What does it mean to have religious faith? In this post I will argue that belief in God often forces believers to submit reason to faith. Then I will defend the importance of recognizing this surrender of rationality and explore the implications of this recognition.
The first sacrifice of reason is belief in God’s existence. There is little to no evidence supporting theism, and science is increasingly rendering unnecessary God as an explanation for observed phenomena. (While scientific explanations can never disprove God, they can undermine cosmological arguments for His existence.) Personal encounters with God can best be explained by human psychology; that individuals of completely differing religions claim to have experienced God illustrates they cannot all be right. At this point, there isn’t much affirmative reason to believe in God. But there is one very good reason to believe God doesn’t exist: the problem of evil. If God is omniscient, benevolent, and omnipotent, then God must 1) know of all suffering that occurs, 2) prefer that this suffering not occur, and 3) have the power to end this suffering. The presence of evil, including war, famine, and natural disasters, therefore requires that God cannot exist. Attempts to resolve the problem of evil could compose an entire book, but in short, I know of no convincing argument against this problem.
Having faith forces us to surrender rational thinking in other areas. In Genesis, God told Abraham to sacrifice his son Issac, forcing Abraham to suspend both the rational and the ethical. On September 11, terrorists killed nearly 3,000 Americans because they chose faith over reason. These examples are extreme, but they highlight the same forfeiture of reason that all believers make. Christians reject evolution despite its being the best supported theory to explain the diversity of life. They fervently defend the immorality of homosexuality simply because their scripture says so. A surprising number even reject or manipulate geological studies in support of the Young Earth theory. Reason cannot support these beliefs.
Having faith has forced me to accept things I consider contrary to reason, or at least my understanding of reason. If God commanded me to kill someone, I would hopefully have the courage to do it. On account of my faith, I also accept that homosexuality is sinful. I believe that miracles happen, and I believe that love is something that transcends any rational understanding of it and can only exist as a consequence of God. (I plan to dedicate a future post to investigating the nature of love.)
I have argued that belief in God sometimes requires submitting rationality to faith. This submission, however, is not blindly following dogma and ignoring reason to make belief easier. True faith requires understanding what one is giving up, and willfully choosing adherence to religious belief despite recognizing the compelling force of reason against such belief. Only then can a believer call his faith a meaningful choice.
Recognizing areas of conflict between faith and reason should be seen as a healthy exercise. People are understandingly hesitant and afraid to give up views they’ve long held (or views they think their religion forces them to hold), but I think that honestly evaluating one’s beliefs can strengthen one’s faith. How much of Christianity would be undermined if evolution actually did take place? If the Earth were, say, 4.6 billion years old instead of 10,000? Would one's personal relationship with God change if there were never a worldwide flood, never a Tower of Babel, never a Garden of Eden? What if even nonbelievers went to heaven? I don’t necessarily consider these hypothetical situations true, but I think it’s important that we identify which tenets are essential to our faith and which tenets we are willing to let reason overrule. As said earlier, doing so legitimizes our religion by making it a more informed choice. And it allows us to define our faith in a way we are comfortable with so that we might actually live that faith and truly be called a disciple.
15 comments:
I have a question
If the Bible is the absolute word of God, how is one able to choose which passages to believe and which to dismiss?
And in overruling certain tenets of the Bible with logic, does that not destroy the sanctity and foundation of the faith upon which the Bible is placed?
I'd have to politely disagree with one statement, in which you say that science has increasingly undermined the existence of God. I know of many physicists, who upon studying the nature of the universe, have found increasing evidence to believe in a higher creator. I'm not too good with specifics, but I'm sure you can Google it.
And your argument about sometimes having to abandon reason for faith rests on the presumption that human reasoning is absolute. What if there exists, let's say, a parallel universe of reasoning? As a human, what we do might be logical in our existence but could be completely bogus in another realm (in this case, God's). A (weak) analogy would be comparing the logic of an insect and of a human being. Humans can somewhat better understand the actions of insects, but insects cannot even begin to fathom what humans do (e.g. going to college, claiming a mortgage). Likewise, as a higher being, God can understand everything we do, but not vice versa.
