Who Here is a Christian? bLinD fAiTh rEbeLs :)

[intedomine]

So you define blind faith as only when people take on the same faith they grew up in? How would you describe the faith of a nontheist that converts to Christianity? or any other type of convert, like a Buddhist or Muslim?

I don't see how one can be ANY type of Christian...or really belong to any religion believing in a god...without some element of blind faith.

I disagree w/ your interpretation b/c it sounds like you're defining someone blinding belonging to a certain religion or religious denomination, not the individual faith that person holds. Yes, you can definitely "blindly" belong to a certain group, like a lot of my peers will say they are Calvinist Christian Reformed without a true understanding of what that really means, but that's not faith, that's ignorance. Blind faith is believing in a god without any expectation of what humans generally accept as "proof".

Yes, that's the key thing.

Blind Faith can exist when people just accept the dogma that is drummed into them when they are of an early age and when they are at their most vulnerable.

They don't look for proof and they don't philosophise properly. (if at all). They are often encouraged not to.

I'm not generalising people of particular religions or kinds of faith as blind. If they want to have a particular kind of faith, that is fine with me. If an individual goes from an agnostic "faith" to a passionately theistic kind of faith, and only after doing some indepth research into what seems more concievable to them, that is respectable.

I just find it hard to find any true value in an indivdual's "faith", particularly if their faith is onlt garnered through constant brainwashing when they were a child, if they are raised (or brainwashed or converted from agnosticism) to strictly adhere to a particular kind of "faith."

 

[Liesje]

Yes, that's the key thing.

Blind Faith can exist when people just accept the dogma that is drummed into them when they are of an early age and when they are at their most vulnerable.

They don't look for proof and they don't philosophise properly. (if at all). They are often encouraged not to.

I'm not generalising people of particular religions or kinds of faith as blind. If they want to have a particular kind of faith, that is fine with me. If an individual goes from an agnostic "faith" to a passionately theistic kind of faith, and only after doing some indepth research into what seems more concievable to them, that is respectable.

I just find it hard to find any true value in an indivdual's "faith", particularly if their faith is onlt garnered through constant brainwashing when they were a child, if they are raised (or brainwashed or converted from agnosticism) to strictly adhere to a particular kind of "faith."

Like I said before, I don't agree that the "blind faith" the original poster's refering to is synonymous with blind ignorance. Accepting what you've grown up with because it's easy and not caring to challenge yourself or research any other alternatives (like what you're describing) is what I consider ignorance.

Blind faith in the Grace of Jesus Christ is different, if for no other reason than it can't be the same as blind ignorance b/c ignorance implies that you don't know something, however "Grace" is a concept that can't be known in the scientific sense. This isn't exactly the way I'd choose to define blind faith, but I guess it helps show how it's not the same as ignorance.

 

[Irvine511]

Jesus' teaching was radical at its time as it is today. The simple act of speaking to a Samaritan women blew away all the social norms of the day.

Today, the whole concept of of Grace goes against all of our worldly teachings (we want to earn it!!). A God centered life is not sold to us by the world.

I'm not sure your stereotype of the Christian life holds true as well - otherwise who wouldn't be a Christian?

doesn't 90% of this country claim to be christmas, hence the War on Christmas feelings of oppression by terms like Happy Holidays?

sorry, it just gets confusing when i hear claims of persecuted minority status and then expressions of majority rules.

i'd also argue that most of society is structured around a belief in god -- after all, who is thanked on the linear notes of nearly all hip-hop albums, gets shout-outs at the grammies, emmies, and oscars? who dominates AM radio? who is important to have on the ticket when running for president?

unless you are born into and practice another faith, who isn't a christian? do atheists and agnostics have any sort of affect upon society?

seems as mainstream and comfortable as apple pie to me.

i'm also not sure that your understanding of what it means to be a christian is representative of how the majority of this country -- and the West -- understands what it means to be christian. unless you are suggesting that you claim a better, more pure, more thoughtful understanding than most others.

