Christian Faith

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

In the Lord’s prayer we ask God to give us the bread we need for the day. Not what we need for tomorrow but just for the day, this day, with no thought for the future since like today, it too will be in God’s hands when the time comes.

We are to trust in God to provide. This is the faith the Lord’s prayer implies and it is not a faith in the truth of propositions (like ‘God exists’ or ‘Noah built an arc’) as so many misguided Christians maintain or turn to when in a bind. It is not even faith in the truth of the proposition ‘God provides’, which is indeed a faith of sorts, but of a different order than the Christian faith I speak of… One can have faith in the proposition ‘God provides’ while not actually trusting in God to provide.

To truly trust in God is to play a game whose stakes are far higher than any game which involves a faith in the truth of propositions. Christian faith is exhibited in the practical realm of living life, when life puts itself in God’s hands. So while many say “God provides” while attesting to their faith in this theory, most of these say so while working to ensure their daily bread, and not only today’s bread but tomorrow’s as well.

These ones don’t have Christian faith, which is a practical faith where life itself is on the line. Christian faith is like the faith a child has in their parent, which is a faith that requires no statements whose accuracy can be challenged, but rather the simple but oh-so-difficult relinquishing of care. Christian faith is a faith that often goes unspoken or that is even unconscious, but blessed indeed are the little ones whose well-placed trust enables a life of play!

But doesn’t Christian faith, which is trusting in God to provide what is needed, imply a truth? Not an absolute truth, no, but a truth that’s made true by well placed trust? Isn’t the essence of all truth being trustworthy, in the sense that the truth is true because those who place their trust in it find it consistently dependable?

God is indeed the truth implied by Christian faith, and the essence of this truth is to be dependable. God is a practical truth whose trustworthiness is demonstrated in practice, where the practice of placing trust in God proves time and again to be sound practice.

But this is only half the story. Jesus says “I am the truth, the way, and the life” so that we are not only to depend on Him but follow Him, as if trusting in His providence is not enough and more than this we must make His way our way…

Each of us sets our own way, and in doing so we make true the way that we set (it becomes an undeniable event in the course of history). In other words there is a truth that is true because experience has shown it to be trustworthy, and there is a truth that is true because we make it true through the life that we live. In Christ these truths converge.

In other words, the truth that Christ makes true through the life that Christ lives is the truth that, in its making, confirms its own trustworthiness by providing for those who place their trust in it.

Christian faith then is not as simple as earlier made out, when it was likened to a child’s faith in their parent. This much is true; but more than trusting in God to provide, Christian faith is having enough conviction to make true the trustworthy truth that God is, just as Christ does…

In fact I would say this is the essence of Christian faith: to make true the life God shows us, the life that is dependable and that others are right to place their trust in. In other words, we can depend on God because God makes true the dependable life. IMO this is precisely what anyone with Christian faith does.

2

Note: The tendency of Christian thinking has been to couple ‘trust in God’ with an omnipotent, master planner God that will inevitably demonstrate in history how well placed our trust is. Such thinking suggests our trust in God follows from the fact that God is all powerful and good and is directing events toward total salvation. I want nothing to do with this ill-fated coupling but would rather have ‘trust in God’ follow from a world of creatures following God’s dependable ways, so that ‘being dependable’ is the real essence of Christian faith (and the means to salvation), not believing in God’s masterful direction or other such nonsense.

3

alyoshka, are you reaching some epiphanies or are you refining some of your original thoughts of when posting here?

4

No epiphanies. I just want to get to the crux of Christian faith and/or the nature of God’s truth…

What is Christian faith? How do we separate it from other faiths so that it can be clearly identifed as Christian? What is the essence of being Christian? I still contend that it is consistently applying love in our lives, but I’m curious what others think. So many people are against Christianity (or religion), but I feel this term is lacking in meaning and that quite possibly people have misguided aggressions against it…

5

Christian faith is that which believes God gave mankind Jesus as their redemptor for their sins.

By following the Bible that contains the Old and New Testament, then try to fllow Jesus’ Tenets.

Showing love to their brothers and sisters by sharing the Word of God.

I think this is due to people who misrepresented God for their own designs. When God’s Word is distorted for man’s gain or power, this surely will Him in a bad light.

6

What is the practical value of this? We can sin knowing our sins are absolved in Jesus Christ? Doesn’t this give us license to sin, or to at least neglect seeking our own redemption if we do?

How do you reconcile God’s love with God giving his son to pay off our debts? How is it that Jesus’ blood pays for our debts? What if I was robbed and beaten; am I to accept Jesus’ blood as repayment/covering my losses? If so, I can’t possibly accept that…

What about Jesus telling us not to worry, that we are to trust in God to provide what is needed? Does this faith have anything to do with the Christian faith you speak of?

I know I’ve asked you these or similar questions before, but perhaps I wasn’t phrasing them properly. It seems to me that you’re reducing Christian faith here to faith in a proposition, and in my opinion Christian faith can’t be as easy as believing a statement to be true. Christian faith must have higher stakes than this… To me having Christian faith means you’re “all in”, so to speak, so that the practical significance of it couldn’t be greater… I don’t get the same sense here… Or rather, I’d like to know what this faith of yours means in practical terms…

7

Actually, there are schools of theology, among them the Victorines and Franciscans who will argue that the incarnation would have happened regardless of original sin, as the event in which God reveals himself to man in order to come more fully into union with creation.