I believe that humans gain satisfaction from something that makes sense but often become frustrated and upset when things don't. Christianity and many other religions stress holiness over happiness, because humans may not always know what's best for them.
And that's where the Bible steps in, to give us direction. As a Christian, you have to firmly believe in the complete truth of His word. Yes, some parts do clash with modern norms, like homosexuality. Christianity agrees that some humans are simply born homosexual and have no choice in being that way. However, those born that way are encouraged to place their love for God above their own happiness and choose to live a life of celibacy.
(On a side note, I do support gay marriage, but that's a whole different topic.)
I'm sure others can point out faulty reasoning and scanty evidence in what I've just written, but I stand by everything I've said, and this is after I've spent years contemplating both extremes of the spectrum. If you're ever extremely bored, you can ask me how my faith has changed over the years and why I've chosen to believe what I do now.
Veronica I agree with what you are saying, that when it comes to the Bible you have to believe all or nothing, but that brings me to another point:
Nobody today follows every single word of the Bible down to the letter. Verses in the Bible dictate that women are not allowed to speak in church, that women who have premarital sex and sodomites are to be stoned to death, that illegitimate births are not allowed into heaven, and so on. A quick google search brought up this list here
http://www.fallwell.com/ignored%20verses.html
It can be argued that these (more extreme) passages can be attributed to the culture of the times, or to the men who transcribed them. But why is this tag only used when convenient? If certain parts can be thrown out, why not others? Why not the whole thing?
What I am saying is that to some extent, every single Christian picks and chooses which aspects of the Bible to follow and which to ignore, and that act undermines the very basis of Christianity.
Some good comments.
Veronica: I don't necessarily think "that human reasoning is absolute." I do believe, however, that rationality is the best tool humans have for intuiting the truth, and that to a great extent being religious requires consciously abandoning this tool.
Charles: I really like your question about belief in the Bible being "all-or-nothing." It gives me an opportunity to explain from a different perspective what my post is about.
Many Christians do seem to base their faith in the integrity of scripture. But the reason they trust scripture to be true--despite its being written by many unknown authors, translated, transcribed, and selectively compiled by privileged humans at the exclusion of other, "heretic" books--is that they have faith in God who ensures that the Bible contain truths.
So the true premise of believing in Christian ideas is preexisting faith. I admit this sounds like a big premise, but remember my argument that faith is inherently irrational (thus there's no rational way to arrive at faith). So I think Christians should acknowledge faith as the given, not scripture. Doing so frees them from having to ground their beliefs in the integrity of scripture, to escape the "all-or-nothing" bind you mention. From here, they can decide how much of the Bible their faith requires to be true, saving them from unnecessary sacrifices of rationality (like denying evolution ).
I still think the Bible is inspired by God. I just don't think it has to be 100% correct to contain the meaningful truths that embody my faith.
Knowing me, I've always enjoyed a good analysis of religion, perhaps because it has always come to me as a trivial matter. In response to Jon and Charles' comments, I agree that it confuses me how Christians pick and choose what can be used from the Bible. It has always bothered me that every church, every youth group, every individual may interpret sections of the Bible in different ways. It's strange to me how such a large faith could be divided in so many ways-not only by sectors, but within each sector as well. Shouldn't the faith bring forth a unity in a single belief. I suppose you could argue that the means by which each person arrives at his or her faith is completely unique...but that brings me to Jon's point. I think I understood what you were explaining in response to Charles...If human reason is not absolute, and so many different versions are being interpreted from the Bible, how is it possible for anyone to know that what they are choosing to believe is truth? It's human beings who are interpreting these Biblical scriptures and preaching them. There is much room for error, especially if humans are as flawed as we are believed to be according to the Bible. Perhaps many people would respond to my last question with the simple answer of "faith". And so we arrive back at the same word that this whole discussion was built upon, which then leads me to another part of religion that doesn't quick click in my mind. I've attended a few church gatherings whether it be Sunday mass or a simple youth group, etc. I could see why so many found truth in these gatherings. The church community in itself is a sort of family. It's a safe place away from home where the kids go out on trips together, adults practice their faith together, everyone sings songs together, and so on and so forth. It's hard not to feel like you're a part of something bigger than yourself. But looking beyond all of that, what bothered me most was what occurred during mass, itself. The preachers all used logic and known truths and simply attached "God" to the end of each sentence to somehow tie it into religion. They were statements that could not be questioned or reasoned with. Furthermore, I've noticed how often vague, feel-good words are used to evoke strong feelings towards faith. Love, Grace, Glory, Mercy, Blessings, Sanctity, etc. I almost felt like I was at a political campaign where the candidates called out "glittering generalities" to their loyal supporters. I apologize if I offend anyone. It's really just my personal take on the issue, but if you could offer some feedback from the other side, I'd love to understand. Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with religion that preaches good will and kindness. I'm just curious about the actual workings of Christianity. I'm not that familiar with the Bible and the traditions of the faith, so maybe my thoughts can be better explained by someone who knows more.
