I’ve touched on the rapture in my preaching, and mentioned it as a non-concern. Whether the rapture comes in my lifetime or not, my death will (in a manner of speaking), which will be the same thing as far as I, as an individual, am concerned. So we need to live this life ready for the end of our world, if not the world.

I’ve touched on the Exodus, as a difficult journey to a Promised Land that ‘ended’ with the beginning of more struggle and hardship. I’ve so far left out that it also resulted in God-directed genocide.

I’ve spoken against persecution of homosexuals, but have never gone so far as to say homosexuality is normal, or not sinful.

I am preaching on these subjects, or at least touching on them as the scriptures I speak on refer to them. That is part of what has led me here. I am beginning to feel I spend more time defending and justifying God’s Word than I do preaching it. I can see myself bending and stretching my thoughts and words to try to teach that God is not evil, and does not want us to be destructive toward ourselves or others.

I appreciate hearing others have similarly struggled, but being in the midst of it, I offer that belief vs. non-belief is not always a clear binary. It can be experienced as a spectrum. Standing at one end, you might not be able to imagine you were ever on the other, but there are many points on the spectrum where you can say you truly believed– and truly doubted. For example, I was recently at a point where I believed the Bible was God’s Word, but doubted I understood what that meant. That’s not a stance that can last for long, perhaps, but it can be a place where we pause for thought.

Askyourself: could you, by any act of will, *make* yourself believe in the tooth fairy? You could of course *say* you believed, and even, perhaps, make decisions *as though* you believed, but could you make yourself, well, feel it? Even more, though you might really really be motivated to get that quarter for your tooth, is there any rationalization for the tooth fairy that would ever work for you?

I agree with those who suggest that we begin by feeling, then rationalizing, and thus arrive at our belief systems. I suspect we all do this to *some* extent. But it seems to me that there, somewhere, comes a point at which post-hoc rationalizing ceases to work well. It would be interesting to have a model to suggest where that point might occur.

And think of the implication: if belief is not a function of will, if will has nothing (or little) to do with cognitive assent, that means belief kind of *happens* to you, right? That it is non-volitional, and thereby potentially non-rational, factors that impel belief. You dont choose to believe, you discover what you do believe. This would, perhaps, explain the observed phenomenon in which more educated people tend to be less (conservatively) religous.

Richard

Religion is the only, and I mean only place where we are told to stop asking questions and just have faith.

Politics?
Ideology? (e.g. racism, feminism, …)
Responding to ads on TV, radio, etc.?
“Luv”?
Classrooms around the world?
.
.
.

Yup, that’s so true.

It’s like the example of picking out the right car that Heather mentioned above. Yes, the best way to make any major purchase is to do the research, and get recommendations and make the best, dispassionate choice. If we’re smart, that’s how we’d do it every time.

But if it were that easy, nobody would ever make a terrible purchase!

How many people do you know who go car shopping, “fall in love” with a car that’s totally wrong for them, too expensive, or notoriously unreliable – and buy it anyway! Some will find a million reasons to justify a bad purchase, while others will admit they’ve been totally irrational and take their chances.

Oftentimes, it comes down to pure emotion trumping logic and reason. Some people are more susceptible to that than others, even when the outcomes for them are negative time and time again. I have to wonder if personality type or temperament comes into play on this.

Excellent point! When Christian scholars do apologetics, there is a certain denial process going on that denies evidence to the contrary. The same for atheists. We are so “wedded” to what our heart desires, that we cannot think straight. In love affairs, it’s evolution and procreative forces at work. In religion, who knows the purpose?

Do you want your Doctor to do that?
Do you want the bridge builders to do that?
Do you want scientists to do that?
Do you want the guy running the nuclear plant to do that?
Do you want your daughter to do that with her boyfriend in the back seat of his car one night?

You simply cannot find truth through faith alone. Can’t be done.

In therapy, some psychologists make you imagine that someone you like a lot and died or moved away can come to help you, embrace you, and give you love. It is all an exercise to make you relax and feel that somebody loves you.

And even though you, as a patient, know that you are imagining it all, it still helps. You, then, release long-held feelings of rejection and move to a better mental place.

I believe that we can–and we do–make a god who helps us in our life troubles. I also believe that we still draw benefits, even if it is a construct of our imagination.

As long as we know we are imagining it all, perhaps it isn’t so bad. We get into trouble when we start affirming that it is real and try to back it up with pseudo scholarship.

This nicely ties back to an earlier point that if you buy a Ford Mustang, you research it with an open mind to discover the pro/cons, and make a decision then. You don’t first believe that the car is the best choice: you investigate, and then believe/disbelieve based on what you find. Otherwise, aren’t you using the conclusion to distort all the facts? If Christianity is the absolute, ultimate truth, then shouldn’t it be that we’ll believe *because* it all makes sense, not believe and *then* it makes sense? That’s a very shaky if-then statement.

(This is Heather — I’m not sure who knows about the name-change, so I’m saying this just in case).