Assumptions about faith

Perhaps this belongs in the faith and belief forum. This rant was brought on from following one of the science threads and noting the damage done to Christianity by YECism.It is often assumed by YECs that evolutionists are athiests, or at least non-Christian. Is it all right if I make assumptions about the faith of YECs, specifically that their faith is founded on a narrow interpretation of a book that they worship instead of in the saving grace of Jesus? Of course it's not OK to make either assumption. But I think YECs are as likely to hold that faith committment as evolutionists are to reject Christianity. Some YECs seem proud of their faith, but I think their faith is incredibly weak. Their faith is threatened by any facts that undermine a preferred interpretation of scripture. In my opinion true faith in Jesus Christ is unshakable. But YECs place their faith in something that is very shakable.

I think a good test for anyone's faith is to ask what would happen to if certain things were found to be true. If your faith would be threatened by the indisputable discovery that Jesus did not rise from the dead, then your faith is founded on the belief that he did. The christian doctrine of grace, is based on the belief that man is sinful, Jesus lifed a perfect life, died as payment for man's sin and was raised from the dead. This fact would undermine the doctrine of grace.But if your faith would be threatened by by some other fact then your faith is founded on something other than grace alone. If your faith would be threatened by errors in scriputure, then your faith is in inerrency in addition to grace. If your faith would be threatened by evolution, then your faith is in a narrow interpretation of scripture instead of grace alone.With the exception of the indisputable discovery that Jesus did not rise from the dead, I can think of no finding of science would threaten my faith.As a Christian I hate to see people reject Christ because of a misconception. It's one thing to have a naturalistic worldview. A naturalistic worldview is just as intellectually valid as a Christian worldview. But I hate to see YECism associated with Christianity. That is a large part of my motivation. I think the YEC ministry drives people away from faith in Christ. Those that it does bring to "faith", I wonder what their faith is in. By the same token we TEs are accused by YECs of driving Christians from faith and causing faith crises. And that's the last thing I want to do. But again I wonder, faith in what? Faith in Christ shouldn't be threatened by deeper knowledge of his creation.If you decide not to promote the topic I understand. I wanted to explore this issue without getting off topic from some other threads.

Sorry I haven't responded to this thread yet. I was pretty busy yesterday.First of all, I am not bragging about my faith in any way; my faith is not better than anyone else's. I think the quality and strength of our faith come from God. And mine would be pretty weak on my own. But I am defending it from the assumtion it doesn't exist because of evolutionary beliefs, and I am challenging those who make that assumption to look at their own faith. Is it in God or in the book that reveals God to us, or the church, or traditions, etc. At the risk of sounding like a cliche, some of my best freinds are YECs! Many of these folks are very intelligent and I respect their opinions very much. That is contrary to a popular assumption held by many Christian-bashers.In your summary of my position you said: I think you misunderstood my position. Doctrines are what I do NOT have faith in. Doctrines are teachings. They are "human wisdom" (a charactarization used with fondness by many a YEC refering to science). The trinity is a doctrine based on some very solid scriptural evidence. I have no faith in it. It could conceivably be re-evaluated and abandoned or revised. 6-day creation is a doctrine that I obviously have no faith in! Salvation by grace through faith is also a doctrine but it's hard to get to a much more fundamental doctrine than that. Especially since Paul said we are saved, "by grace through faith". You can whittle away all sorts of Christian doctrines as non-essential but you really can't take away that one. It would be hard to come up with a theology that could be considered Christian without salvation by grace through faith.As for the second point, and being falsafiable, perhaps I should be more clear. Christianity is falsafiable, belief in God, as JAR said, is not. Not in this lifetime, but of course that's what we're talking about. But neither is Atheism falsafiable for that matter; they are both metaphysical assumptions made without any possibility of either verification or falsification.Yes, I do think it is unlikely it will be discovered that Jesus did not rise from the dead. That's one reason I am a Christian. I just finished reading the book, "The Resurrection of the Son of God" by N. T. Wright. He makes a very solid historical case for the resurrection. But the discovery is not impossible. Last year there was a lot of press about the "James Osuary" and a tomb that might contain the bones of Jesus. The findings were doubtful to put it kindly. But it is conceivable that the most basic Christian beliefs could be proved wrong.

