The fact that a higher power could exist is not an excuse to put faith in it just because it would be nice.
Not to you.
It would make me feel better if I told myself over and over again that I have buried treasure in my backyard that I have never seen, but I am sure that it is there. If I really believed that and put faith in it, that would make my day.
Depends on what you consider treasure.
The fact that a higher power could exist is not an excuse to put faith in it just because it would be nice.
Tell that to a man whose 7 year old daughter dies painfully of cancer and his wife dies of cancer 3 years before. To you it is no big deal. Perhaps you have been through just as much and have come out with no faith. To another faith is what sustains them. Maybe you missed that part. Perhaps the Flying Spaghetti Monster WON'T come DOWN and heal all and bring peace and blah blah blah. But to people, throughout the centuries who have suffered, faith is what sustained them. Is that wrong?
It would make me feel better if I told myself over and over again that I have buried treasure in my backyard that I have never seen, but I am sure that it is there. If I really believed that and put faith in it, that would make my day.
Again this depends on your idea of what treasure is. To some people a rock imprinted with the fossil of a microscopic bug like thing (this would be me) is treasure (anyone who has a clue what this is, feel free to add). To others the promises that Jesus presented are the greatest treasure. To another, the rain that falls after a rain dance during a drought.
Is it right to believe so? Am I justified in doing so? Am I justified in thinking that god exists simply because I am alive? It might make me feel better, but what is the justification for the faith itself? Because I would like it to be so? To put faith in something or someone, again, what reasons should I do this?
Why should you have to justify your faith or lack thereof to anyone? If you have no need for faith or God, then fine. Don't believe. Who cares?
<looks around room>
On the flip side why should a person who has faith feel the need to justify their faith to anyone other then themself? In your reality, there is no room for God. Ok. As I said, to a person who is suffering, their reality demands faith to survive. Perhaps it itself is a great product of the mind to keep us alive during times of distress. Who are you to demand that they prove anything to you? If they evangelize that's one thing, but not every person of faith feels the need to do that. If a person tries to evangelize you, you have every right to ask your questions and get answers and if the answers are not rational, you have every right to tell them to let you be. Otherwise........what am I missing?
I sometimes don't get these type of questions. The answer is pretty simple. You don't have a need, be it spiritual or psychological for God or faith or anything. Like many others. So, don't. Others do. It gets them through the day. It has for centuries.
History as best man can tell is littered with the solid evidence of ignorance and war that faith promulgated, with or without holy books.
People don't like religion because it's brought war upon the land. Well, hell, ya don't need religion for war. You have oil! You have gold! You have land! You have wealth! You have servants to be! There are so many other reasons for war that have also proven themselves to be successful. So if we're going to dog on faith, let's dog on man's greed which probably comes from some animalistic primal thing or somethin like that.
Point being, religion itself is an excuse. Take away religion and you still have man and no matter what, man will always come up with some great excuse to get what he wants. Religion has been in the right place at the right time for the wrong people.
What can a person of faith tell me on the matter?
Well, I suppose now is as good as time as any to do this...
I AM COMING OUT OF THE BROOM CLOSET Y'ALL! If ya haven't noticed I'm not really a person of faith in the tradtional sense. I am something of a pantheisitic pagan, althought the pantheism part is starting to slide. Don't have much of a notion on deity right now. More of a ...oh forget it. That could take many pages to discuss.
As far as the Native Americans go, lets take an example. The rain dance. To be sure it is a part of their culture and history. But with what we now know about weather, are any of us justified to believe that the weather is caused by rain dances of the Indians? Surely if I were investigating the faith of the Native Americans, I would be compelled to ask them to compare their religion and belief system on the weather with what science now knows about it. Who would win that arguement based on fact? Can we base weather forecasts on faith?
Depends on who you talk to. What if you talk to 10 Native Americans who have done a rain dance during drought. 5 tell you the dance did shit for them. The other 5 say, well we got rain. You might have a great explanation, so freakin' logical that it makes the first 5 cheer you on. The other group says to you "Yeah, you might be right. But this is our experience and we were there and you weren't. This is our evidence on which we base our faith."
Perspective.
Faith in unproven and unproveable assumptions about the spirit world has dominated mankind.
You weren't there when Jesus was performing miracles. You weren't there during a drought when a rain dance was performed and rain fell. You need proof that you can rest your beliefs on. For you that proof is not there. To others the Bible or the Egyptian Book of the Dead (I've only read a part of this, so don't read too much into that) is proof enough. Why? Because it is. It is their reality that works for them.
