Faithfulness as a weakness

[dyermaker]

I'd ask first for you to just close the window if you're going in here with arms drawn. If you don't care about my religious thoughts, and you find yourself incapable of reading this with an open mind, don't bother reading, and certainly not replying. I have a specific question I'm asking, it's in bold below. I'm not looking for a one sentence answer on how religion is all bullcrap, and that's the answer to my question. I speculate that some of you treat certain posts like they're high-school novels, and skip all of the minutiae in favor of the Cliff Notes. I'm not trying to change the opinion or religious orientation of ANYONE, merely asking that we discuss things with an open mind, or not bother discussing them at all. I'm not looking to fight a war, I'm looking for a meaningful discussion, one that I can both learn from, and give to.

 

Why is it that the disbelief in what cannot be seen is a strength, but faithfulness is a weakness?

 

I find it neccessary to first draw the line between fundamentalism and faith. When one cheerfully points out the flaws of religion and religious people, they're more often than not talking about religious fundamentalists, almost always fundamental Christians. These are the people who tell you you're going to hell, who interpret every word of the Bible literally, who attempt to find scientific proof to back up the immaculate translations of the Bible (or at least the books they recognize--Sirach anyone??), and who assert that they're not faithful in God, but rather certain in him. This, in my opinion, and for the sake of the discussion at hand, should separate the difference between those who have FAITH in God, and those who are certain. Because the fundamentalists refuse to question their faith, refuse to be open to a metaphorical interpretation of the scripture, and find it so neccessary to shove their fanaticism in your face--they're NOT what I'm talking about. They seek to avoid faith by reconciling it with fact, and I find that a mistake. If you're a fundamentalist, I love you like a brother, but I don't want to talk about you right now, and I don't want your not-so-proud actions brought up in this discussion.

 

Secondly, it's the assumption of many that religion is like a security blanket. That people who are religious do so because they're explaining something they cannot understand, like Greek mythology. Anyone who subscribes to religion is merely doing so to placate their concerns about their own mortality, and to simply leave questions unanswered, by investing that they DO have an answer in a higher power.

 

Nothing could be further from the truth, at least for me. Not a day goes by where I don't question things spiritually. The difference I see between my faithful choice, and the chioce of the atheistic/agnostic, is that I don't give up at that point. Often people see themselves as having an innate NEED to rationalize something spiritual. These are the same people, mind you, who fall in love, get lost in understanding themselves, and experience the plethora of human experiences that we all experience that entail a lack of control, and a resignation of rational proof. When I have a question, I resarch the answer. When some have a question, they merely pose the question as a statement of their concession.

 

How can we believe anything in the Bible, if some of it is so obviously fabricated?

 

It's a question we've all had.

 

However, some pose it merely as an attack. The question, for them, is rhetorical, because they're not looking for an answer to convince them, but rather for their quesiton to convince others that it makes more sense to abandon a belief in religion at all.

 

Nevertheless, when I had the very same question, I read about it. I prayed about it. And when I say read, I don't mean I went to catholicanswers.org (fictional) and read what some priest in wyoming has to say about it, I mean I read about it from MANY different sources. Some sources were fundamentalist, and I knew right away that we would differ in opinion. But I read it anyway, I found anything I could read about this topic (and many others, including legalism with regards to sexuality, the tradition of man versus the imperative doctrine of God, the doctrinal differences and their connection to the old testament, the historical context behind the metaphors in the bible--I'm sure theres more, but the point is, I'm not someone merely stating an unadulterated opinion, I've read and concluded, based on outside sources, and a desire in my soul for knowledge, not neccesarily certain knowledge, but a knowledge that entails an unexplainable comfort)--and I used it to form my opinions. My research is hardly done, in terms of my spiritual conclusions. To sidetrack a bit, I've concluded that the scientific facts are still not exlpained today. We have evolution, which makes perfect sense, so I believe in it, but it's still unproven. (Please note, I'm a firm believer in Darwin's Origin of Species. That said, people hundreds of years ago were firm believers that the Earth is flat. It's lame to pretend we have all the answers, but I don't accept the Genesis Creation story as a historical fact, and I do believe in Evolution. I'm just open to the possibility of being wrong) No one has proven evolution as a fact, because we lack the ability to do so. Now take that ability, and subtract 5000 years from it--could you imagine if God explained the chemistry and process by which he created the Earth to them? If religious text read like my freshman biology book, I'd never pick up the Bible. In order for the people to adopt and understand the gifts of knowledge from God, they had to have the stories with a RELIGIOUS truth, put in a historical context of the time. Something that someone could read and interpret. As time progresses, it's the burden of the human and their soul to take that text, and relate it to their life--no one can do it for them. My soul and I have heeded such a calling, to seek out the answers to the questions with an open mind, to pray and trust that I'm not being beguiled, and to make an educated, yet not certain, conclusion.

