Mike writes:
First of all, this rant is against the self-righteous natural man. This may seem like offensive talk, but all it means is that you are of nature rather than spirit, and you think you have understanding more than God. The last parts (in particular - are not aimed at Gilgamesh) - So this may be a strict post, but conserns those who know I speak truth and are against those with faith in Christ.
I do not know what I am supposed to get out of this speil, but I am not against a "God". I am against those who lie in his name.
It annoys me if someone describes the faith I'm supposed to have, and gets it so painfully wrong, in that he has none and doesn't even believe in Christ of whom we have this faith from. "Faith" in the general use of the word is different from what our whole belief system is based on. Longing has nothing to do with my faith. If I long for something, then I'm not having faith. Submission to authority???Lol. Nothing to do with my faith I'm afraid. I mean - our whole lives based on a dictionary definition? I think not, that's like saying you can be as good as Bruce Lee by simply reading the basics in a martial arts book.
Well this thread is about semantics. Christians regularly butcher the definition of the word "religion", but the dictionary definition of the word faith, in this case, is adequate for our means. There is one definition of faith that is applicable to the non-religious application: "Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing", and three others that apply nicely in the religious context. Christians love confusing these definitions.
It is clearer to use alternate words. Alternate words include knowledge, and the others I listed, hope, desire, longing.
I don't believe Christians have knowledge of a God, and the Bible argues against this objective. I have investigated Christian churches specifically to see if this knowledge was obtainable. Instead, Christians have hope or a desire and longing for a God.
Given the infallibility of our subjective interpretations of reality, we can hold a confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a many ideas, or things. At the base levels are those things we can consistently experience with our senses. Then there are those things we can trust because of their truth and value and trustworthiness, like travel in planes, modern medicine, and engineering marvels like the historic bridge that I travel over every day. These things are based on the soundness of scientific disciplines and we trust them with our lives.
If one is going to commit one's mortal life and immortal soul to a church, why isn't it reasonable to demand to obtain verifiable evidence of the same standard one would apply to all other areas of one's life? The Bible tells us to not test God. The Bible is a brilliant text for rationalising a religion but absolutely useless in verifying the validity of that religion. You do not test God, because God will fail or perform no better than ramdom chance. To believe in something that performs no better than random chance requires faith.
That's this sort of faith:
"Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence".
Tell me then Mike, how your faith does not fit into this definition. Why should I trust in your interpretation of God more than I do air travel or modern medicine?
No. "Faith" as defined by a dictionary, is painfully insufficient, because it is an attempt to articulate something which is hard to define when dealing with something more than a word. We can all place our trust in gravity, but can we put our faith in an invisible God? - Can "faith" in gravity produce religious fervor, and a desire to worship it? Me thinks not.
Faith in gravity doesn't promise something warm and fluffy like enternal life, and a special and elevated status by a loving deity.
If God says to me in his word, "Go - I will deliver you" and I go, then I have had faith. Even if I'm sweating and fearing, I have obeyed.
Be very careful about those voices that come from within.
How can you know what my faith is when you don't obey my God, or believe in him? If you presently are natural - then you cannot declare spirit!
I can never know your God: he is purely subjective and only resides within you. I have oft repeated how people with the very same faith all have completely different interpretations of this God and get very, very different and conflicting messages from him. What does that suggest?
This is the natural man, and his own righteousness and ego - thinking he knows all, even more than the believer knows his belief. How arrogant!
My apologies, because I obviously don't know very much about you or your life, but yes, I am stating that I may know more about the mental process behind your belief than you do. I've studied this stuff for a very long time now, from within and without.
If you "obey" God - then yes, you understand our faith and belief. Well, do you have faith in Christ?
Did you? Did you have a result when you believed received and went into action? - If you say you did have faith, then it wasn't grown in the least if you had no result.
I'm afraid I cannot have your faith, defined either way, because in the first case you guys have no evidence that can give me knowledge, and in the second I'm not prepared to waste my life persuing a false dream.
Definitely I say - that no man who doesn't believe in God, can understand the spiritual man who has faith in God. The natural man thinks it foolishness. This is what the bible says - and it is part of our faith.
People who disagree over something, often perceive the other as foolish. Another rather unprofound Bible canard. But I don't actually see you as being foolish. I understand why men have faith in God, and it has nothing to do with evidence and knowledge and everything to do with hope, desire and longing. It is far from statitically abnormal. The Bible in turn calls me a fool, which I may well be for denying an emotive and arguably strong evolutionary compulsion.
Maybe everyone has a little faith, but how can you understand that which you most vigorously oppose, and deny exists?
Because I have experienced, tested, endured, and studied this stuff. How many other alternate Christian and non-Christian religions have you personally delved into: not just superficially read about and dismissed?
God (in the bible) says nature is against the spirit. You ARE the natural man - no unbeliever is spiritual, how can you understand that which God says the natural man thinks as foolish?
I don't think it is foolish. Just illogical, unconvincing and untrue. But then the Bible does not want us to be logical about it.
Christ himself said that only his sheep understand his voice. Are his sheep those who presently don't believe?
Rightio, so faith is for those who have faith. This is not a very good selling speil for those who like to think a little. Great for converting blind adherents, but then that is what the Bible is really good at.
This message has been edited by Gilgamesh, 08-12-2004 12:12 AM
™ Version 4.2