 

[nbcrusader]

doesn't 90% of this country claim to be christmas, hence the War on Christmas feelings of oppression by terms like Happy Holidays?

sorry, it just gets confusing when i hear claims of persecuted minority status and then expressions of majority rules.

i'd also argue that most of society is structured around a belief in god -- after all, who is thanked on the linear notes of nearly all hip-hop albums, gets shout-outs at the grammies, emmies, and oscars? who dominates AM radio? who is important to have on the ticket when running for president?

seems as mainstream and comfortable as apple pie to me.

90% of the US celebrates Christmas - both religious and secular forms.

The percentage of Christians (those who call Jesus Christ God) in the US is far smaller.

And references to God can mean just about anything these days.



I think we are headed down a different path from the original post...

 

[Irvine511]

90% of the US celebrates Christmas - both religious and secular forms.

The percentage of Christians (those who call Jesus Christ God) in the US is far smaller.

And references to God can mean just about anything these days.



I think we are headed down a different path from the original post...

i'm just wondering where the rebellion is in being a part of america's most protected, most catered to special interest group.

unless we think that some christians are better christians than others -- that Beyonce has a poorer understanding of God than someone who isn't famous and rich and skinny and has a good voice.

 

[Liesje]

I think of "rebellious Christianity" as found in Kierkegaard. Not exactly what he writes, but along those lines. People don't have to behave that way.....but I wonder how many Christians would be willing to if it all came down do it?

 

[Irvine511]

I think of "rebellious Christianity" as found in Kierkegaard. Not exactly what he writes, but along those lines. People don't have to behave that way.....but I wonder how many Christians would be willing to if it all came down do it?

haven't read him in almost 8 years (ugh, i feel so old!)

could you expound?

 

[the iron horse]

"Blind Faith" can essentially mean two different things:

For a believer, the meaning is captured by Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." Faith, by definition, is "blind".

The word can also be used as a slur to dismiss the faith of the believer.

This is close to my intent in adding the blind faith rebels with a

*Hebrews 11:1 or we are simply fools*

I just wanted to do a roll call on how many believers are on the board.

The blind rebel thing was like a wink to them.

This thread took on a discussion on blind faith, but thats OK.

I do believe that the Christian faith is the most rebellious faith on earth.

I do not view the Christian faith through some church denomination, preacher, priest, or pope,

but through Jesus of Nazareth. To me, he is the only true rebel who ever walked this planet. I center my faith in the person of Christ and what is recorded in the four Gospels. I then go from there, but Christ is the point in my faith.

I get the blind faith thought from what C.S. Lewis wrote about when he finally accepted that there was a God, it was like jumping off a clift with no idea whether he would be caught or crash to the bottom. It was a act of faith.

 

[vervex]

Iìm a Roman Catholic from Italy (now THAT's coherence! [I'm joking okay?]).
I wish to share a thought: when I've been to Africa lately I found out how just in our cities and with our technologies we can say that God doesn't exist or anything...if you go out, if you reallly go out in the wildest Nature, you can feel a strenght in Nature, something bigger than you that you cannot explain...
I something think that cities are temple (or castle) made to protect ourselves from what we don't understand...but we at the end shouldn't be scared at all, we belong to the force of Creation,
whatever name you call It...
I call it God,
I call it Jesus,
and I thank Christ for renewing the Alliance between God and us.

Ciao,
Tom

Well said I really like that... I explains a bit how I feel about this force, even though I haven't been in Africa ahah

 

[nbcrusader]

i'm just wondering where the rebellion is in being a part of america's most protected, most catered to special interest group.

I'm not sure I agree with your stereotype - but I realize you view Christians differently than I.