 

Additionally, there's the argument that God cannot be seen, nor proven, so he cannot exist. The wind cannot be seen, love cannot be proven. I believe that God works primarily through love, and it takes a belief in love to believe in God. Please read that link moimeme posted on romantic love, because I'm not talking about that. Darkangelism said that love was a human invention, and doesn't truly exist. I contend that he's never felt Love, and until you've felt it, you can't fathom what it is or what it does. Call me a liar if you wish, but I know with 100% certainty that Love exists, I'll never stop knowing it. It's that same certainty that I get with God. Unlike a fanatical and uneducated crusade of righteousness, I don't pretend I have all of the answers, and I don't try to condescend the divine and unexplained to what I'm not capable of understanding. Rather, I have established a personal and rewarding relationship with God, one that I stil question and doubt daily, but still work at--just like a human relationship.

 

Finally, there's the issue of free will. The most common reason for a conversion from religiousness to atheism, is the idea that if God exists, he would have stopped evil. God may be able to microwave a taco so hot that he can't eat it, but he can't stop evil. The measure of evil is only exists in comparison to the measure of good. One cannot be good, without the existence of evil. God can intervene if we let him. I have no doubt that God works through people. I've not only seen it in people, but I've felt him working through me. The greatest gift God gave us is free will. We're not truly human unless we have full 100% control over our lives, and we're not truly human unless we can respond to the choices of others. There are situations and experiences that one can only call coincidental to a certain point, and I feel lucky enough to pass the threshold of doubt. I try my best to relate to you my religious experiences, but it's like Nirvana, I can't teach it to you, you have to find it for yourself.

 

The subscription to organized Catholicism and a certain, yet doubtful belief in God is a part of me. It's this part of me that people see as weak, because I can't prove it. Perhaps I'll never understand that.

[Arabess]

To my amazement, my daughter wrote a rap song once:

 

I don't care what man might say

I believe in Him ANYWAY

Cause I.......AM.......IS!

 

It works for me.

 

I try greatly not to push my belief on someone else....not my friends nor my children....and certainly not a stranger. I don't consider my belief as superior or inferior....I just believe it to be true for me.

 

And that's all I need.

[moimeme]

My theory on this has to do with scientism and with people who require 'certainty'.

 

People who get a collection of sheepskin leaflets become impressed with their ability to use their cognitive skills. Too, someplace along the line, they become inducted into the cult of scientism, whose belief is that "the investigative methods of the physical sciences are applicable or justifiable in all fields of inquiry" (dictionary.com). This becomes extrapolated to matters of faith as well. The simplistic result is they demand empirical proof of anything before they believe it. And scorn anyone who hasn't a file cabinet full of empirical proof for something they wish to discuss.

 

The second, related affliction is the requirement for certainty. They must believe that all is knowable now.

 

History has shown us time and again (now, almost daily) that that which we now think we know may be proven wrong tomorrow and that there are things that people in the following generations will know and understand that we could not possibly understand now due to gaps in the information we have. Nevertheless, they refuse to allow for the fact that everything to do with God and faith may indeed be knowable AND provable someday to people who come later and know more. Still, these highly educated people seem to insist upon believing that that which is not known now will never be knowable.

 

And anybody who believes otherwise is a deluded fool.

 

You can't discuss with folks like that; it's pointless. They will continue to 'prove' that you are unable to prove your claims empirically today and therefore they have no value. Those of us who have had transcendent experiences understand them - and understand what the scientists lack but it's no more possible to explain it to them than it is to explain the experience of love to someone who has not had it. And pretty much as futile.

[dyermaker]

Moimeme, in drawing the distinction between those who want certainty, including religous people in zealous pursuit of certainty, and those who have faith, I was trying to leave such things out of the discussion.

 

The impression is there that it's easier to believe, than to not believe.

 

This implies that there is neither inquisitiveness, nor doubt involved in faith--this is not the case.

 

It would be a lot easier for me to find fault in certain doctrine, and rhetorically use it to defeat religious truths.

 

Why is it then that the fact that I believe in God, and (*gasp*) participate in an organized faith, a weakness?

[moimeme]

Because you don't require empirical proof. I was not using 'certainty' the way you are, which really is the definition of 'absolutism'. Reread my definition of 'certainty'; basically it is that there is nothing unknowable.