sorry i found this online, and you tell me if these fit the way religion is preached to the public.
http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/proptech.htm
Ayo Charles-
If someone, or in this case everyone, decides not to fully follow the Bible, that definitely means they’re being hypocritical. But then what you do suggest they do?
You’re right in that nobody follows the Bible word for word anymore. It could be because they just don’t know much about the Bible, or because they make an honest mistake and slip-up, or they might just deliberately choose not to follow the scripture, but you’re right by saying that every Christian is hypocritical in terms of abiding to the Bible. However, you need to realize that that hypocrisy is the exact reason why Christianity even exists.
In the doctrine of Christianity there was a standard that you would gain admittance into heaven so long as you obey every last rule in the Bible, however every single person came up short, but God still wanted man to enter heaven. This is the entire reason why he sent Jesus Christ to die for us- enter John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (I’m sure you’ve seen this verse around a million times).
You’re completely right in that the tenets of Christianity are indeed supposed to be and/or should be all-or-nothing. You’re allowed to compromise absolutely nothing in the Bible, and every word is supposed to be taken as absolute truth. However people are people and because we are who we are, in the course of life we’re bound to let things slip to the wayside – this goes for any religion, not just Christianity.
It’s exactly because reality does not follow the “supposed to be's” that God offered another means of being saved. That’s why people, as hypocritical as they might seem, always beat their chests about being Christian; it’s because they know that despite the fact that they suck, they still have God’s grace. That’s why there are all these verses in the Bible about how “the last shall be first” or why God uses lowly peasants, and crooked slaves to accomplish great things- it’s to show that it doesn’t matter who you are, because it's God that has you covered. So while you’re argument in saying that people pick and choose certain parts of the Bible and that in turn undermines Christianity is completely sensible, it’s also an extremely petty argument in the grand scheme of things.
There are things in the Bible the don’t make sense, or might contradict with society’s standards. Consequently a person might choose a side that causes them to compromise the Bible, or to the other extreme, seem like a Jesus freak. However, brooding over those things as a means of criticizing the religion only shows that you’re missing the entire point of Christianity. The Bible is written on a need-to-know basis, and as far as entering heaven, it tells us everything we need to know. If someone truly appreciates God they would obviously make at least a modest attempt at following the other rules in the Bible in order to best represent their faith (or at least feel guilty for not doing so). But in the end, the rules are not what Christianity revolves around, so it's not fair to treat the doctrine and it's followers like so.
Question- is it “need to know basis” or “need-to-know basis?”
AND ERICA- UNLESS YOU INDENT AND USE BREAKS IN YOUR PARAGRAPHS, NO ONE WILL WANT TO READ THE BIG BLOCK OF TEXT THAT IS YOUR OPINION.
Erica, you mention some thoughtful concerns that I'll try to address:
"Shouldn't the faith bring forth a unity in a single belief?": That's the goal, and that's what the Catholic Church has tried to do for the past two millennia (the word "Catholic" refers to a universal and undivided church). But it's hard to maintain strict conformity. Each person feels (and is) entitled to his or her own pursuit of truth. So in the end, each person's faith is unique.