 

[Irvine511]

I'm not sure I agree with your stereotype - but I realize you view Christians differently than I.

stereotype? surely a look at the rhetoric of the last election cycle will reveal language that supports my point -- politicians want the christian vote, in the way that they might want the black vote, or the urban vote, or the jewish vote, or the gay vote (very important in many cities). christians are as test-marketed an interest group as any.

so -- are you saying that some people are better or truer christians than others?

 

[nbcrusader]

stereotype? surely a look at the rhetoric of the last election cycle will reveal language that supports my point -- politicians want the christian vote, in the way that they might want the black vote, or the urban vote, or the jewish vote, or the gay vote (very important in many cities). christians are as test-marketed an interest group as any.

I answered your question once, and pointed out that your facts were incorrect. You simply repeated your question (one loaded with the familiar conclusionary statements) without facts.

so -- are you saying that some people are better or truer christians than others?

There is an interesting topic in your "question" which would make a fine thread of its own.

 

[Irvine511]

I answered your question once, and pointed out that your facts were incorrect. You simply repeated your question (one loaded with the familiar conclusionary statements) without facts.

what facts were incorrect? on a project that i worked on, we were given a list of "do's" and "don't's" in order not to offend the intended home schooling market that the product we were creating was to be marketed to. clearly, this is indicative of a definable culture with dilenated values. this group -- what many republicans will refer to as the base, and the votes of which are threatened to be revoked by people like Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, James Dobson and others should the Republican Party not follow through on certain political goals such as the appointing of SCOTUS nominees with a specific set of criteria -- is easily the most powerful and influential group in American politics.

so, there's this group, combined with the 90% who would probably call themselves Christians in that they celebrate Christmas, and you get the vast, vast majority of the American population who identify with the word "Christian" in some capacity.

thus, where's the rebellion?

what i'm getting at is that "rebellion" is a term of self-congratualtions, of self-adulation. i don't think it's at all warranted, and in our society, the true rebels -- at least in a religious sense -- are the agnostics and the atheists, espeically those who prove just how it is possible to live an entirely moral life without any influence of any religion.

There is an interesting topic in your "question" which would make a fine thread of its own.

one of the trademarks of fundamentalism is the belief that the mainstream has strayed too far from the essence and origins of the religion, the belief that some are better than others, that religion can't be DIY. which is a slippery slope.

 

[Liesje]

haven't read him in almost 8 years (ugh, i feel so old!)

could you expound?

Yeah...I haven't read him in years either, but if I remember correctly from my philosophy class (he is a theologian but is also recognized as the first exestiential philosopher), his most famous work talked about Abram and Isaac and how every person who calls themself a true Christian should be willing to sacrifice so much and give up their own child for God. He also attacked "Christendom" b/c (like now) so many people go to church but have no genuine affection towards Christianity - they've not really made any sacrifices in their lives.

 

[nbcrusader]

what facts were incorrect? on a project that i worked on, we were given a list of "do's" and "don't's" in order not to offend the intended home schooling market that the product we were creating was to be marketed to. clearly, this is indicative of a definable culture with dilenated values. this group -- what many republicans will refer to as the base, and the votes of which are threatened to be revoked by people like Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, James Dobson and others should the Republican Party not follow through on certain political goals such as the appointing of SCOTUS nominees with a specific set of criteria -- is easily the most powerful and influential group in American politics.

so, there's this group, combined with the 90% who would probably call themselves Christians in that they celebrate Christmas, and you get the vast, vast majority of the American population who identify with the word "Christian" in some capacity.

Does celebrating Christmas make you a Christian?

I've celebrated Purim. Does that make me Jewish?

You're just rehashing your old cliches on Christianity and politics.

All of which have nothing to do with iron horse's original statement.

 

[Irvine511]

Does celebrating Christmas make you a Christian?

I've celebrated Purim. Does that make me Jewish?

no. you identify as christian. you can celebrate whatever you want while retaining your identity. the vast, vast majority of people who celebrate christmas even in it's most secular form identify as christian. the identity has meaning, whereas a Jewish identity has no meaning for you, except in an intellectual or oppositional context.

