Question for Theists / Apologists / Christians

[Zzyzx]

.
“Wouldn’t it be easier and more logical to forego reasoning altogether and instead live out your life steeped in religious faith in the hope of eternal life after death?� (Vitaly Malkin “Dangerous Illusions�).

Earthly life is only an eye-blink compared to eternity. So, isn’t a purely / exclusively / ascetic religious life the only rational way to live if one actually believes and trusts the eternity promise?

[tam]

Peace to you,



[Replying to post 10 by Jagella]


I touched on the rich young man in another thread, but here is the story:



Just then a man came up to [Jesus] and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?�

“Why do you ask me about what is good?� [Jesus] replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.�

“Which ones?� he inquired.

[Jesus] replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’[c] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]�

“All these I have kept,� the young man said. “What do I still lack?�

[Jesus] answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.�

When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.


Please note that the young man asked what he still still lacked. He lacked faith in Christ and His words, and he seems to have loved his wealth MORE than Christ (not that he did not love Christ and God at all, but He did not love Christ MOST). The young man obviously did not realize this until he had to choose. Then he went away sad.


My Lord gave this lesson to the young man (of whom it is said Christ loved) ONLY when pressed by that young man to know what he still lacked.


Perhaps the young man learned from that lesson. My Lord would be the one who knows.


So this was a specific lesson to a specific person (and we can learn from it as well, even though it does not necessarily have to do with wealth or possessions).



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Zzyzx]

.

That seems to be quite the loaded question. Why would anyone have to forego reasoning in order to live their life in faith?

(I will forgo the word 'religion' because faith and religion are not the same thing. So when I respond to your question, I am responding as a person of faith. I am no part of religion.)

Religious faith, as I used the term, implies organized belief.

Individual faith implies a personal belief.

Some who debate here attempt to distance themselves from organized religious belief by presenting their own version (or making it up as they go) – perhaps claiming special knowledge.

One would be better served learning from Christ, listening to and following Him, learning and showing love as He teaches us... rather than living some kind of "ascetic life" that Christ did not teach.

Is that to suggest 'learning from Christ' by communicating with him directly?

If so, any claim of ‘learning’ is unsubstantiated personal testimonial – which may be convincing among fellow believers or in Holy Huddle or TD&D sub-forums.

[tam]

Peace to you,

.

That seems to be quite the loaded question. Why would anyone have to forego reasoning in order to live their life in faith?

(I will forgo the word 'religion' because faith and religion are not the same thing. So when I respond to your question, I am responding as a person of faith. I am no part of religion.)

Religious faith, as I used the term, implies organized belief.

So what exactly is 'organized belief'? Who organizes it? How is it organized?

One would be better served learning from Christ, listening to and following Him, learning and showing love as He teaches us... rather than living some kind of "ascetic life" that Christ did not teach.

Is that to suggest 'learning from Christ' by communicating with him directly?

If so, any claim of ‘learning’ is unsubstantiated personal testimonial – which may be convincing among fellow believers or in Holy Huddle or TD&D sub-forums.

Interesting comments, considering all the blue in my previous post, as well as all the scriptural citations.


His sheep will hear and listen to His voice; that is true, and He will lead His sheep into all truth. Obviously there is no comparison or substitute for knowing Him in truth, and hearing His voice, and learning from Him.



That being said, a person would still be better served learning from Christ and following His words and example (including His teachings on love), even just in what is written, than by living an "ascetic life" that Christ did not teach.



THAT being said (because we can take this even farther), one would be far better served living according to love - than by living some kind of "ascetic life".


Love gives to those in need; love forgives; love is merciful; love does not cause harm; love does not steal or murder or commit adultery or bear false witness against anyone, etc... and there is no law against love (Galatians 5:22, 23). And, as stated in my previous post, LOVE covers over a multitude of sins (1Peter 4:8; Proverbs 10:12). Not an "ascetic life".





Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Zzyzx]

.

Religious faith, as I used the term, implies organized belief.

So what exactly is 'organized belief'? Who organizes it? How is it organized?

Beginning a long time ago people known as shaman or preachers convinced others that they knew about invisible, undetectable, supernatural entities – often claiming direct communication with ‘gods’. They found that they could convince ‘followers’ to do all sorts of irrational things (such as sacrificing children) ‘in the name of god’.

With the passage of time the system was formalized into what became known as religions – which often competed with one another for influence and wealth. There are presently about four thousand different religions among humans – each of which seems to think it is the only TRUE religion.

Some individuals borrow beliefs from organized religions and modify them for personal use -- then attempt to distance themselves from the origin of their belief.

[Jagella]

Please note that the young man asked what he still still lacked. He lacked faith in Christ and His words, and he seems to have loved his wealth MORE than Christ (not that he did not love Christ and God at all, but He did not love Christ MOST). The young man obviously did not realize this until he had to choose. Then he went away sad.