I am certainly not disagreeing with you completely on this matter. Sheesh you are talking to a person who has tossed these questions around a lot lately. I suppose while I see your angle very clearly, I also see people who without faith that there is a greater cause or higher sense of justice, would probably not make it to the next phase of their life, which could very well be a very important phase to all of mankind. Who knows?
A person who prays to God today to get through another day of hell, might well be the person who works as an amassador for the UN (think Brangelina) and helps hundreds of people to get food and water, and they do this because of appreciation for what God "has done for them". On the other hand, a person who needs faith to wake up in the morning, might be the Big Atheist to convert an entire nation to atheism which brings about a new sense of peace.
Each person will go through various phases and stages in their life to get to where they are now (or later haha). When the believer produces a cure for some freaky version of smallpox that another believer created to destroy man, do we ask for justifcation for their beliefs? Nope. We look at the works themselves. Their beliefs, better or worse got them to where they are.
Yin and yang.
For that matter, is it necesarry that I believe that Christ is my savior before I accept the Golden Rule, or to love thy neighbor as thyself?
Nope! I agree wholeheartedly with you on this!
Is it possible that Jesus had a very enlightened view of how man should treat one another?
Yep! I agree very much with this!
Does that mean I have to believe he was born of a virgin, executed and resurrected on the third, day and is now god to follow the Golden Rule?
Nope! I agree with this as well. I think there is a possibility others actually said something similar to this before him.
Think of this though, it got said. Not only did it get said and taught, it's a huge teaching of the Christian church. It's as you said, the Golden Rule! Had he not been thought of as God, would we have it today? Would the words of Buddha had the same impact? Maybe! I'd like to think so. But this is what we have. And while the bible has been the source of distress, it also has been the source of that teaching and others that I personally take to heart. Be they from God or an enlightened man who was ahead of his time and a part of the evolution of man, they are still words that I genuinely appreciate were said and taught.
Religion is not necesarry for me to treat someone as I want to be treated.
You are absolutely right! Who said it was?
<looks around room>
Still, religion has been a vehicle for teachings. Some good, some bad. So take the good and toss the bad and if the religion pisses you off you can throw that out too.
It shouldn't be a requirement for me to believe in something absolutely no one can prove before I am a "nice person".
damn straight.
It is amazing to see through the lens of the past how quickly Christians forgot the Golden Rule and to love thy neighbor and turn Jesus into the millenial judge when it came to their own political purposes.
Yep. But be careful not to group Christians into one solid group and torch them all for the sins of their forefathers. Many can take the teachings of Jesus and move forward with the religion and blind faith and do great things. I'm sure you know this, it's just a reminder.
All because people had FAITH that he was ruling in heaven, thus unspeakable crimes resulted.
Yep. But there have been many other Christians and Moslems and Jews and you name it, who have refused to have no part in these crimes due to their faith in that higher power.
Where do they get these contradictory ideas about Christ as lover of man and judge of man?
You tell me...
The same source, the bible.
The bible says a lot of things, but the last time I checked I don't think it actually gives it's followers the right to torture and murder others. Yes the OT has some pretty nasty things to say about YHWH, but I think we are mostly discussing Christianity at this point which would more then likely be based on the teachings of the apostles as set forth in the NT, and as I said the last time I checked, it doesn't give man the right to torture. (I have others here to thank for pointing this out to me). Point being, man has gone in and abused the words and teachings of others to justify their greed and desire to destroy. That greed and desire was there before religion, and would be there after it.
The only way then I could accept Christ is to turn off what I look at as evidence and say "I am through looking at the facts and am now willing to believe this ancient idea about Jesus.
Why do you have to "accept Christ" to appreciate his teachings? Many do not accept him as their personal Savior, but see him as you might, an enlightened man, and move forward. If others don't like it, what are they going to do? If they believe you are going to hell, well, that's their loss that they can't see you as a good guy who can appreciate the value of humanity.
The evidence and facts point to something else, that Jesus was nothing more then an unusually enlightened man living in a less then enlightened time of human history.
That is your perspective, which I am not saying is wrong. Just making a point.
His words were recorded, his works, exaggerated.
You weren't there, I wasn't there, and unless someone has some pretty wild proof, no one here on this planet at this time was there. So all we have to go on is the written words of men who lived during or more accurately, after his time. (Although I realize that can be disputed).
For some that is enough.
For you and me at this point, it is not.
Live and let live.
So I need faith to believe in him, or I won't be able to believe that Jesus is savior at all, because their is no factual reason to belive this concept otherwise.
See above.
Of course, you probably wouldn't be willing to do that with any other major world religion, but you are more likely to do so with Christianity, as it is the religion you grew up around and are familiar with.
Do what?
That does made a difference, doesn't it?
uhmmm ok.
Did I happen to say welcome to the forum?