---

Brent

True, no question. But it is a doctrine explicitly layed out by Paul, as is resurrection. Any form of Christianity that didn't include these would have to would be at odds with the foundational documents of Christianity (Paul's letters). Of course there is an incredible variety of beliefs that people have argued to be consistant with Christianity, and incredible feats of spin-doctoring are possible.

---

Brent

Paul certainly had a way with words. But I don't see how his writings could be considered anything less than foundational for modern protestant Christianity. No I don't think that's what he meant. The full quotation is "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast." I think he means to contrast something we can work for and the totally free, unearned gift of God. Tons of ink has been used trying to explore what Paul meant by that. Which is the gift of God, grace or faith? Or both? Is having faith a "work"? Is it something we do to earn salvation? No, I think he makes it clear here and elsewhere there is nothing that can earn salvation. God doesn't "owe" us anything because we have faith in him. Bet he (Jesus) does promise to save those who believe. Paul also offers the quote, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." I think Paul's position is that God can apply grace wherever he wants. God is the perfect judge, knowing our hearts. Paul indicates that even the gentiles demonstrate that they have the requirements of the law written on their hearts. I think it's consistant with Paul's theology that God can use the blood of Christ to cover the sins of some Austrailian aboriginee who's never heard of him. Or old testament Jews who had never heard of Jesus. Or how about a modern God fearing Jew who, through no fault of theirs, was brought up to believe that Jesus was a false Messiah? What if God loves that person and wants to save them. Who are we to say, "But God, you can't save him, he didn't say the sinners prayer". By the same token there may be those who are very proud of their faith, thinking they have done all the right things. God will have mercy on whom God have mercy.

---

Brent

I'm sorry, I thought your were characterizing my position as faith in doctrine. Well of course a YEC could say that. They do say it all he time. My point is they're wrong. To require ANYTHING else in addition to belief in Christ is a contradiction of the gospel of grace alone. Yes they're all doctrines but to require belief in those doctrines contradicts a more basic doctrine, that all we have to do is believe in Christ. I'm not sure how that statement sets me apart. If you honestly ask a question you have to be willing to accept whatever answer you get. If it were discovered that Jesus did not rise from the dead, then yes I would lose my faith in Christ (although I would still be a theist). I have indeed founded my faith in Christ on hopes of a certain physical world that may or may not exist, specifically the resurrection. But if a YEC would lose his faith in Christ on the discovery that the earth is older than a literal reading of Genesis allows, then he has founded his faith on hopes of a certain physical world that has already been shown not to exist, instead of the resurrection. Which faith has a more solid foundation?

Well for the purpose of this thread about faith assumptions maybe we can just assume that Jesus is relavant. Otherwise we will have to cover an issue that's been debated for millenia and settled nothing To this I'll just say that for Paul justification would be impossible without the atoning sacrifice of Christ. There's a debt that had to be paid.As for God "selling" us salvation in exchange our faith, I don't think that quite describes what's happening with grace. First of all that won't work from an accounting point of view. Assuming there is a God, we don't have anything God didn't give us. Everything we have was either given by God or we aquired it using that which God gave us. God gave us free will which allows us to have faith. By giving it back to him we are not earning anything. I don't think we are entitled to anything in exchange for it, and I doubt God is very impressed with anyone who thinks they are. Again, since we don't have anything God needs, our sin-debt is unpayable. Paul says that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. Righteousnes is the currency that buys justification or salvation and we don't have it. So God gave some to Abraham. The price that is paid for our salvation is not faith, it's the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Once paid, it can be applied to Abraham or anyone God chooses. We are all spiritually "children of Abraham" when we have faith, and God credits us with righteousness we could never earn. Just like we are all spiritually "children of Adam" when we sin. Abraham's blessing or Adam's curse.Edited by bdfoster, : No reason given.

---

Brent