User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 239

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    May I state that if yeu 'believed with all yeur heart' then it wouldn't be a problem. If yeu recieve new information that yeu find makes yeu question such, THEN QUESTION IT.

    I'm pretty sure god would rather have someone who yearns to believe with true understanding and faith, over someone who blindly follows because they were told to =3

    "taking it back" isn't a blasphemy, pretending to believe when yeu really don't, however, would be. If god really is god, then he'd know yeu don't really believe it; yeu need to do a bit of soul searching, or some research into more information, or discuss with some people who know their stuff, and see if yeu can't get answers to yeur problems. How yeu go about doing it doesn't matter, so much as yeu learn.

    Whether yeu learn for or against probably isn't that big of an importance either as long as yeu tried.

    But then again that's my personal view... I just can't see god sending someone to hell for trying their best to do whot's right on a religious sense, and then send someone to heaven for doing something they didn't even believe in.
    i really believed it! so its hard to take back something i felt deeply within my being. there may be lots of christians who went to church their whole lives and professed the faith but never ever believed a single thing and this would be a different case. then according to the bible they wouldn't be held accountable for their faith in the doctrine of christianity according to the scriptures but i'm not one of those cases.

    i don't need help in the form of a religious person telling me i'm ok in believing that jesus isn't the only way. heck i could just ask you or any person who isn't a christian and i would be told that my logic was nonsense. but it doesn't have to do with asking a person about this, it's a matter between me and what i believed to begin with. imo

  2. #12
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    I always wanted to believe in an evangelical-style Christian faith and tried very hard.
    It carried me through many many years of doubts and conflicting emotions and thoughts.

    In the end, I had to embrace who I was -- I am a questioner by nature, and have to call a spade a spade, whereas the religious culture I was part of for so long insisted I had to 'believe and be 100% sure' in order to be a true believer. i had to accept that my intellect is agnostic, but so much of who I am is colored and defined by my Jesus-reflective values. All my life, I have found something of resonance within Jesus's words and the main relational concepts of Christianity. Even if I would wish to abandon it, I cannot; it mirrors how I have chosen to live my life.

    I don't think that level of "knowing" is possible for any religious belief. You choose to believe or you choose to not believe, but this "assurance" is not real. It is assumption, not assurance, if one wants to be accurate. You choose to believe; you cannot be forced to believe. Kierkegaard called it 'fear and trembling,' to make that final leap across the abyss of uncertainty and lay claim to something you cannot prove to yourself or others, even if you can make a case for it.

    I think proof is overrated in terms of spirituality. If people could just accept that their faith is based on faith (rather than "proof"), then there would not be much issue at all.

    I think a more literalist interpretation of Scripture misses the point, it fights a foolish battle in having to insist the scripture is specifically aligned with a particular interpretation in order to be valuable. Why, foolish? Because (1) it can never be realistically sure its historical beliefs are actually true, and it puts so much at stake that if the historicity is false then the values are false, and (2) it's not about following particular rules but having the right internal spiritual attitude towards the Divine, oneself, and others.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #13
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Alright, so you probably don't take the Old Testament literally. But where do you stand on Jesus and the New Testament?

    Did Jesus perform miracles? Did he die for our sins? Did the resurrection happen? Or is the Jesus story a creation of the Gospel writers and based largely on earlier Messianic figures?

    And if you don't believe in a literal historical Jesus Christ, how do you reconcile that lack of belief with a religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ?
    I think what one has to do is realize the Gospels were written for particular audiences, for particular purposes, in particular contexts. How we interpret a quick glance at biblical literature is often very different from its original intent.

    My guess is that the NT is not completely literally true. In the ancient world the discipline of history as an objective study didn't exist. Plus, the gospels were based on oral traditions and weren't written until something like 70 years after the Christ.

    What does all this mean? Nothing really. As far as I can tell, there is no way of absolutely knowing what did and didn't happen. But my belief of Jesus is that he was both human and divine, so the Christ of Christians isn't limited to the stories of the Gospel--he's much bigger than that. Incidentally, I do believe Jesus really did exist, granted the miracles and events likely happened differently. It just doesn't matter to me.
    Johari Nohari

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. "--Niccolo Machiavelli

  4. #14

    Default

    I'm not a biblical or scriptural literalist (I reguard that as all kinds of heretical), the records of the life and ministry of Jesus are not metaphorical like, for instance the creation myths, or the parables and teaching tales which Jesus used himself, such as the story of the sower who casts seeds, the meaning of which Jesus explains further to the disciples and which is then recorded in the scriptural text.

