump. Brains think.

What exactly are you talking about? Can you try to explain it without the metaphorical language?

And again, please try to avoid the circularity. Please try a few "I find the Bible truthful because..." without metaphors. And if a voice/influence showed/told you it was truthful, how did you asess whether or not it's claims were truthful.

Dear friend,

I am not sure I can explain without using picture language.

There is no other creature or thing or anything which is like God. Therefore, we lack language and understanding of God, because we cannot relate him to anything else we already know. This is why I am forced to use half-crappy picture language, to give an idea of God/the Christian truth that I am talking about.

When I said I believe in my heart, I did not mean that the organ 'heart' does the believing. It is the same as when we use the word 'heart' when talking about loving our spouse, kids, football or whatever. "My husband is in my heart" does not mean he jumped into my chest and is now inside of the bodypart known as heart.

 

[cerette]

Fundi....

I sense that you wish to be able to reach faith in Christianity from a natural, logical, mental, brainpowery sort of point of view. (Have I understood you correctly?) Thing is, that is not the way to go. God does not use those roads to lead you to faith.

I speak here from a believer's point of view. I speak what the Bible teaches. That is my foundation.

We don't stand on the same foundation in this discussion, therefore I highly doubt we will end with a mutual understanding.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Cerette, excellent. You're getting very close to getting where I'm coming from.

When you say, "My husband is in my heart," you're right. It doesn't mean he somehow got into that blood pumping muscle in your chest.

It's wonderful, poetic, metaphorical language.

For something like...

Your mind has thoughts of devotion for your husband.

OK. So now we need to disambiguate this a bit. There are two separate key things here.

There's your husbands.

And separately your thoughts of devotion for your husband.

Very separate things.

And the evidence of the two things are quite separate. Your husband exists completely indepdent of your thoughts of devotion for him.

So here's the issue.

When you say something akin to "I know God is real because he is in my heart," what is that evidence of?

Is that evidence of your thoughts of devotion for God?

Or evidence of God? (And then there's the fact that YHWH of the Bible is the God is yet another matter.)

So what I've heard more or less in metaphorical terms is evidence of your belief.

That I concede. I fully understand that you believe and that your belief is real.

The separate matter is, is that which is believed to be real?

That's where I'm asking you to get out of the metaphorical language and avoid the circularity.

And hoping something to be real, doesn't necessarily make it real.

This is what I'm trying to understand.

Can you show me God is real beyond the fact that your belief in him is real in the same way you could show me that your husband is real beyond the fact that you have thoughts of devotion for him.

A few posts ago I mentioned the difference between the quest for that which is fulfilling vs. that which is true. Perhaps this illustrates.

 

[Shadowfax503]

Shadow, questioning my faith was really unintended.

If you read the bible to inspire you, you're probably fine. But seriously trying to understand what it says and make sense of it all with itself and with the broader world around (aka Creation), is a bit different challenge.

Amen! It is a challenge. (I came from a degree in biology and statics)

To me it was a good challenge all be it a hard one and one that has lead to a more real relationship with God. I can give you this one thing to think about. If you are still wanting to believe even a little bit than it really is worth you time and effort to dig in to it.

I would love to chat some more but at the moment I have to go. I will check back again. God Bless and I will pray for you and this challenge.