Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Can faith alone ever be sufficient? [View all]
Since Adam and Eve, God as the Christian Faith understands him, has manifested himself to man. Moses with the burning bush and the ten commandments, Noah with the instruction to build a huge boat, Isiah and Ezekiel to name but a few from the Old Testament all had visitations. How about Paul and the road to Damascus? Or Patrick, the banisher of snakes from the Emerald Isle, who heard God speak to him at the tender age of sixteen. We have the Prophet Muhammad, who was visited by Gabriel on behalf of God in 610.
Throughout history we have well known examples of people who affected change because of their belief that God had spoken to them. Movements were raised, religions were born. Think Joan of Arc or Joseph Smith, or Jim Jones, or the Branch Davidians. (Of course, we also have as examples, every Republican Presidential candidate in modern times).
For some the messages from God have been positive and have had a positive impact, for others those messages have given the receiver of such blessing carte blanch to commit murder, genocide, rape and every other horror that man can reign on man. As a result of this one does have to question the veracity of those who claim that God commanded or directed them in a certain path. Conflicting messages from Saints, Prophets and those accused of being charlatans would lead one to suspect that the voice inside said heads may not be holy in nature. If you truly believe that God talks to you or to anyone within your belief structures how do you reconcile the conflicting nature of Gods messages? Say God had a chat with you tonight and commanded you to undertake a certain task. Would you accept that as a miracle of faith and do as God has commanded, or would you want something a tad more concrete? How do you determine that is not just a delusion or mental illness? What if you were commanded to undertake an immoral act? After all, plenty of people over the centuries have committed hugely immoral acts on the say so of their chosen God. If God came to you tonight and asked you to sacrifice a child, would you?
How about he came to you and declared Soph as his new prophet, would you accept my teachings? Or if I declared God had spoken to and revealed the truth to me and all must follow me or risk eternal damnation, would you? Or would you ask God for proof? Or go to the head doctor for a serious examination of your mental health or send me to the head doctor for a serious examination of my mental health? What makes you believe that God spoke to Peter, or Paul, or Moses, or Abraham, but could not have spoken to Mohammed? How do you determine which people are telling the truth about their visit from God and which are not? What proof to do you require that it is the word of God and not the word of Man? Can faith alone ever really be sufficient?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
81 replies, 5724 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
81 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
in general, we are not rational creatures. So no reasoned argument penetrates faith.
marylandblue
Apr 2019
#4
Most can distinguish between a logical versus a very emotional argument.
Bretton Garcia
Apr 2019
#30
A lot of the needs we call rational are based in our organic nature or social matrix.
marylandblue
Apr 2019
#61
Apparently it means substituting cigarettes donuts and bad coffee for alcohol,
Voltaire2
Apr 2019
#44
You just don't like the religious origin and formulation, so I'll give you a non-religious one.
marylandblue
Apr 2019
#46
Just pointing out that the serene passivity of 12 step programs is an evidential failure
Voltaire2
Apr 2019
#49
Yep. They usually just gloss over what they don't understand. Too bad. The parables are fabulous!
Karadeniz
Apr 2019
#75
Conclusion: faith alone is never enough. We need reason, science, even more.
Bretton Garcia
Apr 2019
#58
An answer to Guil, and the alleged inevitability of faith, belief, even for rationalists
Bretton Garcia
Apr 2019
#70
Gil relies heavily on imprecise meanings of words without providing definitions
marylandblue
Apr 2019
#73