You're just rehashing your old cliches on Christianity and politics.

All of which have nothing to do with iron horse's original statement.

cliches? hardly.

it has everything to do with the current state of American politics and the monolithic cultural impact of christianity -- not to mention the irony of christians who claim both majority status and persecuted minority status whenever things like "intelligent design" are tossed out of the classroom -- that essentially negates whatever claims to "rebel" status originally claimed by the starter of this thread.

 

[got2k9s]

the vast, vast majority of people who celebrate christmas even in it's most secular form identify as christian. the identity has meaning, whereas a Jewish identity has no meaning for you, except in an intellectual or oppositional context.

I would say that those who celebrate Christmas and identify themselves as a Christian but do not actively participate in the Christian faith/ideals/precepts, etc. are doing so on a more "cultural" basis than anything.

Cultural as in "Well, I'm not a Muslim and I do think that maybe there's probably a God up there," kind of thing.

More the same way that CULTURALLY there are Jews who are not exactly "practicing" Jews.

. . . not to mention the irony of christians who claim both majority status and persecuted minority status whenever things like "intelligent design" are tossed out of the classroom -- that essentially negates whatever claims to "rebel" status originally claimed by the starter of this thread.

Ironically, though, and contrary to your claim above, what I have heard is the claim that it's a MAJORITY opinion that is being left out of the classroom by not allowing 'intelligent design' to be taught, not a minority one.

If it's true that "Christians are protected," then why ISN'T and why HASN'T 'intelligent design' been taught in schools, and instead, believers of Darwinism fight to 'evolution' taught in schools?

The 'intelligent design' debate is a prime example to disprove your notion of the protected status of Christians in the U.S.

And as far as the "rebel" status, iron horse was talking about Jesus himself, not "Christianity."

There is no doubt that Jesus was a rebel.

Asserting that He was 'King of the Jews?!'
Are you kidding me?
THAT was what got him crucified. Those in government and even "religious leaders" FEARED Him. So, they crucified Him.

Jesus WAS a rebel for His time and in His time. No doubt about it.

Edit/addition - - the content of iron horse's post referred to Jesus as a rebel, but now I realize that the thread title refers to Christians as rebels.

And to that, I would say that, I believe it goes against human nature to HAVE blind faith, though I really don't like the word "blind" associated with faith. It does imply a negativity.
But I would say that it's a leap to have it. A rebellion against our nature.

 

[A_Wanderer]

The intelligent design "debate" is about securing educational standards in schools and ensuring that students are in the best position to suceed later on. If you are taught all through high school that cell level processes are all irreducibly complex and that they are by definition formed by a creator then you will be at serious disadvantage to other students at university level biology.

It doesn't matter what the majority of people want because majority opinion does not change facts and that is what science is built off. The iconoclasts who upset the dominant paradigm with the ideas that explain the evidence best will generally come out on top in scientific debate, the intelligent design hypothesis however is built from wishful thinking and has not been able to demonstrate itself in the world of peer reviewed scientific discourse.

Science is inherently undemocratic

 

[got2k9s]

My, aren't you the intellectual elitist?

Should I use my GOD-GIVEN reasoning skills to deduce that you are, in fact, calling those who believe in 'intelligent design' ignorant fools?

'Cause that's what I hear, and I must disagree. Sorry.

 

[A_Wanderer]

You have a right to an opinion same as anyone else but that doesn't change facts. It doesn't stop bacterial resistance developing, procreation with variation or wipe out the fossil record.

 

[got2k9s]

Oh, I believe in absolute truth - - but I take issue with the fact that your responses reek with the air of intellectual superiority.

 

[indra]

Just a question...What does "intelligent design" bring to scientific knowledge? What, exactly does it add to the study of biology for example?