[quankanne]

Why is it then that the fact that I believe in God, and (*gasp*) participate in an organized faith, a weakness?

 

because faith is purely subjective. It's hard to describe the 'why' of believing to someone who has no connection or recognition of what you're talking about -- and I think most of us give creedence to a subject/belief when we feel some sort of connection to it ...

 

I think that those who find faith a type weakness do so because they cannot comprehend the beauty we find in it, so it's easier to just dismiss it as a weakness. And that is based on their purely subjective point of view. To be fair, though, I've encountered more agnostics who are okay with the idea of others having that personal connection with God, than I have people who automatically "diss" me because I say I've got God.

 

---

 

Words fail when I try to explain what my faith is, but I can tell you that what I've got with God is mine alone, and I'm very, very happy about what we've got together. The best I can to do is to model the love he shows me, but still, it's only a fraction of what he gives to me ...

 

the short answer to 'why do I believe?' because it's mine.

[jenny]

why does it matter to you if people see it as a weakness?

[moimeme]

It gets tiresome being looked down upon for having faith. Adherents of scientism think people who believe in the unprovable are intellectually challenged. It's annoying.

[jenny]

ok. more specifically, dyermaker, why would it bother you?

 

i sort of enjoy the antagonism towards agnosticism/atheism, or, more recently, judaism. it's just debate, and no one can alter your strength at the end of the day.

[Bronzepen]

We as humans are very inquisitive creatures. We try to understand or make sense out of our envioronment. Whether it be physical, psychological or metaphysical. Pretty much, anything that we deal with.

 

We fear the unknown but at the same time we strive to understand and decipher any new puzzle.

 

Of course the biggest puzzle is God or for non-believers it's the age old question - "Why are we here?" But the answer, if there even is one for us to understand, goes hand in hand.

 

Being inquisitive creatures, all, scriptures like the Bible, Koran, etc... is man's way of trying to understand and interpret what God is and to some extent what s/he/it represents. This is not to say that the scriptures are fictional or that they are non fictional. That's a discussion for another thread. I am merely stating that they are tools and/or guides for someone to read and come to their own conclusion.

 

Having said that. Let me give you my take on why people see faith as a weakness.

 

While the scriptures provide a "picture" they don't provide a clear, cut and detailed picture. All in all, God still remains an enigma. But for the majority of the world population (people in organized faith like yourself) the scriptures are enough for them and for you to come to your own conclusion that you have faith and God does exist.

 

Of course for some people the scriptures are not enough. They need more "facts" or at least something to work on. Unfortunately, all they have is the scriptures and recorded events (miracles). This is not enough. These people need more whether it be scientific or mathematical.

 

The fact that you believe in something that is not proven (to them) and your just taking it at face value. Will appear as weakness to these people because in their eyes your taking the easy road or just taking it as fact without substance or proof.

 

Another reason is some people don't like organized religion. Some see it as a way for people to control other people in the name of God. For some people this is a sign of weakness because you are being used.

 

 

This is my take on God. Just my opinion.

 

For you Dyer, God is love. I agree but I will amend to that and say God is not just love but everything.

 

I believe God has everything and I mean everything planned out. We (meaning entire universe and beyond) are all part of his plan. S/he/it has mapped out everything already. This includes the "bad, evil, atrocities and death" that we humans witness and carry out. Everything has a reason for happening and sometimes we will understand why and sometimes we will shake our heads and wonder what's going on.

 

The thing is, everything connects in one way or another. To us it may be endless and maybe it is.

 

We can try to make sense of all this and in the end we will still have questions.

 

Faith in God is to believe in the unbelievable.

 

hmmm.....I sure have used that phrase a lot this week. I wonder if it means something?? ;-)

[jenny]

as a side point, do you really believe this:

 

That people who are religious do so because they're explaining something they cannot understand, like Greek mythology.

 

why would your faith be more substantial or broader in purpose than theirs?

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by jenny

why does it matter to you if people see it as a weakness?

Because it's something I work hard on, and when I try to share what I've learned both in pursuit and in earnest conclusion, I'm looked down upon. It's not like I'm trying to change anyone's mind, that's rarely my intent in any discussion of something of this nature, I would just like to be afforded the same credibility as those who choose to not have faith. If I was a scientist, I'd understand it, but why do matters of faith seem to be out of place in any discussion? I definitely do NOT have a my-way-or-the-highway attitude about it, and I don't accept ANYTHING blindly. I feel like I've payed my dues, if that makes any sense.

Originally posted by Bronzepen

We fear the unknown but at the same time we strive to understand and decipher any new puzzle.

