Now a question for RJT, NotReady, and other believers

[jester710]

Sklansky has admitted that he would likely believe in God if enough geniuses studied the topic and declared God's existence to be probable. My question for you is, if this happened and Sklansky started to believe on those grounds, would you consider that a valid reason for belief? Do you think God would consider it valid? (Note: I am speaking primarily here about the Christian God, so think along those lines, and feel free to use Bible verses to prove your point; I am also assuming that Sklansky becomes a Christian, and not just a theist.)

I am fairly certain that I am working my way towards one major question here, but I'm not completely sure, so I'm jumping through these hoops until I get my mind right. If you think you know where I'm going, feel free to point it out, or if any of this has already been addressed please let me know.

I appreciate any responses.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky has admitted that he would likely believe in God if enough geniuses studied the topic and declared God's existence to be probable. My question for you is, if this happened and Sklansky started to believe on those grounds, would you consider that a valid reason for belief? Do you think God would consider it valid? (Note: I am speaking primarily here about the Christian God, so think along those lines, and feel free to use Bible verses to prove your point; I am also assuming that Sklansky becomes a Christian, and not just a theist.)

I am fairly certain that I am working my way towards one major question here, but I'm not completely sure, so I'm jumping through these hoops until I get my mind right. If you think you know where I'm going, feel free to point it out, or if any of this has already been addressed please let me know.

I appreciate any responses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I cant answer because I don't fit your criteria, but I think you may be heading in a direction that meets up with some thoughts I'm trying to express about morality and forming beliefs because of expert opinion.

Good luck, I watch with interest.

chez

I guess you are headed toward the "faith" topic... The Bible says people must believe in God by faith. "It is by Faith you have been saved..." So, if I don't believe by Faith, but by reason... then can I still be saved? I would then have more faith in these experts and my own reasoning abilities than the Bible and the preachers. Would God accept my belief? If not, why? He want's me to irrationally believe? Then why did he create me to be such a logical/rational being? And, if he would accept my belief based on reason, then why doesn't he give more supporting evidence for me and rational people like me... so that we too might be saved from eternal damnation.

OK... not sure if that's where you're going... but, there ya go. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[RJT]

jester710,

I don’t know that I would consider it a “valid reason for belief”, per se. I do know this: If this were to happen, then I am sure that David would (to paraphrase himself) “spend the same amount of time studying it”.

Understanding what Christianity (for example) is and what it says, and being a believer are two different things. NotReady, Bluff, Pair are all examples of real believers They have taken the leap. I am a piker compared to them.

At this point in my life, I have (finally) come to understand what Christianity is all about. I have made the decision in my mind that it is True. I have chosen it for myself (as opposed to atheism. – and I discount other religions, because this ones seems to make sense, so no need to look around any more – I do know a bit about the other majors ones, enough for me to disregard them. Btw, prior to this I read a philosophy. It didn’t take long to realize that philosophy does not lead to any answers.) I have chosen Christianity as opposed to atheism. It is an either or. It doesn’t mean Christianity is correct. It is simply a matter of choice.

I chose Christianity because it is the better of the two choices for me. I would rather try to live my life as a Christian than not. If I am wrong so be it. Atheism does nothing for me – of course that is redundant – it is nothing. Christianity for me is like Martha Stewart says about things that work for her “a good thing.” (Ok, I know that was “gay” - to use the vernacular of the young today, the way they use that word.)

But, getting back to the real believers NotReady, et al. They have taken the leap. I am just on the edge right now. My intellect tells me probably. My heart tells me yes. One day I hope to be able to really take the leap and feel it completely. That will just be a matter of time and experience, I hope.

