The Tension of Faith

Atoms make the most sense to me. They are what makes up things that are seen and yet they themselves are unseen.

My beliefs are evolving. It is honest to admit that none of them have been likely to be true in the objective sense. I used to always claim that one needs to stand for something or they will fall for anything. Which brings us to a working definition for truth. Of late, I am leaning towards the belief that honesty is truth. To thine own self be true.Thus to say that "I dont know" is far better than claiming to know based on what one has read. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Let's get back to your signature.

quote:

---

He has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

---

For some of us, doing justice, being honest, and loving kindness are all we can honestly do. We have no idea what it means to walk humbly with God. My question is this: Is it important to at least being open about one's willingness to do so..without any concept of Who it is they would even be walking with?

I disagree. Not all truth is verifiable...as least initially. Sometimes you gotta choose a road without knowing the final destination. It would be great if we always had good road signs, but they sometimes are lacking.

Let's explore this idea of cultural Christianity, shall we? Of course, I googled several definitions.

At Got Questions.Org What Is Cultural Christianity?
They basically say that "Cultural Christianity is a religion that superficially identifies itself as Christianity but does not truly adhere to the faith. A cultural Christian is a nominal believerhe wears the label Christian, but the label has more to do with his family background and upbringing than any personal conviction that Jesus is Lord. ". We cant accuse jar of being a nominal believer if he routinely goes and does for the least of these. (Grocery Carts, eye level with children, helping the neighbor, and attempting to rescue the poor Biblical Christians from willful ignorance certainly counts as something! I do not know what jar does on a daily basis, but I can see him helping a lot of people in small yet meaningful ways. I do think that both jar and Ringo are too casual in minimizing the resurrection of Jesus and do not claim Jesus to be Lord. The counter-argument is that God is unconcerned with such superficial toadying and this is why jar claims that atheists, Wiccans, other beliefs, and common street folk will make it into heaven ahead of Biblical Christians..(the proverbial goats. )

​

I was always taught the importance of belief in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus as the necessary step towards being a true Christian and not simply one in name only. To his credit, jar seems to bear fruit in his life, much of which we cannot see. (John 15:1-8) I cant say that I am any more of a Christian than jar is, though he often annoys me by equating other beliefs as just as important as the Christian ones (and Creedal ones) which he has learned.

​

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

---

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith

You are likely correct. I feel that you often disrespect the teaching...the belief...perhaps the origin and validity of Christianity, but I cannot claim that you do not advocate doing what the lessons and teacher (Jesus) say to do.I used to always label you as the Apostle to the Atheists, and I still sometimes think that you cater to their collective attempt to separate the belief from the reality. I would think that a Christian would or at least should attempt to fight for the validity and history of the belief itself yet you suggest that the lesson that should be passed on is the teaching (to do for others) and that the truthfulness of the legend does not matter as much as the lessons taught within the story. (add by edit) GDR seems to go off on this same tangent. And the way I was taught, the motivation was to "be a good Christian" and believe...then do. In contrast, you seem to suggest that doing is everything and for this reason, the unbelievers who do correctly will arrive in heaven (should one exist) before the Biblical Christians hung up on doctrine and belief yet short on useful action. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

But why is it important to you to do these deeds?

Oh stop! You know darn well what the implication is. Besides, to you the whole term Lord is irrelevant.

Yet one cannot walk with an unknowable God very well.

Who made up Micahs God?

An argument could be made, based on GDRs perspective, that one cannot believe in the Nicene Creed with a clear conscience while also believing that every aspect of God mentioned in the Bible was made up.

Yet at least you are honest enough to admit that you are an atheist.

The allusion was not directed at you specifically. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Your argument only holds weight if Christianity is based on what we do versus what we believe.

Perhaps it is that they won't believe without evidence. I am not so worried that the existence of God supersedes natural laws in certain circumstances. You, of course, would call it wishful thinking and fantasy-based.