    I do believe that Jesus was ressurected from the dead, I believe in the trinity therefore Jesus was both man and an incarnation of God, therefore it wouldnt have been a challenge.

    I believe he could perform miracles however it could be the Gospel of John in which the author provides a holy "disclaimer" in which he admits there are many stories, that these are just a sample and choose to make belief possible. I dont believe its a story constructed from old testament references either, those are utilised as the original audience for conversion it was hoped would be Jewish and therefore the Jewish scriptures were important to reference.

    Why do I believe those things and that it wasnt all a clever literary tool or that a historical "unmagical" Jesus ministered but his ministry was embellished and exaggerated because of all the miracles and martyrdom since. If you read either scriptural or historical sources Christianity should not have survived or grown as a faith, it should have been impossible and it should have perished like the Essenes (spelling) or Zealots or other splinter groups within Judahic or Abrahamic faith communities.

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I always wanted to believe in an evangelical-style Christian faith and tried very hard.
    It carried me through many many years of doubts and conflicting emotions and thoughts.

    In the end, I had to embrace who I was -- I am a questioner by nature, and have to call a spade a spade, whereas the religious culture I was part of for so long insisted I had to 'believe and be 100% sure' in order to be a true believer. i had to accept that my intellect is agnostic, but so much of who I am is colored and defined by my Jesus-reflective values. All my life, I have found something of resonance within Jesus's words and the main relational concepts of Christianity. Even if I would wish to abandon it, I cannot; it mirrors how I have chosen to live my life.

    I don't think that level of "knowing" is possible for any religious belief. You choose to believe or you choose to not believe, but this "assurance" is not real. It is assumption, not assurance, if one wants to be accurate. You choose to believe; you cannot be forced to believe. Kierkegaard called it 'fear and trembling,' to make that final leap across the abyss of uncertainty and lay claim to something you cannot prove to yourself or others, even if you can make a case for it.

    I think proof is overrated in terms of spirituality. If people could just accept that their faith is based on faith (rather than "proof"), then there would not be much issue at all.

    I think a more literalist interpretation of Scripture misses the point, it fights a foolish battle in having to insist the scripture is specifically aligned with a particular interpretation in order to be valuable. Why, foolish? Because (1) it can never be realistically sure its historical beliefs are actually true, and it puts so much at stake that if the historicity is false then the values are false, and (2) it's not about following particular rules but having the right internal spiritual attitude towards the Divine, oneself, and others.
    I think scriptural literalism, in any faith (and I would argue that it is a far, far greater aspect of Islam than any other faith today), is a sign of "bad faith" in the believer, secret doubts are masked by the letter of the law, and I also think, in fundamentalist interpretations, that it is a sign of emotional and psychological immaturity or neurotic trends.

    A living faith is on the road to becoming a dead religion by the time scriptural litealism creeps in, in fact it is well and truly progressed, for while scripture existed in the time of Jesus, he and his followers lived a faith rather than exclusively studied and extolled scripture.

    Someone told me once it was a little like walking blind folded with the assurance that you will not fall from the path you are on, if you trust that you wont fall you'll not give it any more thought, if you dont trust then you may begin to scrutinise the blind fold itself, looking for flaws or holes or ways to peak out or around it.

  6. #16
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Alright, so you probably don't take the Old Testament literally. But where do you stand on Jesus and the New Testament?

    Did Jesus perform miracles? Did he die for our sins? Did the resurrection happen? Or is the Jesus story a creation of the Gospel writers and based largely on earlier Messianic figures?

    And if you don't believe in a literal historical Jesus Christ, how do you reconcile that lack of belief with a religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ?
    One issue of whether or not to believe in miracles has to do with the practical effects of religion. A person who believes in the miraculous power of God will believe that such power can change their life. Therefore they can change behavior that they could never change without faith, and their life will improve. A person who does not believe in the miraculous power of God will not be able to dramatically change their behavior and therefore their religion has to practical purpose.

