|December 22nd, 2005, 09:30 AM||#101|
web wheeling, hard.
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
That is why it is called Faith, BECAUSE you cannot touch or see it. I can see why that is difficult to do, but when you grant that faith, it opens up so much that you cannot see now.
|December 22nd, 2005, 09:39 AM||#102|
Catch the wave
Join Date: 11-08-05
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
j/k :tonka: I hope you aren't stating that you fully understand the intracacies of particle physics, to biochemistry, to, etc, etc, etc... the way I see it, there are roughly thousands of scientsts over the years.
there are literally hundreds of millions of people that have experienced and been touched by faith. by following logic, it's almost illogical to follow the scientists :p
I understand your points - as thinking, rational men, especially our gender it seems, we want to fully graps, understand and just know.
I took it up on myself to step back. To look at things from the other side.
I've also come to grips with the fact, that I can't just know, or fully understand, so I'm ok with having a personal leap of faith.
it was pointed out, that organized religion has done some shenanigans that has hurt it's credability. science has too, but that's not the point. The very earliest of bible manuscripts, written by the very people who lived/experienced the events that they have put down in ink.
they are roughly 99% contextually accurate to the roughly 20,000 known manucripts from ancient times. I'm wandering here in the argument, but the point is. yes, people, such as the terrorists on 9/11 have been known to die for their beliefs - as in a belief.
but, have you ever known someone willing to die for a known false belief? Those men, in 1-50 AD that penned the earliest books of the new testament. they put down what they honestly felt that they had experienced.
literally thousands of people being fed from nothing, as an example. Was this a mass illusion?
Now, also keep in mind. The Jews from that period were very well known historians. They disagreed that Jesus was the son of man, but they never ever really disputed the depictions of what transpired back then - even the seemingly legendary accounts.
Why is that? They had plenty of opportunity, even back in the very early days of the bible, and the word was spreading so rapidly. Which is another amazing thing to consider. This new religion, the practice of which meant DEATH in horrible ways for many that practiced/preached it spread faster than the plague, and crossed demographic profiles.
For me, a little bit of faith in science, along with a relatively recently found faith in spirtuality co-exists harmoniously in my mind, heart, and soul.
Are there still difficult questions in my mind? Absolutely. Are there some serious implications that can be derived from christain beliefs, that I'm not completely at ease with? Yes.
But mostly they exist harmoniously in my own personal belief system.
I don't preach it.
I don't condemn those that disagree.
I only try to explain how I arrived where I'm at to those that ask. (participating in this thread is tantamount to asking IMHO)