"The preachers all used logic and known truths and simply attached 'God' to the end of each sentence to somehow tie it into religion. They were statements that could not be questioned or reasoned with.": I admit these statements can be construed as misleading, but in reality they merely serve to strengthen the faith of believers, and don't often convince nonbelievers. So arguments about how the complexity of the universe necessitates the existence of God might encourage theists but would sound like trash to atheists. This makes sense if you accept my argument that faith is irrational, because rational nonbelievers won't find religious teachings (which have little to no logical grounding) convincing.
In defense of evangelists who attempt to convert others using the misleading tactics you mention, I should acknowledge that they do so because their belief is sincere. Christians truly believe your soul will burn for eternity if you don't convert. Considering this, one can understand why they would try "propaganda techniques" to spread religion.
In my view of Christianity, reason and faith interact in a meaningful way. Well first, to address the question on Christian unifying theory, my personal view comes in the form of the classical question "what would Jesus do?" There might be contradiction between the Old and New Testament, but ultimately, as followers of Christ, we must do just that. We require faith to believe walking in the steps of Jesus is the right path; we require reason to lay out this path in an ever changing world.
Preexisting faith is the first step. Nevertheless, I believe most of the criticism is directed towards believers who put more faith in scripture than they do in Jesus. The habits, laws, and traditions of the ancient Judaic tribes are an easy target for those resentful of organized, and often archaic religious culture. The life and values of Jesus however, present a much more difficult target. There is nothing wrong with living a selfless, loving, and peaceful life: all qualities exemplified through the life of Jesus.
Once you believe, the challenge lies in attempting to live out this lifestyle. Sometimes the choice is black and white, sometimes irrelevant, and often the "right" choice is unclear. This is where the power of reasoning comes. Christianity allows us, if not encourages us, to seek out the truth. Christ helps us wrestle with the big questions in life, and talks of purpose, love, and righteousness. These are ideas the define us. What we think of evolution and creation have very little bearing in how we live our daily lives.
I find the interaction of faith and reason in the Bible intriguing. Jesus tells his disciples to place their trust in him (faith) but also engages in rational discourse and debate. Believe it or not, reason is useless without faith. What I mean by this is, science is a terrible religion. It can describe the world in wonderful ways, but it will never tell you what is right and wrong. Atheists and Christians share this common ground: they are believers first.
I agree with Veronica; I don't think that suspending reason for the sake of faith is necessarily a terrible thing. It seems somewhat arrogant to assume that everything must have rational basis and to reject it if it can't fit those bounds.
Wow I totally forgot about this post until now, but I'm really enjoying all the comments.
I agree with Jay's position that the whole point of Christianity is NOT about the (minor) discrepancies between the way Christians live and what they read in the Bible. In regards to Charles' example of the Bible recommending that we stone to death an adulterous woman, the principle that it teaches should still be upheld by Christians today. Sexual immorality will always be taboo in Christianity. This Bible verse is warning us to not commit adultery, a form of sexual immorality. It mentions stoning because that was a normal form of punishment back then, but nowadays, crimes are mostly punished in a less extreme way (at least in the US). Like I mentioned before, the principle of this verse still holds true. What constitutes a Christian value is abstinence from sexual immorality, NOT the stoning of women. If God is judging someone, He would obviously base it on whether the person has led a pure life rather than whether that person has stoned every non-virgin out there. By concentrating only on the form of punishment, you're missing the main idea of the verse.
As for Christianity being irrational, I personally find many rational aspects to the religion. Of course, I was raised as a Christian, so it's a lot easier for me to say this than a non-believer. But when the Bible advises us to act a certain way, I find a logical reasoning behind each commandment. For example, again touching on the subject of sexual immorality... the Bible advises us not to do it until marriage. From a medical standpoint, this makes sense. The less people we sleep around with, the less chances of spreading venereal diseases around and having unwanted pregnancies. And let's take another example, drunkenness. We've all witnessed firsthand what bad things can happen when someone gets plastered: saying things you normally wouldn't want to, accidentally harming yourself, vomiting, hangovers, etc.