I honestly feel the strongest decision I've ever made is the concession that some things are above me. Perhaps that makes me a turncoat to anyone who considered me an intellectual, but I'm willling to say that there are things that neither me nor my species will ever understand. I consider many religious questions as partially unanswered, and I'll be asking them when I get to heaven.

The fact that you believe in something that is not proven (to them) and your just taking it at face value. Will appear as weakness to these people because in their eyes your taking the easy road or just taking it as fact without substance or proof.

I don't take things at face value, I thought I made that clear. The scriptures are not "enough", taking the easy way out would imply that I believe things without understanding the reason I believe them, or at least conceding the reason as something I'll never understand.

Originally posted by jenny

as a side point, do you really believe this:

 

[bla bla bla ancient greeks]

 

why would your faith be more substantial or broader in purpose than theirs?

It is my conclusion, upon prayer and the constant opneness to the possibility of being mistaken, that God recognized people will always change, and that different souls require different things in order to experience God. It would be quite lame of God to make ONE church, and have that ONE church be the "you'll go to hell or else" church. I think in recognizing the uniqueness of human souls and needs, he manifests himself through the many religious faiths.

 

He understood that ancient Japanese people needed a connection with the environment, while Ancient Greeks needed a way to placate concerns over the wrath of nature. Thus, Shintoism and Greek Mythology. The different religions are different ways of God communicating to his people, their souls--the fostering of an individual relationship with those who desire a community of fellow believers, lest we all mediate in solitude.

 

God chose Catholicism to communicate with me, and he has. Catholic, by definition, means "universal", we believe in one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Nevertheless, it would be hateful and counterproductive for me to assert that I'm the only one going to heaven, because I'm "right"--this is one thing through which I don't strive for correctness. I'll never be able to explain what God does for me, and even if I could, no one would believe it. People have set views towards religion, and just like I won't believe in Aliens until it happens to me, it's futile to convert you. Conversion is a personal decision, between one and God.

[Bronzepen]

Originally posted by dyermaker

 

I honestly feel the strongest decision I've ever made is the concession that some things are above me. Perhaps that makes me a turncoat to anyone who considered me an intellectual, but I'm willling to say that there are things that neither me nor my species will ever understand. I consider many religious questions as partially unanswered, and I'll be asking them when I get to heaven.

 

 

I don't think your a turncoat. Your just humbled. I totally agree. There are things that we will never understand or meant to.

 

I think when we goto heaven, questions and meaning have no bearings. We are all simply one. Either everything will make sense or it doesn't matter if it doesn't make sense. Just my thinking.

 

 

 

Originally posted by dyermaker

 

I don't take things at face value, I thought I made that clear. The scriptures are not "enough", taking the easy way out would imply that I believe things without understanding the reason I believe them, or at least conceding the reason as something I'll never understand.

 

 

I never said you did. This was my explanation into one possiblity as to why some people may view you as weak for having faith. In THEIR eyes they see you as taking it at face value, since to them all there is to go on are the scriptures. You have your reasons but for the people that view you as weak, you have not fact. That is their perception.

[CaterpillarGirl]

Most of the world's greatest minds have used their talents to harmonize reason and faith. In fact, I have not yet met an intelligent person who had not turned their thoughts to theology at some point in their life. I constantly see people quoting Einstein on religion/God, and yet dismissing those whose life work has been devoted to this very subject. I think people find faith and religion easier to dismiss if it is seen as something without necessary contemplation and inspection, as if we are all mindless servants of some heirarchy rather than rational creatures.

[SoleMate]

Dyer, my feelings on this topic are so very similar to yours. It is humility and intellectual curiosity that have convinced me that God exists and really does care what I do with my life. It certainly isn't unreasoning faith.

 

And even with science degrees from two elite universities (MIT and Stanford if you were wondering), the more I learn, the more aware I become of my limitations, and of human limitations generall, in perception, reasoning, and the ability to truly "know" the "truth". I will never be able to know the exact location and momentum of a certain photon at once. But the best operation of my head tells me that God is real, and present.

 

One thing I have realized is that my words are not necessary to defend my faith or to convince others. God will do that, and He finds it most effective to work through my actions. Many people preached the Gospel to me with words, at great length, but my heart was only opened by testimonies with no words at all, or perhaps just a few.

[moimeme]

the more I learn, the more aware I become of my limitations, and of human limitations generall, in perception, reasoning, and the ability to truly "know" the "truth".

 

Therein lies the true meaning of wisdom. Those who think they know it all know less than nothing. Those who revel in their intellectual 'superiority' because they demand scientific 'rigour' in every discussion are awash in superbia. But, as Ryan's sig said, "It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."