Re: Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers
 

A few things:

First of all, I'm assuming that if David were convinced by the geniuses that Christianity was likely to be correct, he would do his best to live in accordance with it. Take that to mean what you will.

Now, back to the question of the validity of his faith. John 20:29- Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

I don't think Jesus is condemning the fact that Thomas had to see to believe here, but it seems He's definitely saying that it would've been better had he believed before seeing. So it seems that, sometimes at least, there are "better" reasons for belief.

I think one of the main problems one could raise with David's belief is that it would essentially be from man, not God (and really, it would be a faith in man, or at least in the wisdom of geniuses). But I am assuming that, after he is convinced by the geniuses, he is truly and sincerely convinced, and he believes completely. Is this different from a sincere faith that is inherited from one's parents and never questioned?

I don't feel like the Bible gives a very good or consistent answer to this. Some people, like the centurion who asked Jesus to heal his son, had faith based on little or no evidence. Others, like Paul, were hit over the head. Jesus was definitely a fan of the centurion's faith, but nowhere is Paul criticized for having God blatantly reveal Himself.

Re: Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers
 

To answer your question in a slightly restated way, I think belief based on a genius consensus would not be genuine belief. Rather, it would just be a human-to-human suck-up exercise much like a frog looking into a flashlight. His definition of genius already shows this by requiring a person to both suck up to the system and get sucked up to in representation of the system -- something that has little to do with one's reasoning abilities and even less to do with one's understanding of God.

I don't think God sets standards for valid and invalid ways to believe. As long as the belief is genuine, ie. really and truly that, deep in your heart and soul, then He will take care of you.

Sklansky makes a fundamental error in assuming this question is a rational exercise. To make the leap of faith you need to (among other things) create axioms. Logical thought OTOH involves arriving at various truths starting from a given set of axioms.

God and the devil are battling it out for Sklansky's soul and he is blissfully unaware. At one point it will become clear who is the victor but for now he'll just keep running 'round and 'round in his little logical gerbil wheel, creating threads that entertain and annoy us all the while.

Re: Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers
 

In my oppinion and that of udontknowmickey and notready's. God would have decided wether or not D.S. would beleive. So if He beleives then he beleives and its just that simple.

Re: Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers
 

Paul was not a contemporary of Jesus. I am not sure if you know that. He lived after Jesus was crucified.

At any rate, Jesus does say “Blessed are those that have believed and have not seen” to
Thomas. Thus the “doubting Thomas” phrase that we use today.

Sure, it is good to believe on its own. But with today’s science it is indeed difficult to take the leap of faith so easily. We need to “logically” deduce Christianity on it the “facts”.

Getting back to your question if David would pass through the Pearly Gates or not. I do agree with Brady and Max that once you get on the path Of Christianity you then still have to take the leap of faith. The big hurdle is the intellect. After one realizes that, it is not a matter of intellect but choice, then the plunge is the easy part. (Not so easy that I, personally, have left the cliff, but I am getting there.)

Again, that is for further discussion. Once we are at the cliff then we can discuss the rest. There are all kinds of ramifications at this point - e.g. those who have heard and did not believe, those who have never heard the Word of God, those who died before having a chance to accept God’s word, etc.

Re: Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers
 

[ QUOTE ]
The big hurdle is the intellect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The big hurdle is the intellect.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

But the intellect only goes so far. It does not give answers. Then it becomes a matter of choice. What's the problem?