Logically, abstaining from these activities provides more long-term benefits than partaking in them. Some people might argue that there's no harm in getting drunk once in awhile or sleeping around a bit. It's true that you'll PROBABLY be completely fine after a few shots or one-night stands. But it's more true that you'll be COMPLETELY fine if you DON'T drink or DON'T sleep around. By abstaining, the only risk you're taking is feeling left out or bored or momentarily unsatisfied. And for Christians, the promise of His kingdom should far outweigh these temporary afflictions. (2 Corinthians 4:16-18)
(continued from previous comment)
A great Bible verse that addresses irrationality is 1 Corinthians:8-31. I HIGHLY recommend reading this verse, for both believers and non-believers. Basically, it states what I think I said in my previous comment: that the power of God reigns supreme over human reasoning.
Erica, I understand what you mean about some pastors sounding like politicians. But preaching styles can vary greatly. It took me years to finally find a church that taught me beyond the "vague" concepts of love, faith, hope, etc. A lot of pastors nowadays include practical examples in their messages in order to make them more relevant and applicable. Also, it can also depend on the type of churchgoers. I know my grandparents prefer the old-school "repent or go to hell" style, while I don't. Therefore I attend a church with a pastor who preaches differently.
And as of this summer, I am no longer Catholic. I guess I really haven't been Catholic, or religious for that matter, the past few years. But just because I left the Catholic faith doesn't mean I believe Catholicism is an incorrect form of Christianity. In regards to your question about the divisions within the religion, it all has to do with personal preference of the form of worship. There are millions of Christians around the world, and it would be impossible to have everyone worship the same way. Ultimately, we all believe in God and Jesus; we just put emphasis in different areas. Again, like what Jay said, the main point of Christianity is believing that Jesus died for our sins. Any discrepancy beyond that is minor. If you have witnessed disputes between different sects, it has nothing to do with God but with the petty nature of human beings. God Himself strictly forbids this type of behavior. (1 Corinthians 3:1-23)
And of course, all that I have said can appear utterly meaningless to non-believers, but I hope that I have offered something to consider.
* Typo: the Bible verse I recommended everyone to read should be 1 Corinthians 1:18-31.
hi jon!! okay i have to admit i just read this just now. and i'm not much of a reader, i had to kinda skim through all the comments.
in response to charles, i looked at the site about the verses ignored thing, and in my opinion, its easy to read that stuff and be like "yeah!" but if u actually take the time to study in depth why people believe this or that, and etc, u'll find that a lot of them end up making sense, and for the iffy ones, you'll find that there are many interpretations for a particular doctorine, so not every christian believes what the guy on that website says. also you have to reallly study how and why the certain old testament laws arent followed anymore. its not something u can just google, i think it would at least require u to read the whole old testament and new testament to understand, as well as googling.
and on that note, the bible is not something that a human can completely and fully understand. Its mysterious because its God's thoughts written in human language and i dont think any human language can adequately describe God's thoughts in a way we can understand. what may seem like nonsense to us may just be above our understanding. I believe that throughout history, God has been revealing things about the bible through different people, like martin luther, and john calvin, and etc etc, and even today we are still in the process of trying to understand the bible.
and erica, in america it may seem like church is a family and safehaven for ppl and a social thing, but in many countries, people risk their lives to go to church. so its not always so feel good. and yes, they probably use words like love, grace, glory, etc, because thats what God is. so if u have a sermon without those words, then it probably doesnt have much of Jesus in it.
and one last thing! which i think is really important. i think living in america kinda takes the reality out of christian religious. in indonesia, and many other countries, it is pretty common for someone to become demon possessed and become really sick because of someone doing voodoo, and the demons will talk through the person and say stuff acknowledges God in a fearful way (just like int he bible with the hoard of pigs) and i've even witnessed a demon possessed lady at my house and some pastors from indonesia came to cast the demon out, and i was really little at the time, but the voice is like a super deep voice that definitely couldnt come from the lady, so it was definitely a demon. and it refused to say "lord jesus" or something like that, until it was finally cast out and she could say that. and my mom who lived in indonesia has told me many other stories and i've heard also from other people, so i believe them. and my point is, that some ppl live in a very spiritual world, so christianity to them is something very real and not like some untangible thing, and in america, its a very non spiritual world. so in that case, thats one of the reasons why im very very sure there is a God and there is a devil.
Post a Comment