Ok, so we have to be as little children to believe in Jesus but then we grow in the word and move from milk to meat and learn to defend our faith to anyone who asks. The problem is that many of the people “defending” their faith sound like 44 year olds defending a 4 year old belief in something like Santa Claus. At least the people do who maintain a very rigid, literal view of the Bible and Jesus and God. Just look at my posts on Josh McDowell and Ravi Zacharias. Pick up and really read The Case for Christ. Strobel accepts things without questioning and without the probing questions one would expect from a journalist — exactly as a child would. Which is fine and dandy for new converts to Christianity but when you start holding that unquestioning faith up as a logical defense, it falls apart under its own inconsistencies. Defending your faith means you have to go above and beyond blind faith.
Recent Posts
- Individuation: Inner Work by Murray Stein
- Let’s understand Christian mythology symbolically, for once
- God and the Self in depth psychology
- Dream as psychopomp
- ken sightings unconfirmed
- Religion and Reality by Adi Da Samraj: Part II
- Religion and Reality by Adi Da Samraj: Part I
- Our Father
- Tim Freke is coming to Kansas City in May
- Farewell to the ‘misunderestimated’ president
Recent Comments
- Dave Blanquet: Why have you deleted my post? It was very beneficial information and i promise...
- Scotty Tirino: Sick of obtaining low numbers of useless visitors to your site? Well i wish to let...
- Lynne: Re: “Adi Da uses capitalization profusely and seemly at random.” There...
- MysticSaint: hi, thanks for the quote and credit. blessings.
- Ken: Well, I thought it was funny. I was laughing out loud. I thought the contradictions were far...
- abortion adam and eve adi da aging alan watts amazon.com animal cruelty antisemitism archetypal images archetypes atheism awareness balance baptism beliefs bible bible commentary biblical interpretation black elk book burning book summary books boycott buddhism calvin and hobbes carl jung censorship chaos charity children children's books christ christian apologetics christian fundamentalism christianity collective unconscious conscience conscious living consciousness creation depth psychology diet dreams drugs eckhart tolle edward edinger ego election evil experience faith fanaticism father first amendment foie gras freedom fundamentalism g-d garden of eden gender george w bush gnosticism goat god heaven hell historical jesus holy spirit homosexuality humor image of god imago Dei individuation inerrancy inner christianity intelligence islam jesus job joseph campbell josh mcdowell journey judging others knowl knowledge language large hadron collider lhc lilith links logic long hair love lucid living lyrics massive attack mcdonalds mel gibson miracles mircea eliade morality mysticism myth names neurosis nietzsche omniscience optical illusions paradise paradox pastor peace perfection politics prayer preconceptions protest psychology psychopomp quantum physics quotes ram dass rants reason religion religious freedom religious pluralism richard smoley righteous anger ritual rudolf bultmann science self-knowledge sin stillness suffering the creation of consciousness the only dance there is the present the self theology thought forms timothy freke tolerance total depravity trinity truth upanishads vedanta yahweh
Categories
Blogroll
Notable Sites
Recent Notable Links
Archives
- April 2009 (4)
- March 2009 (1)
- February 2009 (3)
- January 2009 (4)
- December 2008 (17)
- November 2008 (4)
- October 2008 (1)
- September 2008 (6)
- August 2008 (5)
- July 2008 (6)
- May 2008 (12)
- April 2008 (20)
- March 2008 (3)
- February 2008 (4)
- January 2008 (10)
- December 2007 (12)
- November 2007 (4)
- October 2007 (7)
- September 2007 (4)
- August 2007 (7)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (20)
- May 2007 (10)
- April 2007 (1)
- March 2007 (11)
- February 2007 (18)
- January 2007 (20)
- December 2006 (4)
- November 2006 (1)
I enjoy your authenticity, Ken—in a way, you’re a cerebral version of iMonk, in that both of you are very transparent about your inner wrestlings. That is rich.
Just a thought, for whatever it might be worth, in reference to “Defending your faith means you have to go above and beyond blind faith.” First, while it’s true that there is blind faith (and anti-intellectual faith, too), that doesn’t strike me as what the Scriptures call a Christian to. As just one example, the primary underpinning of a believer’s faith would be the Resurrection.
Second, there are Christians who struggle with some of the things you mention here at your blog, and whose bottom-line motto, as a result, is “in hope against hope he believed” (ROMANS 4). They’re stumped by many of the things that don’t make sense (whether in life and the world around us or in the Bible), and maybe even at times have been downright angry at the conundrums, but at the end of the day, they know that the True Manna is still their soul’s only sustenance.
Take care,
Inq
I am still trying to figure out faith. I think that faith (and “blind” faith) is as subjective as beauty — not to God, of course, but individually. For example, you cite the Resurrection as the basis of a believer’s faith but I would say, “how do you know the Resurrection actually took place?” I suspect you would say something like, “Well, it says so in the Bible.” And I would say something like, “Well, how do you know that the Bible … ?” And we would go back and forth and I would probably not end up with the same faith as you and you probably would end up with the same faith. It’s very subjective.
I agree that blind faith is not “what the Scriptures call a Christian to” but I think that many Christians have exactly that — blind faith. To use “because the Bible tells me so” as the “reason” for believing all that you believe, to me, is blind faith. Something has to convince you that the Bible makes a good initial condition for the rest of your beliefs.
And that is exactly where your second point enters into it. I’m (almost) convinced that experience makes for excellent evidence. If you were to talk to my parents they would, indeed, use “because the Bible tells me so” to defend just about everything they say they believe. But if you talked to them more and talked about every day life, you would find that God works in a very personal way in their lives all the time. And they use this personal experience of God as the real basis for believing that the Bible is true so they can base everything else on the Bible. Now, to many other people, my parents would be naive, delusional, crack pots. Just because the insurance company sent them money back for an overpayment on a medical bill does not mean that God was behind it. But to them it does. They choose to interpret life in this way and so, I think that for them, it’s valid.
This is really no different than what the Buddha says. “Do not believe what I say. Experience it for yourself and make up your own mind.” My parents’ faith is based on a lifetime of experience and, to them, is anything but blind — it makes no matter what anyone else says about it.