Discussion post and reply 1
Pastor:
I suppose it’s tough to talk about the introduction too much because the points will be made later in the book. The main point of the introduction, I thought, is the most difficult point in all of theology: we must put our reason under the Word of God. That obviously has volumes to say about the problem of evil and other philosophical/theological questions. We stick to the Word of God even if it doesn’t “make sense”. Someone once said that theologies can be divided into two camps. There are those who say, “I believe in order that I may understand” and those who say “I understand in order that I may believe.” The Bible advocates view number one.
Those are my thoughts on the introduction. Comments on your end?
Have a good evening.
My response:
Only in that I disagree with that first statement. :P It's something I've been struggling with my whole life, but I don't have any desire to believe first and let that belief determine how I understand the world. To me, religion is a mindset... it is an agreement of belief between a group of people, but ultimately every individual's mindset is different and to try and it is possible to reconcile what you see in reality with what you have been taught about the world, but the two don't necessarily agree. I guess it would make more sense to me to let reality define itself, not to try and define reality by our attitudes toward it.
There are some very accurate things in the Christian worldview... for example, I just don't see how nature could "create" itself... there has to be a creator. That is just one example. But there are also a *lot* of things I think are innacurate about the Christian worldview... for example, human nature. I don't see how the concept of sin defines itself in real life. I believe in conscience but it is more vague than a set of rules, basically whatever would harm another person humans naturally view as wrong, but shame, punishment, rules, and acceptability are all just part of a cultural context. How much of "sin" is cultural? A lot! (According to my observation) Again, that's just one example of what I am talking about.
It is my observation that humans tend to believe what they "choose" to let themselves believe... they can either be passive and allow others to lead them to define their belief, they can actively decide to believe something by adopting a certain mindset, or they can observe the world around them and draw conclusions based on that. Christian tradition very much emphasises the first, "letting God work in your heart" but also the second one (in some denominations) and that would include making a conscious choice to believe something. I very much advocate the last one, and that is what I mean by "letting reality define itself." When approaching the deeper questions, I don't want to just let the voice of others lead me to adopt a certain mindset, nor do I want to self-brainwash myself into believing something. Sure, I believe in Divine Inspiration, but that journey to God has to be undertaken by opening your eyes, looking around at the world, and listening to all sorts of people and ideas, not by subjecting yourself only to the words of those who believe in one mindset.
I have observed that Christians don't generally like this sort of observation at all, but I don't really think the other two choices will lead to truth, maybe to belief, conviction, action, and satisfaction for some people, but not to objectivity or truth.
Sorry to jump in with arguments so quickly, but I've found that the more important questions usually start at the beginning. :P
I suppose it’s tough to talk about the introduction too much because the points will be made later in the book. The main point of the introduction, I thought, is the most difficult point in all of theology: we must put our reason under the Word of God. That obviously has volumes to say about the problem of evil and other philosophical/theological questions. We stick to the Word of God even if it doesn’t “make sense”. Someone once said that theologies can be divided into two camps. There are those who say, “I believe in order that I may understand” and those who say “I understand in order that I may believe.” The Bible advocates view number one.
Those are my thoughts on the introduction. Comments on your end?
Have a good evening.
My response:
Only in that I disagree with that first statement. :P It's something I've been struggling with my whole life, but I don't have any desire to believe first and let that belief determine how I understand the world. To me, religion is a mindset... it is an agreement of belief between a group of people, but ultimately every individual's mindset is different and to try and it is possible to reconcile what you see in reality with what you have been taught about the world, but the two don't necessarily agree. I guess it would make more sense to me to let reality define itself, not to try and define reality by our attitudes toward it.
There are some very accurate things in the Christian worldview... for example, I just don't see how nature could "create" itself... there has to be a creator. That is just one example. But there are also a *lot* of things I think are innacurate about the Christian worldview... for example, human nature. I don't see how the concept of sin defines itself in real life. I believe in conscience but it is more vague than a set of rules, basically whatever would harm another person humans naturally view as wrong, but shame, punishment, rules, and acceptability are all just part of a cultural context. How much of "sin" is cultural? A lot! (According to my observation) Again, that's just one example of what I am talking about.
It is my observation that humans tend to believe what they "choose" to let themselves believe... they can either be passive and allow others to lead them to define their belief, they can actively decide to believe something by adopting a certain mindset, or they can observe the world around them and draw conclusions based on that. Christian tradition very much emphasises the first, "letting God work in your heart" but also the second one (in some denominations) and that would include making a conscious choice to believe something. I very much advocate the last one, and that is what I mean by "letting reality define itself." When approaching the deeper questions, I don't want to just let the voice of others lead me to adopt a certain mindset, nor do I want to self-brainwash myself into believing something. Sure, I believe in Divine Inspiration, but that journey to God has to be undertaken by opening your eyes, looking around at the world, and listening to all sorts of people and ideas, not by subjecting yourself only to the words of those who believe in one mindset.
I have observed that Christians don't generally like this sort of observation at all, but I don't really think the other two choices will lead to truth, maybe to belief, conviction, action, and satisfaction for some people, but not to objectivity or truth.
Sorry to jump in with arguments so quickly, but I've found that the more important questions usually start at the beginning. :P