It is largely the protestant view which upholds original sin as the reason for the incarnation, working from the premise that the material world is corrupted, evil, or not in the communion of God’s grace. The aforementioned thought of the Victorines and Franciscans contend that while creation may be fallen, it is nevertheless essentially good, inasmuch as it bears the mark of its creator, which no sin can erase or undo.

As to the OP, I read this yesterday and decided to hold off posting until some more replies came in, but it sounds pleasantly close to a Kierkegaardian stance on what it means to be Christian, which is focused more on the idea of becoming Christian (living as one) rather than dogmatic tenets or specific beliefs. A corollary would be Paul Tillich’s idea of ‘ultimate desire,’ meaning that towards which we direct all our love, trust, and energy is that which we identify as God, and only God himself is worthy of being an ultimate desire. However, what it means to place God as one’s ultimate desire is undefined, and only in the act of desiring God ultimately can one learn what it means. Or something like that. I need to revisit Tillich sometime soon :slight_smile:

8

Qzxtvbzr,

Yes, Kierkegaardian for sure…

I’ve never studied or even read Tillich, but you (sort of) raise something that has been on my mind. For example, you say that Tillich’s thinking is that God is to be our ultimate desire, love, truth, etc, and I can see this in Jesus’ teachings, i.e., Jesus says we are to love God first, and that second to this we are to love others…

If I could though, I’d like to look at a more specific event that I think ties into this thinking (which, if I could express it loosely, suggests that ‘all roads should lead to God’ and conversely that ‘all good things come from God’…). When Jesus is on the cross, he doesn’t forgive his executioners but rather he asks God to forgive them, as if forgiveness can only come from God while Jesus, or every poor existing individual for that matter, has no forgiving power in itself.

I’ve never understood the mechanics of this… I know Liteninbolt and many others would just call it a matter of faith, but given my inclinations, as I’m sure you’ll understand, I can’t accept this answer.

It seems to me that God is a character type, a loving character, so in truth if there is forgiveness it must come through God (since only if we’ve adopted God’s loving character would we be forgiving at all). But if this is so, I don’t see why Jesus asks God to forgive, as if forgiveness lies outside his power… It seems to me the forgiveness must come from him, for it is rooted in his decision to live a life of love… It’s almost as if incarnation is a myth and God remains a separate being, forever aloof from earthly affairs, who we can pray to and ask favours from but that’s it…

Sorry if this isn’t making much sense, but to me incarnation is when we decide to follow God, so that God’s loving ways are manifest in us. Christ is the perfect example of this. But if it’s ultimately our decision, as I think it is, I don’t see why forgiveness is seemingly outside our power…

I think that all forgiveness goes through God, but I also think that it is ultimately our decision whether forgiveness is granted (which is to say whether we adopt God’s loving ways and forgive). As such I can’t understand why Jesus asks God to forgive his executioners, as if only God has this power and God remains separate from Jesus…

9

I suppose none if don’t accept Jesus as your Saviour.

We should try to live as a child of God and try not to sin. If we tempt God and sin recklessly without remorse, God more than likely will knock us back on our heels so that we may highly regret our actions. God knows our hearts and deal with us if we take advantage wiith our transgressions.

It is not for man to reconcile. This was a gift from Him and Jesus knew the price for His Sacrifice.

Jesus had to live and die in the flesh, then rise in the Spirit in the act of being Sanctified in order to take on the sins of the world.

God and Jesus’ Kingdom is not of this world. Material things do not apply for Jesus’ Sacrifice. This was intended for the afterlife we spend in eternity with God.

Exactly. Jesus did not have to labor for His sustenance. He knew that God, The Father would provide for His needs. Just as in “The Sermon on the Mount”. There was a multitude of people wanting to listen to the Words of The Lord. His Disciples explained to Jesus that the people needed feeding, so He told them to take the few loaves of bread and fish and pass it out to the crowd. As they did the food increased in amount so that it fed everyone there. A miracle performed right before all of their eyes. Faith was the basis of that wonderful event.

Faith is to believe that God is The Truth where human logic can not explain. God makes His Presence known all the. We just have to look and listen. Being ‘all in’ isn’t a struggle when God is with you in Spirit. Once I let my faith in God came to fruition, I felt His Love help me understand the value of being one of His children. He touches my heart, increases my compassion, tempers my wisdon In is teachings so that I may be a testament to His Works. Jesus is the proof to the prophecies in The Old Testament to fulfill The Truth. That was what He told Pontious Pilate while being put on trial. He was testifying to The Truth.

10

It doesn’t surprise me that different sects of the Christian faith has altered conclusions concerning the fall Adam and Eve. Interpretive redress usually amounts to a sect bending with a human eye for doctrinal consideration. Most denominations vary in their view of ritual affectations. It is my understanding that the early Catholic Church removed some of the Books of the Bible to suit theirn doctrinal beliefs. Moral relativism in my opinion is a tool of satan to divide people in their belief in God. For my part, if a religion promotes Jesus as a Saviour for mankind and is the ultimate intercessor between God and man, I can find no fault in it.

11

It doesn’t much matter what the practical value is.
The identifier is exactly what Liten said regardless if that identifier is personally useful to you or not.

A) “What is a mystery?”

B) “That which is not fully understood or that baffles or eludes the understanding”

A) “What is the practical value of this?”

um…I guess none for yourself if you are asking.