Yes, the man lacked something to get to heaven. Christ did not answer: "You lack faith in me and my words." Tam, you made that up. The answer I posted earlier from Matthew 19:21 (NRSV) was actually:

If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.

Yes, the "young man" may have loved his wealth more than Christ. (And who can blame him?) But that's only peripheral to what Christ is quoted as saying to him. Christ told the guy to sell his possessions. That's asceticism.

[Jagella]

Beginning a long time ago people known as shaman or preachers convinced others that they knew about invisible, undetectable, supernatural entities – often claiming direct communication with ‘gods’.

Under that definition, Tam would qualify as a shaman. She is convinced that she knows Christ personally--face-to-face. She speaks to him, and he speaks to her.

There is nothing new under the sun!

[Danmark]

.
“Wouldn’t it be easier and more logical to forego reasoning altogether and instead live out your life steeped in religious faith in the hope of eternal life after death?� (Vitaly Malkin “Dangerous Illusions�).

Earthly life is only an eye-blink compared to eternity. So, isn’t a purely / exclusively / ascetic religious life the only rational way to live if one actually believes and trusts the eternity promise?

I think you are on to something here and Tam's example of the story of the Rich Young Ruler is spot on. I was going to start a new thread on what might be a related topic, but was having trouble articulating it.

The thought was that the battle between religionists and unbelievers might be more about what is most important to them, rather than mere belief. After all, what one believes may not be a matter of choice or will. We should focus on what one WANTS to believe.

i'd love to believe in the idea of heaven, of eternal paradise. Even the hedonist should aspire to realize such a reality. I agree with the premise of this thread, that if one so believes, he and she should pick up their crosses and follow Jesus to paradise, forsaking Earthly pleasures.

Instead what we see most often from self nominated 'Christians' is instruction and preaching. Rather than follow Jesus prime teaching and helping the poor, being anti abortion and anti gay seem to be their prime public concerns. I see little about taking all your worldly goods, giving them to the poor, and following Jesus.

[2ndRateMind]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

This is, of course, Pascal's wager. He thought it worth betting on God existing, and granting eternal bliss to believers, since one risks very little (give or take a few fleeting pleasures) to maybe gain a great deal.

My own feeling is that a religious, faith-fuelled life need not even be ascetic. In fact, I think it better to fully engage with all that life has to offer, than retreat from it as a coward flees the battle-field. When God created the world, according to scripture, He saw that it was good. Ascetism rejects that goodness, which seems a somewhat ungrateful attitude to express in response to His providence.

Furthermore, there are clearly evils in the world that need defeating, and wrongs that need righting. I am not sure the ascetic contributes in any way to those tasks, which is a shame, because participating in the cosmic war between good and evil is how we grow in spiritual stature. And it is my belief that spiritual stature, or the lack of it, is what is rewarded or punished by a just God.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[2ndRateMind]

Instead what we see most often from self nominated 'Christians' is instruction and preaching. Rather than follow Jesus prime teaching and helping the poor, being anti abortion and anti gay seem to be their prime public concerns. I see little about taking all your worldly goods, giving them to the poor, and following Jesus.

Indeed. One might even suppose, uncharitably, that the very reason these topics come to the head of the conservative agenda is that they require no sacrifice of them. These issues allow one to appear pious, without actually making any personal commitment, or troubling the most sensitive part of a conservative anatomy; the wallet.

But we cannot out-manoeuvre God's inexorable justice, and the first shall be last, and the last, first. Jesus promised us this, and I trust in that promise.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Don McIntosh]

.
“Wouldn’t it be easier and more logical to forego reasoning altogether and instead live out your life steeped in religious faith in the hope of eternal life after death?� (Vitaly Malkin “Dangerous Illusions�).

Earthly life is only an eye-blink compared to eternity. So, isn’t a purely / exclusively / ascetic religious life the only rational way to live if one actually believes and trusts the eternity promise?

No. First, in this scenario my basis for choosing a life of naked irrationality would itself be a reason (something akin to Pascal's Wager). But to reason that reason itself is worthless would be incoherent. I could not do things that are incoherent even if I tried.

Second, asceticism is, despite appearances, really too easy. Essentially you make one very difficult decision (to abandon all worldly attachments), and then spend the rest of your life, alone or among like-minded ascetics, quietly waiting for your earthly life to end. The life of genuine discipleship is more challenging than that. It involves ongoing tasks like working an honest living and paying taxes, giving to the poor, preaching to the unconverted, interacting with (and suffering at the hands of) hostile and difficult people, and forgiving those same people.

Third, a "purely" ascetic life would be impossible. So instead of fasting occasionally or periodically from food and water, to be purely self-denying I would fast always from food and water. But then I would be dead within a few days. Now you could argue that this is precisely what pure asceticism would entail. To that I would answer that Jesus himself, who ate and drank often enough to live a relatively healthy (and joyful) life before he was executed, was clearly not a pure ascetic, and therefore pure asceticism is not the highest expression of Christian discipleship.