This is why it is easy for me to make statements like: "If no god, then meaninglessness. If God then meaning." I do not say, "therefore God". While NotReady does not find it so easy to say this directly. Once someone has taken the leap – there is no other possibility. “If no god…” is not part of their vocabulary. He says “therefore God” basically. Now, it stills is easy for me to think like this – I can still say “It does not mean – therefore God.” Hopefully, someday I will not be able to say such things as “if no God…”

Basically, then, to answer your question. David would choose Religion under the hypothetical. Whether he would be a “believer” is hard to say. Is this enough for God? I would hope so (for my own sake as well as folk like he.) But, I do not know. (If you need a more specific answer let me know. I'll see if I can attempt it again.)

RJT

p.s. I should disclose that I was baptized Catholic when an infant. My whole education was in Catholic schools. On the other side of the coin, I will also disclose that Catholic schools don’t “indoctrinate” per se. We keep our religion and our science in their respective classrooms. When topics such as ethics in business and in medicine are discussed then the disciplines can come into the same room so to speak.

[BradyC]

[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky has admitted that he would likely believe in God if enough geniuses studied the topic and declared God's existence to be probable. My question for you is, if this happened and Sklansky started to believe on those grounds, would you consider that a valid reason for belief? Do you think God would consider it valid? (Note: I am speaking primarily here about the Christian God, so think along those lines, and feel free to use Bible verses to prove your point; I am also assuming that Sklansky becomes a Christian, and not just a theist.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Believing in God and the deity of Jesus is not enough... the Bible says even the demons believe and shudder. That is not saving faith. You can only reason so far... you have to put your trust in Christ eventually.

[MaxPowerPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
My question for you is, if [enough geniuses studied the topic and declared God's existence to be probable] and Sklansky started to believe on those grounds, would you consider that a valid reason for belief? Do you think God would consider it valid?

[/ QUOTE ]

No indication is given in scripture that there is such a thing as invalid grounds for belief. Some believed with very little information or empirical evidence. The apostle Paul had to be knocked from his horse and struck blind before he would believe. If it takes a panel of geniuses declaring the probability of God's existence to get DS to believe, that will in no way mean his belief is invalid.

I would also say that the fact that you are assuming that he becomes a Christian necessarily involves faith in the person of Jesus Christ and not simply in the fact that there *probably* is a god.

[ QUOTE ]
That is not saving faith. You can only reason so far... you have to put your trust in Christ eventually.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does that mean? "Trust in Christ"?

So, it's not enough to believe that Christ was God... and that He came and died for your sins. You have to "Trust". I know the "demons shuddering" verse you refer to. But, I also know John 3:16, and Romans 9:10-11. It would seem that just believing Christ died for your sins (and confessing it) is enough to be saved. But, then, James says faith without works is dead. Ahhh... so, just as soon as DS starts to believe in God, then he'll have to figure out whether the Arminians are right, or the Calvinists. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[MaxPowerPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
What does that mean? "Trust in Christ"?

So, it's not enough to believe that Christ was God... and that He came and died for your sins. You have to "Trust". I know the "demons shuddering" verse you refer to. But, I also know John 3:16, and Romans 9:10-11. It would seem that just believing Christ died for your sins (and confessing it) is enough to be saved. But, then, James says faith without works is dead. Ahhh... so, just as soon as DS starts to believe in God, then he'll have to figure out whether the Arminians are right, or the Calvinists. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

James' message was that a true saving faith has an impact on how you live. Someone who says they are a Christian - that they have faith - and they live like hell is a liar. DS does not have to understand this. He does not need to know the Arminian/Calvinist debate. But if he has saving faith, his life will show marks of it through the way he lives.

[jester710]

[ QUOTE ]
I would also say that the fact that you are assuming that he becomes a Christian necessarily involves faith in the person of Jesus Christ and not simply in the fact that there *probably* is a god.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is what I wanted people to assume, that the geniuses had recommended Christianity as probably being correct. Apologies if I didn't make that clear.

[MaxPowerPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, this is what I wanted people to assume, that the geniuses had recommended Christianity as probably being correct. Apologies if I didn't make that clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

No apology necessary. You were very clear. I only included my comments about faith in Christ to get them on the record so that I was not misinterpreted.