Leaps of Faith

[andrewducker]

Reading an argument elsewhere on the net which had the following chain of logic:

1) For reasons X, Y and Z it seems likely to me that the universe was created and watched over by divine providence.
2) Therefore I am a Christian.

In fact, there's a fair amount of discussion online over whether there are supernatural elements involved in the world - creationism vs evolution being one example.  But I don't remember bumping into _any_ reasoning for why this leads inexorably (or even vaguely) to Christianity (or Islam, Buddhism or rooster worship).

Comments

[red-cloud.livejournal.com]

You were expecting logic? :-)

[andrewducker]

Not really, but it interests me that nearly all the argument rests on stage 1, not stage 2.

[red-cloud.livejournal.com]

It's a perfect example of begging the question (or circular reasoning, if you prefer).

It goes something like this: "There is lots of evidence that the world was created by a supernatural being. And, because I am a Christian, this must be the Christian God. Therefore, I am a Christian."

Or, more succinctly: I am a Christian, therefore I am a Christian. QED.

[xquiq.livejournal.com]

Oh but it obviously leads to Christianity, becaues the bible says it's the divine word of God, therefore it's the divine word of God, therefore I am a Christian, because the bible is the divine word of God. I believe the bible is the divine word of God because I'm a Christian and the bible says........*boom*

;-)

(In case it's not obvious, I'm not actually a Christian, although I'm a recovering Catholic ;)

[andrewducker]

I hear you never really recover fully :->

[missedith01.livejournal.com]

Surely if you accept argument (1) then you become A Consumer and (2) becomes a question of choosing your divine providence according to whatever criteria seems most important ... colour, availability, extras, packaging, price/weight ratio, etc.

[nickys.livejournal.com]

It's an all too common case of faulty logic.

Have you heard the argument about Free Will vs God's purpose being beyond human comprehension?

[andrewducker]

Nope - enlighten/amuse me...

[nickys.livejournal.com]

Okay - God gave us free will so that we can make moral choices, okay? But God also arranged things so his purpose is inherently beyond our understanding.
So, given that we don't know what's really going on (and are specifically informed that no matter how hard we try that we'll never find out what's really going on) how can we possibly make valid choices?

[andrewducker]

Similarly:

Some people say that they've been moved by the spirit of God - they've felt his power/presence. This is why they believe.

I've never felt this. And presumably I've never felt it because God doesn't want me to.

So my lack of belief is in fact God's fault.

[nickys.livejournal.com]

> So my lack of belief is in fact God's fault.

According to certain evangelists: it's not God's fault if you were doing the spiritual equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and going "Lalalalala" - such as, for example, corrupting your body with alcohol and loose women when you should have been in church... :-)

[adders.livejournal.com]

But I don't remember bumping into _any_ reasoning for why this leads inexorably (or even vaguely) to Christianity (or Islam, Buddhism or rooster worship).

If it did, we wouldn't need faith to belive in God. You cannot conclusively prove that God exists. I have personal, subjective experience that God exists, which allows my to have faith that he does. But if there was an inexorable proof of His existence, there would be even more religious people than there are already....

[andrewducker]

I have personal, subjective experience that God exists, which allows my to have faith that he does.

So if I _don't_ have personal subjective experience then my lack of faith is more understandable?

[dragonscholar.livejournal.com]

This is what I call a "default argument." The default cultural assumption is Christianity is right.

As I've noted, having fun with "Intelligent Design" types - if we show intelligent creation, what proof is that of God? It's at best proof of a creator (and still can a creation comprehend its creation?).

[moniqueleigh]

Ah, yes, one of my favorite circular arguments. Heh. Gotta love the Christian default, huh?

Personally? I do believe in 1), but that doesn't necessarily lead to the Christian God. To me, it leads simply to belief in a creator (or creators, whatever). This is open to interpretation, & everybody is free to believe or not as they choose. *shrug*

[adders.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. It's a fairly important part of Christian belief that God doesn't often force his way into people's lives - they have to go looking for him. There's a famous painting of Christ standing outside a door, gently knocking. The subtle point is that there is no handle on his side of the door - it's only on the inside.

[andrewducker]

I've got about as open a mind as you can have without the wind whistling between my ears. I've been searching for truth all my life. I've explored both the outside world and the inside of my head in quite some detail (and still do).

I am listening.

I haven't heard anything yet.

[adders.livejournal.com]

There's a difference between listening and looking. Took me a long time to figure that one out.