I honestly can't think of anything. I can see where it could well be studied in religion or philosophy class, but in hard science classes it has nothing at all to add.

 

[Irvine511]

My, aren't you the intellectual elitist?

Should I use my GOD-GIVEN reasoning skills to deduce that you are, in fact, calling those who believe in 'intelligent design' ignorant fools?

'Cause that's what I hear, and I must disagree. Sorry.

yes. i'll say that. though i'd modify it -- i'd say those who believe in the kind of intelligent design made political by specific groups are being willfully ignorant. it's the worst kind of thinking -- "gosh, this stuff is hard to understand, let's just stop thinking right now and admit defeat."

A_W knows his stuff on this.

i'm sorry if facts and logic and reasoning are threatening or elitist, but so be it.

he also answered your earlier post to me as well as i could have, so i feel no need to revisit it.

 

[Liesje]

Just a question...What does "intelligent design" bring to scientific knowledge? What, exactly does it add to the study of biology for example?

I honestly can't think of anything. I can see where it could well be studied in religion or philosophy class, but in hard science classes it has nothing at all to add.

As a Christian, my opinion is absolutely nothing I've read the Creation story (and many other creation stories) in and out and 1) the original Hebrew wording basically supports the theory of evolution and 2) that aside, the Christian Creation story deals with defining the nature of relationships; it is not and was never meant to be taken as fact that supercedes the realm of science. I'm disappointed that most of my Christian compatriots can't, or won't let themselves, see this. Why is it so difficult to believe in both? Evolution is undeniable (to a certain extent at least).

 

[got2k9s]

Coward.

There was plenty more to discuss in my response to you that he didn't even address.

Or are you just taking the easy way out? See, you must believe in 'intelligent design' after all. *sarcasm*

Read this book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/03...002-3784094-8176005?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 then get back to me.

Oh, and a great synopsis is under the "Editorial Review" section on this site, just scroll down a bit.

Whatsa matter? Scared? Worried that all of your smarty-pants pre-conceived notions and false comfort of superiority will be shattered? Just flat-out afraid to consider something you can't feel with your fingers?

Real intellectuals search before deciding.

And I say this with a hug attached, sincerely.
I prod with love.

 

[Irvine511]

Coward.

There was plenty more to discuss in my response to you that he didn't even address.

Or are you just taking the easy way out? See, you must believe in 'intelligent design' after all. *sarcasm*

Read this book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/03...002-3784094-8176005?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 then get back to me.

Oh, and a great synopsis is under the "Editorial Review" section on this site, just scroll down a bit.

Whatsa matter? Scared? Worried that all of your smarty-pants pre-conceived notions and false comfort of superiority will be shattered? Just flat-out afraid to consider something you can't feel with your fingers?

Real intellectuals search before deciding.

And I say this with a hug attached, sincerely.
I prod with love.

um, i'm going to assume that you were talking to me, and i'm going to say that we've been through the ID debate here on FYM a million times and i'm very certain in both my facts and my convictions.

real intellectuals not only search, but they understand the rules of the discipline in which they are studying -- science deals with exactly that which you can feel with your fingers, that which you can test, quantify, verify, or falsify.

you cannot do such things with the supernatural. hence, it is not fit for a science class. take it to a theology or philosophy class, but do not destroy science standards with such things.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Does the search for evidence lead to a conclusion or does the conclusion lead you to evidence?

 

[got2k9s]

Irvine, read the book.

Written by a guy who was an athiest, who learned how to be one in BIOLOGY CLASS.

You know, with all those facts and things you can touch.

Read the book and see how it addresses your beliefs.
It's a very interesting read . . . you know, for an intellectual.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Since you have read the book can you explain how people learn how to be athiests in biology classes?

 

[got2k9s]

Since you have read the book can you explain how people learn how to be athiests in biology classes?

It was a joke. You know, we idiot peons have a sense of humor, but one undoubtedly, not quite as EVOLVED as yours.