I think doubting your faith is natural, stagnation allows no view point to thrive. I don't know how compleately I agree with Rev. Honey, but he has some great, well put points. This is from the TED coference a while ago. There are newer videos on tons of subjects, and I'm sure Jeph will direct you to the Richard Dawkins stuff. Enjoy.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/112
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (RSS)
3 Responses to "Doubts are natural"
September 26, 2007 at 2:15 PM
First, I really enjoyed that talk. It reminds me a lot of what you and I were talking about the other day at lunch. I'm really starting to think there is something to this idea of potential goodness, whether it comes from a separate entity or from within us.
One thing I liked about what he said, and I'm not sure it was his meaning but it struck me, was the difference (and similarity) in the words faith and trust.
To me faith is kind of a blind acceptance, saying you don't know, you have no real reason to believe this way but you're going to do it anyway. Where as trust is a guided acceptance, saying you don't know, but you do have clues and hints that lead you in this direction. Perhaps that can help explain my leaning towards a trust in science over a faith in God.
Second, on the subject of doubt. A few post ago I made some comments on Matt's doubt of faith (or everything) and said that it was the opposite of faith. My response was aimed at a particular brand of faith (i.e. Christian faith, Muslim faith etc.) Now I do agree that doubt is an essential part of trust (see how that works!) in your world view. As I argued on other post, doubt is an essential part of science. And so I think that when one is shaping his or her world view their should be a considerable amount of doubt on certain opinions in order to be able to fully trust that point of view. Which seems to only make said POV stronger.
I think however the reason there are so many negative Bible verses in reference to doubt is because the dogma the book presents cannot stand up to skepticisms.
So it is important to separate as you call is Nathan, "The Character of God" from the ancient dogmatic depiction of God. And in discussions with you, you seem to be able to do this quite well, other then a few things you still choose to accept.
However to me that raises the question, how can one still call themselves Christian if they don't accept all that a Christian is suppose to accept? I guess there in lies the reason for the Protestant Revolution and the subsequent splintering apart of that part of Christianity.
But its funny to think that a Catholic, who believes in saints and sacraments and all that stuff can be lumped into the same religious group as an Assembly of God member, isn't it?
Personally that's why I stopped claiming to be a Christian long before I became an atheist, I just stopped accepting so much stuff that the Christian's taught that I couldn't be a Christian.
So that was a tangent, but back to doubt.
Doubt is important I definitely agree, but I will have to play devil's advocate from time to time on these subjects. Because I do think their comes a time where you have shaped the belief to your own liking so much (which I'm not essentially condemning) that you're not part of the same belief structure that you started off with.
Does that makes sense?
September 26, 2007 at 4:24 PM
Jeph, I think you got most of what I said on sunday and why I posted that. To adress what you said at the end, I think the doubt in the Bible is more a doubt in the existence of God, or really more the deity of Christ. I think the disticnt thing about Christianity is Christ. This is a pretty large topic, but I think that is how one can still be a Christian, but disagree with established doctrine. As long as you hold to Christ I think you still count as a Christian.
I think it is doubt that moves this point of view one. You suggested that it can change to something different(your faith that is) from the begining, but I think this is good/expected. I think the basis of what people beleive is the same, there is a God and other such basics, it is just the acting out that changes.
I hope that made some sense.
September 26, 2007 at 5:51 PM
i am very intrigued by the idea of faith vs trust. i hadn't thought about the different before, but i think exploring that could go a LONG way towards making arguments more cogent. hm.
Post a Comment