|
Post by Jesse Morrell on May 4, 2006 17:09:31 GMT -5
I've been pondering the question as to when and how belief in God comes about. Is the belief in God an inescapable revelation that the Lord gives to all of His creation, a fact that He has made so abundantly clear that all men are without excuse for their unbelief. Or does belief in God come after birth by means of reason and knowledge?
In the view that all men are born with an unescapable belief in God through revelation, the unbelievers would be criminals because of their supression of the truth that they abundantly have.
But in the view that men come to believe in God through rational knowledge later in life, the unbeliever would be a mere victim of circumstance who hasn't yet come across the knowledge that would make him believe in God. For example, if he grew up in an unbelieving home. Until he later recieved the knowledge of the truth through means of reason and evidence and yet choose to deny this truth anyways.
If men are born with the inescapable knowledge of God and His Law, then the sinner is a criminal who needs to be confonted and rebuked in his unwillingness, having the knowledge of God but not glorifying Him as God, having the truth yet supressing it in unrighteousness.
But if belief in God is gained after birth through rationally examining the evidence, recieving knowledge he had not yet recieved or had come across, then a preacher is not one who rebukes the unwilling but more of one who educates the mere ignorant.
In which case God sends people to hell for ignorance or lack of knowledge or evidence rather then for knowledgeable unwillingness to obey the truth they already had.
Feedback?
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 4, 2006 17:47:39 GMT -5
romans one. good stuff, and actually one of the only passages that has me convinced that christianity is a good track to be on. everything else is kinda so-so... moving on.. sin is the 'x' factor here, in my opinion, because if the truth was so revealed to mankind then faith would...well...to put it in laymen's terms...wouldn't be faith. ugh, or maybe this means that faith is the 'x' factor...i was never good at math. so, while i agree that the truth is possibly there in great abundance, sin cloaks it, and this means that men are required to put their faith in god. now, where faith begins...i do not know...maybe it depends on the individual, because i imagine each individual's relationship with god is different.
an objective opinion from an agnostic putting his christian thinking hat-on, dmclayton
p.s. i think my tags are a lot mor informative than your usual, "sincerely." hah.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on May 4, 2006 17:56:54 GMT -5
Faith is not blind in the respect that faith comes in when reason cannot. Faith is simply believing the believable, not believing the unbelievable.
For example, a godly man who has a godly wife are married. The more that the man learns about his wife, the more "faith" he ought to have in her. Faith in this sense is trust. And that is saving faith, when a man puts his trust in Jesus Christ dying on the cross. Not blind trust, but seeing trust.
But not everyone has this saving faith, though all men have belief in God. Belief and faith are two seperate things. God has made Himself and His Law abundantly clear to all men everywhere so that all men are without excuse and all men must put their faith in Christ. Without belief (belief defined as knowledge of God and His Law) there would be no need at all for faith (faith defined as trusting in Jesus Christ) because if men were in ignorance of God and His laws, there would be no sin that needs covering by having faith in Jesus Christ. So without belief I see no need for faith.
While I do appreciate your thoughts clayton, the doctrine and theology section is supposed to be meant for "in house debates" so that believers could discuss scriptural doctrine without outside interference. The world-view debate section is where believers and unbelievers can discuss issues, while the doctrine and theology section is where believers and believers can discuss issues.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on May 5, 2006 8:49:06 GMT -5
Rom 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think [of himself] more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
I have heard some interpret this as meaning that every person has faith. The question is what is that faith in. I tend to believe that. Everyone has a starting point in their thinking that they trust in.
But then there is this verse: 2Th 3:2 And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all [men] have not faith.
I see your questioning...
Hsa 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.
Vs
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Hmm... those verses actually go together. In the first verse it says they rejected knowledge. To be able to reject knowledge you would have to have it available.
I believe that each person has a "general revelation" of God. And that to suppress that it would come through an evil heart. Example: Naturally a man would think there was a Creator. I have never ran into anyone that hasn't had lots of education (I would say science, falsely so called) that is a strong believer in evolution.
I would think that a sinner deep down would have a want for there to NOT be a God to come to those conclusions. False science is would only be the 'excuse.' I heard Vance Haver say something like this once, " An excuse is only a reason (motive) wrapped up in a lie."
If you believe that each man has a 'general revelation' of God, what is that comprised of? Morality, a Creator, faith.. anything else? Or does anyone disagree with those things?
I have been thinking lately on what knowledge a sinner has of God. I think that would be an interesting study.
|
|