    Of course the other side to this is that once you accept miracles are possible then their is no reason to disbelieve any of the stories of the New or Old Testament. So this creates something of a dilemma for each Christian about what exactly to believe is true. Each person ends up drawing the line in a different place.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  7. #17
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Alright, so you probably don't take the Old Testament literally. But where do you stand on Jesus and the New Testament?

    Did Jesus perform miracles? Did he die for our sins? Did the resurrection happen? Or is the Jesus story a creation of the Gospel writers and based largely on earlier Messianic figures?

    And if you don't believe in a literal historical Jesus Christ, how do you reconcile that lack of belief with a religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ?

    • faith, by definition, is faith--this is so paramount, and yet both religious people and atheists can forget this
    • I perceive the Bible to be a book written by and about a bunch of flawed humans seeking (or, as per some of the stories, not seeking) after something they don't understand, and I believe this thing that is impossible to understand is God


    Ultimately I think what's key here is the difference between Truth and truths. I don't know that I believe in Truth unless that is synonymous with God. Humans can't find Truth, only truths. So with this postmodern perspective it's pretty easy to not care so much about sweating the details because ultimately there's no such thing as a perfectly accurate story IRL anyways--but that doesn't mean they lack value

    • Criminal investigators get highly suspicious when witness accounts line up closely: we humans are constantly making meaning and construcing reality in various ways
    • ultimately for me it's about the seeking and the attempting to live out, through my actions, my belief system; I used to really care about perfectly figuring out what was literal and what was not so literally trustworthy, but I've grown to believe it doesn't much matter so long as I'm implementing love, patience, kindness, gentleness, etc. Like any human I neglect to behave perfectly but again it's about the seeking


    I take the resurrection literally for a number of reasons. Some of these reasons are logical and intellectual (N.T. Wright wrote a lot on the resurrection). Some of these reasons are purely emotional/spiritual/not anything I could or would want to defend with logic.

    I do believe in miracles. I don't believe there's much point in fingerpointing out what is or what isn't a miracle as I don't think believing that they exist necessitates me understanding how to differentiate.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  8. #18
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    • I'm implementing love, patience, kindness, gentleness, etc. Like any human I neglect to behave perfectly but again it's about the seeking
    But if you were to believe the christian doctrine of Original Sin, going all the way back to Augustine, you would know you are rotten at the core. And far from neglecting to behave perfectly, you delude yourself that you implement love, patience, kindness, gentleness, etc when in fact you are damaged and damaging.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    384

    Default

    doesn't original sin mean humankind had eaten from the tree that gave us knowledge of good and evil and as a consequence we became separated from god the almighty? original sin meant we are by nature separated from god. jesus died on the cross for this original sin thus we humans are saved if we so believe in him, or the doctrines of the developed christian faith as so stated.

    fundamentalism is definitely problematic no matter which fundamental we talk about. islam, christianity, judaism, even some smaller spiritual paths can become tainted by virtue of people who vow to hold the law of their 'faith'. i am mostly irritated with christians who do this because i grew up in a culture of christianity. but now i'm getting a whif of islam fundamentalists and they stir my bs meter as well.

    i rather like the writings of karen armstrong. will delve into these more in the future as i sort out my feelings on the subject.

  10. #20
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    But if you were to believe the christian doctrine of Original Sin, going all the way back to Augustine, you would know you are rotten at the core. And far from neglecting to behave perfectly, you delude yourself that you implement love, patience, kindness, gentleness, etc when in fact you are damaged and damaging.
    No I don't--those things go hand in hand. I'm just focussing on the positive side of it. If you would prefer me to rhapsodize about the ways in which I have failed to be perfect I could go on for years and years...
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

Similar Threads

  1. Questions for those who are completely SURE of their type
    By Such Irony in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-15-2013, 11:49 PM
  2. Question for People Who Live In Japan
    By Savage Idealist in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-11-2011, 02:48 AM
  3. Question for those who oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds:
    By Brendan in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 05-05-2010, 09:32 PM
  4. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-25-2009, 03:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO