Christianity & Other Religions

[Jmd96]

Happy lenten season to all,

In brief, I am a theologically Catholic teenager raised in a Protestant home. My inner conversion came several years ago, based on arguments on the inconsitencies of Sola Scriptura, the blatant Catholicity of the Early Church Fathers, biblical evidence for Catholic doctrines, and others. Because of this, I’ve felt that I’m pretty open-minded with my beliefs, following the evidence wherever it leads.

Recently, though, one thing has irked me.

I have always held Christianity as an assumption. It’s the religion in which I was raised, and I have no objective reason to be Christian as opposed to Muslim, Jewish, Baha’i, etc.

I consider myself well-versed in Christian apologetics. I could refute most objections to Christianity. But I’ve never considered that the objector may be correct, I’ve simply found arguments to support Christianity because I already accepted it.

(As an aside, my skepticism does not encompass theism. I find Pascal’s Wager powerful for basic theism, and I tend to view God as a properly basic belief, as Plantinga argues. It also helps that I find cosmological and moral arguments for God’s existence compelling.)

I’m wondering if anyone has experienced the same doubts, and if they could give me some advice. I’m sure non-Christians reading this are probably rolling their eyes, thinking “Just objectively evaluate every religion and make your choice.” But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true. Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. To think that something else is true is scary.

Sorry for the rambling and God bless,

 

[chazcheh]

Im with you to a degree. It is important to keep an open mind and truly learn the basis of every other religion to truly understand what their core beliefs are and how they began. I think all religions have similar themes of morality but I can not go past the idea that Christianity fits into the whole scheme of things related to the world, its existence, human existence, the respect for mankind, the signs we have received through Jesus Christ himself and through the saints, the PURE LOVE preached through our faith, the pure love and knowledge shown through Jesus Christ, and especially how it has been transmitted through the world today.

There is still the idea that sits at the back of my mind that says maybe I believe this because I truly want this to be real,but looking back at history, philosophy and science, it all coincides well with the catholic faith.

Well thats my thought any way.

Like Padre Pio Said: ‘Pray Pray Pray and Dont worry’. God will lead you in the right direction!

 

[inocente]

My five cents. All long-lasting religions must contain truth with value to people, otherwise they wouldn’t be long-lasting. Since truth cannot contradict truth, those religions must contain the same core truths. To find those truths, the principle would be to focus on what is common rather than on what separates.

 

[Dave_B]

I have no objective reason to be Christian as opposed to Muslim, Jewish, Baha’i, etc.

Other religions are our attempt to reach God, whereas ours is God reaching out to us.

 

[JRKH]

I don’t have a lot to offer…but will give my thoughts for whatever they are worth…

It is true that the faith we are raised in (whatever faith that might be) gives us great comfort. There is a familiarity about it that means we don’t have to “try as hard”.

Doubts will come - they must - for as we grow older and our childish view is challenged - we feel we need to have proper answers. Tough to do when dealing with something as large and mysterious as the Creator of the Universe.

Doubts don’t have to be evil, nasty things. They can help one to grow in faith.

My journey also took me into looking at other faith systems and so forth during the years that I was away from the Catholic faith of my childhood.
Nothing deep or particularly “serious”, but more of a curiosity.

As I looked at these other faiths (mainly far eastern types) I noted the many similarities between them and Catholicism. How they took “Love” as the core value, just as Christianity does. How they emphasized quiet, contemplation, reason and a reaching out to God in open childlike humility.

Looking at these, very peaceful, very contemplative, very loving, very giving belief systems, I felt a great brotherly affection for them - and yet - there seemed to be something missing. Some sort of “Key” was missing.

That key was Christ. Many “gurus” and “teachers” existed, but none had accomplished what Christ had. None had managed that last full measure. Lived a life so perfectly in tune with the Father as to overcome even physical death.
As beautiful, fulfilling and close to the kingdom, as these other belief systems are, it is right here in Christ that we find the one perfected example of Godly, Loving life.

Strip away all of the “church”, the “denominational”, the “doctrinal” differences, and the base and core of Christianity is Love. This is what Christ teaches. This is what we are to believe. This is what Paul tells us is greater than faith or hope. This is what St John tells us God IS.
So embrace Love as the core of our faith.
Embrace Christ as the perfected example and first fruits of the perfected life of Love.
Do this and, no matter what else you look at, no matter what differences or similarities you might find, you will always come back to Christianity - and His Catholic Church.

Peace
James

 

[Stumblesalot]

Happy lenten season to all,

In brief, I am a theologically Catholic teenager raised in a Protestant home. My inner conversion came several years ago, based on arguments on the inconsitencies of Sola Scriptura, the blatant Catholicity of the Early Church Fathers, biblical evidence for Catholic doctrines, and others. Because of this, I’ve felt that I’m pretty open-minded with my beliefs, following the evidence wherever it leads.

Recently, though, one thing has irked me.

I have always held Christianity as an assumption. It’s the religion in which I was raised, and I have no objective reason to be Christian as opposed to Muslim, Jewish, Baha’i, etc.

I consider myself well-versed in Christian apologetics. I could refute most objections to Christianity. But I’ve never considered that the objector may be correct, I’ve simply found arguments to support Christianity because I already accepted it.

(As an aside, my skepticism does not encompass theism. I find Pascal’s Wager powerful for basic theism, and I tend to view God as a properly basic belief, as Plantinga argues. It also helps that I find cosmological and moral arguments for God’s existence compelling.)

I’m wondering if anyone has experienced the same doubts, and if they could give me some advice. I’m sure non-Christians reading this are probably rolling their eyes, thinking “Just objectively evaluate every religion and make your choice.” But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true. Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. To think that something else is true is scary.

Sorry for the rambling and God bless,

Hi,

I had similar thoughts a while back. Had I been systematically ‘mentally conditioned’ into believing there was a God and, if so, was the Catholic teaching the true faith. I took a step back, a deep breath and considered the evidence. My conclusions were:

1)Yes, there is a God, and it IS the Holy Trinity
2)Yes, the Catholic faith IS the true faith

You already appear to be aware that the Catholic philosophy is flawless; this is because it was not constructed by men, but by God incarnate. My advice would be to have faith, take a deep breath and examine the evidence. This examination of evidence will only strengthen your faith in the Catholic Church.

God bless

 

[danserr]

Happy lenten season to all,

In brief, I am a theologically Catholic teenager raised in a Protestant home. My inner conversion came several years ago, based on arguments on the inconsitencies of Sola Scriptura, the blatant Catholicity of the Early Church Fathers, biblical evidence for Catholic doctrines, and others. Because of this, I’ve felt that I’m pretty open-minded with my beliefs, following the evidence wherever it leads.

Recently, though, one thing has irked me.

I have always held Christianity as an assumption. It’s the religion in which I was raised, and I have no objective reason to be Christian as opposed to Muslim, Jewish, Baha’i, etc.

I consider myself well-versed in Christian apologetics. I could refute most objections to Christianity. But I’ve never considered that the objector may be correct, I’ve simply found arguments to support Christianity because I already accepted it.

(As an aside, my skepticism does not encompass theism. I find Pascal’s Wager powerful for basic theism, and I tend to view God as a properly basic belief, as Plantinga argues. It also helps that I find cosmological and moral arguments for God’s existence compelling.)

I’m wondering if anyone has experienced the same doubts, and if they could give me some advice. I’m sure non-Christians reading this are probably rolling their eyes, thinking “Just objectively evaluate every religion and make your choice.” But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true. Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. To think that something else is true is scary.

Sorry for the rambling and God bless,

This question comes up from time to time. One way that we know that Christianity is true as opposed to other religions is by historical evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus.

I’ve heard suggested as one of the best books available today:
Michael Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus

At the more popular level:
Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ
William Lane Craig, The Son Rises

Craig also has a website, reasonable faith, at which you can find pop level articles on the resurrection.

The Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft also has some consideration of the Resurrection at his own website.

 

[cjforJesus]

I don’t have a lot to offer…but will give my thoughts for whatever they are worth…

It is true that the faith we are raised in (whatever faith that might be) gives us great comfort. There is a familiarity about it that means we don’t have to “try as hard”.

Doubts will come - they must - for as we grow older and our childish view is challenged - we feel we need to have proper answers. Tough to do when dealing with something as large and mysterious as the Creator of the Universe.

Doubts don’t have to be evil, nasty things. They can help one to grow in faith.

My journey also took me into looking at other faith systems and so forth during the years that I was away from the Catholic faith of my childhood.
Nothing deep or particularly “serious”, but more of a curiosity.

As I looked at these other faiths (mainly far eastern types) I noted the many similarities between them and Catholicism. How they took “Love” as the core value, just as Christianity does. How they emphasized quiet, contemplation, reason and a reaching out to God in open childlike humility.

Looking at these, very peaceful, very contemplative, very loving, very giving belief systems, I felt a great brotherly affection for them - and yet - there seemed to be something missing. Some sort of “Key” was missing.

That key was Christ. Many “gurus” and “teachers” existed, but none had accomplished what Christ had. None had managed that last full measure. Lived a life so perfectly in tune with the Father as to overcome even physical death.
As beautiful, fulfilling and close to the kingdom, as these other belief systems are, it is right here in Christ that we find the one perfected example of Godly, Loving life.

Strip away all of the “church”, the “denominational”, the “doctrinal” differences, and the base and core of Christianity is Love. This is what Christ teaches. This is what we are to believe. This is what Paul tells us is greater than faith or hope. This is what St John tells us God IS.
So embrace Love as the core of our faith.
Embrace Christ as the perfected example and first fruits of the perfected life of Love.
Do this and, no matter what else you look at, no matter what differences or similarities you might find, you will always come back to Christianity - and His Catholic Church.

Peace
James

James you still seem to carry some of the eastern philosophy you have studied. The core of thier beliefs is pantheistic.Yes they preach love,but many also preach demonic doctrines such as kundalini and reincarnation.

Jesus is more than just a perfect example! He is God in the flesh,the second person of the Blessed Trinity! He died for your sins on the cross.He opened the gates of heaven by laying His life down for His sheep,not just as some good example.

 

[JRKH]

James you still seem to carry some of the eastern philosophy you have studied. The core of thier beliefs is pantheistic.Yes they preach love,but many also preach demonic doctrines such as kundalini and reincarnation.

Jesus is more than just perfect example! He is God in the flesh,the second person of the Blessed Trinity! He died for your sins on the cross.he opened the gates of heaven by laying His life down for His sheep,not just as some good example.

Thank you for offering these clarifications. To be truthful I never studied these systems in enough detail to have really run into much of this type of thing (well except for reincarnation of course) - And also it was a very long time ago.

I hope I have not caused anyone distress by my post.

What I really meant to convey is that, when one looks at different, long standing, faith systems, one often finds love at the core and in Christianity we have the very BEST of that Love in Christ, our Lord our King and our God.

Thanks again for the correction/clarification.

Peace
James

 

[sllhouette]

Well, I don’t know if it helps but I can share my story about this.

When I was young (late middle school - late high school) I was blessed in that I was brought to understand Pascal’s Wager. I could see in fullness of reason that God did exist. But I was left with the question of “who is he?” “how would I know?” What I eventually reasoned is that the only way that I could know God is if he revealed himself to me. Recognizing that need I cried out for it and he answered me. I am Catholic because I have encountered God in such a way that I can not deny that it is him.

Thomas’ doubt is one of my favorite stories in the bible. When Thomas had sincere doubt he didn’t run away, rather he ran toward God and asked for what he needed. I also think it is worth noting that not even the apostles could give Thomas what he was looking for, It had to come directly from God. Christ then says to Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed”. He says this to Thomas. This means to me that there are things that Thomas needs to have faith about which God is not going to show him.

There was some time period between when I recognized Pascal’s wager and when I felt God had revealed himself to me. In that time period I reasoned that the men who had come before me were at least as intelligent as I was. These fathers sincerely believed in the christian God. I didn’t think that scripture alone would have been enough for them. They had to have had some encounter with God in order to profess the faith in the way that they did. In this way they were a witness to me of the reality of God.

Was that enough for me? Well, I am stubborn and hard of heart, so no. Unfortunately it was not. But it did put me in a place where God could start to work on me.

Matthew 7: “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. Which one of you would hand his son a stone when he asks for a loaf of bread, or a snake when he asks for a fish? If you then, who are wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give good things to those who ask him."

Also, If I can be any sort of a witness to you: Christ in truly present in the Eucharist. I don’t just believe this, I KNOW this. Go to adoration.

Peace be with you.

 

[Candide_West]

Hi JMD96,

I’m not sure if I can add much that is useful here, but I was once in a very similar situation to you (except that I didn’t convert to catholicism, I was CoE actually).

Happy lenten season to all,

In brief, I am a theologically Catholic teenager raised in a Protestant home. *My inner conversion came several years ago, based on arguments on the inconsitencies of Sola Scriptura, the blatant Catholicity of the Early Church Fathers, biblical evidence for Catholic doctrines, and others. *Because of this, *I’ve felt that I’m pretty open-minded with my beliefs, following the evidence wherever it leads.

Recently, though, one thing has irked me.

I have always held Christianity as an assumption. It’s the religion in which I was raised, and I have no objective reason to be Christian as opposed to Muslim, Jewish, Baha’i, etc.

For what it’s worth I think that the very fact you are honestly asking yourself these kinds of questions speaks well of your intellectual integrity.

I consider myself well-versed in Christian apologetics. *I could refute most objections to Christianity. *But I’ve never considered that the objector may be correct, I’ve simply found arguments to support Christianity because I already accepted it.

I did likewise, in truth I think this is often true for religious apologetics, if you accept the underlying premises then the arguments are very convincing, if you do not, they are not.

(As an aside, my skepticism does not encompass theism. *I find Pascal’s Wager powerful for basic theism, and I tend to view God as a properly basic belief, as Plantinga argues. *It also helps that I find cosmological and moral arguments for God’s existence compelling.)

This is where our positions diverge somewhat, I never found Pascals wager compelling, nor could I find a route to make it a properly basic belief without falling back on the conclusion of my own arguments.

The cosmological argument I found compelling for a time. But obviously not any more.*

With regards to the moral argument are you referring to the need for absolute morality, or that people are more moral with belief in God? The former I realised could be adequately met with practicably objective morality, and the latter I found to amount ultimately to a claim of “ought” equals “is”.

I’m wondering if anyone has experienced the same doubts, and if they could give me some advice. *I’m sure non-Christians reading this are probably rolling their eyes, thinking “Just objectively evaluate every religion and make your choice.” *But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true. *Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. *It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. *To think that something else is true is scary.

I can well understand that. I suppose an argument for maintaining your belief is that it helps you to be a better person whether or not it is actually true. The downside of this is that if you do it deliberately then it’s rather contrary to intellectual integrity.*

One thing I would say is that losing your religion does not mean throwing your code of ethics out of the window (this is something I always worried about when I questioned my faith).*

In fact what I ended up doing was undertaking a review of my ethics to determine what was justified and what was not from first principles. In many cases I found that my morality in practice changed little, although my justification changed substantially (the justification was made from first principles instead of “because God said so”).

Sorry for the rambling and God bless,

Apologies for my own rambling. If this is of use to you then great, if not then apologies for wasting your time, I appreciate you are not here looking for a debate.*

I guess my aim here was just to offer some reassurance that even if you do lose your faith it doesn’t mean losing yourself. I think it’s important to remember not to be afraid of that in order to be able to follow whatever path you honestly believe is the right one for you.

 

[Jmd96]

Hi JMD96,

I’m not sure if I can add much that is useful here, but I was once in a very similar situation to you (except that I didn’t convert to catholicism, I was CoE actually).

For what it’s worth I think that the very fact you are honestly asking yourself these kinds of questions speaks well of your intellectual integrity.

Thank you, that’s very gracious of you. However I think the fact that I’m afraid of the answers to these questions speaks well of my intellectual immaturity

I did likewise, in truth I think this is often true for religious apologetics, if you accept the underlying premises then the arguments are very convincing, if you do not, they are not.

Actually what I was getting at was moreso that there are good, objective arguments for Christianity, but I don’t believe in Christianity because of them, I simply accepted them because I already accepted Christianity. I’m sure there are also similarly good arguments for Islam or for Judaism.

That having been said, I agree with you to an extent. There are apologists whose evidence for Christianity goes something like, “Of course Christianity is true, this verse from Romans says so.” It’s painfully circular logic, but thankfully it’s hardly the norm.

nor could I find a route to make it a properly basic belief without falling back on the conclusion of my own arguments.

I’m not quite sure what you mean here… Are you referring to your own arguments against the existence of God?

The cosmological argument I found compelling for a time. But obviously not any more.*

With regards to the moral argument are you referring to the need for absolute morality, or that people are more moral with belief in God? The former I realised could be adequately met with practicably objective morality, and the latter I found to amount ultimately to a claim of “ought” equals “is”.

At the risk of derailing my own thread, I’m curious as to the reasons why you no longer find the cosmological argument compelling.

For the moral argument, I’m referring to existence of objective morality. A moral law requires a moral lawgiver. My argument is basically that which has been articulated by apologist William Lane Craig.

I can well understand that. I suppose an argument for maintaining your belief is that it helps you to be a better person whether or not it is actually true. The downside of this is that if you do it deliberately then it’s rather contrary to intellectual integrity.*

One thing I would say is that losing your religion does not mean throwing your code of ethics out of the window (this is something I always worried about when I questioned my faith).*

In fact what I ended up doing was undertaking a review of my ethics to determine what was justified and what was not from first principles. In many cases I found that my morality in practice changed little, although my justification changed substantially (the justification was made from first principles instead of “because God said so”).

Apologies for my own rambling. If this is of use to you then great, if not then apologies for wasting your time, I appreciate you are not here looking for a debate.*

I guess my aim here was just to offer some reassurance that even if you do lose your faith it doesn’t mean losing yourself. I think it’s important to remember not to be afraid of that in order to be able to follow whatever path you honestly believe is the right one for you.

Well, I am well-grounded in my theism, so I really don’t have to worry about a tearful descent into nihilism. I am curious as to how you define right and wrong in the absence of an objective basis, i.e., God.

I would be interested in a debate on these topics, though. However, I’m not sure how well I’d fare in that kind of discussion, and I’m also not sure how CAF would like that, given their current ban on atheism threads.

Anyway, thanks for your kind post and for being a friendly non-believer-- they can seem so rare on the internet.

God bless,

 

[fhansen]

But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true. Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. To think that something else is true is scary.

I understand the fear but Christianity is about nothing if not about Truth. If it can’t stand up to scrutinization then its not worth your time anyway. Your don’t need to go out of your way to test your faith but, OTOH, tests will come inevitably, and your faith can either stand the test and strengthen, which it always has for me whenever I looked into or was challenged by other religions/philosophical systems, or, who knows, it may just possibly fail. Either way, we must place Truth above all else. And, IMO, that leads to Christ. But we must all find out for ourselves.

 

[empther]

You don’t see a “Universal Catechism of the Protestant Church”.
They, the Protestants, couldn’t write one. They can’t agree among themselves.
Even less is there a Cathechism of the Moslem Church. Have your ever read their Koran?
Much less the other religions, some of which don’t even have a god.

If the Catholic Church can get together and agree on such a vast system of thought, isn’t that because the Catholic Church has the truth?

 

[Candide_West]

Thank you, that’s very gracious of you. *However I think the fact that I’m afraid of the answers to these questions speaks well of my intellectual immaturity

Courage lies not in having no fear, but in going forwards despite your fear.

Actually what I was getting at was moreso that there are good, objective arguments for Christianity, but I don’t believe in Christianity because of them, I simply accepted them because I already accepted Christianity. *I’m sure there are also similarly good arguments for Islam or for Judaism.

Fair statement I suspect.

That having been said, I agree with you to an extent. *There are apologists whose evidence for Christianity goes something like, “Of course Christianity is true, this verse from Romans says so.” *It’s painfully circular logic, but thankfully it’s hardly the norm.

Agreed.

I’m not quite sure what you mean here… Are you referring to your own arguments against the existence of God?

No, I’m talking about when I was a Christian. So my arguments in favour of the existence of God was the only way I could make a case for it being a “properly basic belief”.*

At the risk of derailing my own thread, I’m curious as to the reasons why you no longer find the cosmological argument compelling.

I’ll only touch on this briefly, as you said it risks derailment. But I originally found it compelling because I agreed with the proposal that the Prime Mover was God. Ultimately though I realised that all the properties I cared about God possessing (omnipotence, omniscience, benevolence, personal being etc) were outside what was demonstrated by the argument. They were things I’d added on because of my pre-existing beliefs. While the PM supported by the cosmological argument COULD have the properties I cared about God possessing, there was nothing in the argument which said the PM MUST have those properties.*

For the moral argument, I’m referring to existence of objective morality. *A moral law requires a moral lawgiver. My argument is basically that which has been articulated by apologist William Lane Craig.

Well, I am well-grounded in my theism, so I really don’t have to worry about a tearful descent into nihilism. *I am curious as to how you define right and wrong in the absence of an objective basis, i.e., God.

Basically I start from what I call first principles, in other words, terms which are axiomatic. These are things like*

“suffering is bad”
“happiness is good”

It doesn’t really matter exactly what words you use or what language you speak in, we all know that “suffering”, “misery”, “agony” refer to negative experiences, things we want to avoid. So I work from those as basic axioms and my ethics emerge from there.*

One thing it’s important to note is that I’m not just talking about pleasure vs pain here, happiness is much more complex than pleasure and suffering is much more complex than pain.*

Soma induced delirium is not happiness.*

I would be interested in a debate on these topics, though. *However, I’m not sure how well I’d fare in that kind of discussion, and I’m also not sure how CAF would like that, given their current ban on atheism threads.

For what it’s worth I suspect you’d hold your own very well in an open debate.*

With respect to the ban, it’s hard to know what exactly is and is not permitted. Taking a look around there are obviously many threads where atheist points of view are discussed, I’d say it would be difficult to host an open philosophy forum where any such views are simply banned.*

I’d suggest if you are starting a thread and concerned it may be close to the line, to simply ask a mod if it’s ok beforehand.

Anyway, thanks for your kind post and for being a friendly non-believer-- they can seem so rare on the internet.

God bless,

To be fair I suspect it depends where you go, I’ve seen some discussion sites where there are plenty of unpleasant atheists, and others where there are plenty of unpleasant theists. And some where there are both. Personally I think the mods on CAF manage to strike a good balance between ensuring good behaviour and not interfering excessively.

 

[Micorhizea]

Happy lenten season to all,

Thank you! Likewise.

I consider myself well-versed in Christian apologetics. I could refute most objections to Christianity. But I’ve never considered that the objector may be correct, I’ve simply found arguments to support Christianity because I already accepted it.

You have perfectly delineated the condition of any who are faithful to any creed, even political and/or economic, who were born into a situation. Since maturity and growth, especially spiritual growth, is away from ego identification with a series that starts with infantile self absorption, moves though personal self, family and peer group, through ideologies and toward God, you are in a remarkably mature position relative to those who take what they think they are for granted as “truth.” And like you, everyone has their set of self-convincing apologetics for what they decided or are habituated by their culture to believe. That holds for any belief system, “belief” being the operative word. No matter what we “believe,” we all know that 2+2=4 and won’t jump outt of an airplane or off a cliff without safety gear or at all, if we are sane. And yet many would give the identical weight to their belief that they would to a mathematical equation. That is what we call “rationalization” and see quite clearly how people with other beliefs are doing it, but are blind to our own. So you have what might be called a cubic centimeter of chance to see something rather fundamentally important to yourself and the human in general. But few give themselves that chance, dismissing it as danger or threat to their accepted world view. How rare that anyone sincerely questions that.

(As an aside, my skepticism does not encompass theism. I find Pascal’s Wager powerful for basic theism, and I tend to view God as a properly basic belief, as Plantinga argues. It also helps that I find cosmological and moral arguments for God’s existence compelling.)

The people who question, and take it as a life work for the purpose of discovering their actual relationship with God, are called contemplatives. The ones who get to what is regarded by most as an end, especially in popular Catholicism, are called “mystics.” The ones who actually accomplish what might be ultimately the greatest possible “human” achievement, we don’t really have a name for in our Catholic tradition. They are contemplatives, of course, but have gone beyond the subtle attachment to visions and phenomena. I call them, along with others, by one of their many names: I call them The Lonely Ones. For them there is no need for such an obvious artifice as Pascal’s wager. Is God about an argument or an intellectual paradigm? Maybe there is something far more radical and fundamental that those simplicities of mental architecture wherein few can dwell for fear of filling their shoes with sand.

I’m wondering if anyone has experienced the same doubts, and if they could give me some advice. I’m sure non-Christians reading this are probably rolling their eyes, thinking “Just objectively evaluate every religion and make your choice.” But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true. Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. To think that something else is true is scary.

I disagree with the idea of “objective evaluation,” primarily because there really is no such thing available to the human. But similarly to making faith into knowledge through emotional need, we convince ourselves that we can be objective. Yes, we can have a simulacrum of that in limited areas, but on the whole, no. That would require the omniscience of God, and no mortal mind can fill those shoes. And you have a right to be fearful. There is much that is actual and imagined that is at stake. And that is the definition of “drama:” something at stake. The bigger the stake, the bigger the drama. And that is why folks can get so emotional about their stake in a religious, political, or social belief. They have to believe they are right, or their stake in their sense of identity is at risk. And yet, being in the Arms of God, and being made in His image and likeness, one’s real identity is in fact about the only thing not at risk.

And yet, as I found on a way old thread I was scanning, there is this: “The most dangerous undertaking is the search for reality. It will destroy your world.” It went on to explaiin that what is destroyed is the attachment to the belief that one’s “inherited” belief system is the totatlity of reality or the only possible perception or even way of perceiving. But it kind of goes with the idea of seeing the world anew in an instant, doesn’t it?

So you can take courage by the hand and explore what is in fact a deeper and more pervading understanding of reality. Or you might remember on your deathbed that once you thought you might try. God loves you totally in any case. And you will find out. But if you are graced to be an explorer of the interior, you will be a rare individual. and few may understand you or what you are doing, even amongst “spiritual” advisers. So God bless, and know that Love is on the field, no matter what you decide or where you go, or don’t. Just be true to your conscience, a word that means “with knowing.” It doesn’t mean “with belief.”

Sorry for the rambling and God bless,

What you did was not rambling, at all. God must love sincerity and the bravery it takes to step out and say what you see. You get kudos in my book!

 

[Aelred_Minor]

To the OP, I would recommend reflecting on the uniqueness and importance of the Chrsitian belief in the Incarnation. You might find similar language in some other religions, but never a similar belief.

Every other religion in the world, except perhaps the most nihilistic ones, is an attempt to reach out to the Divine, to bridge the immeasurable gap between ourselves and the ultimate Source of our Being. Since we are utterly unable to do this and yet have an existential need for it, the religions develop sacrifices, rituals, religious laws, “profound” counterintiutive philosophies, ways of attaining altered states of consciousness, etc. in an impotent attempt to bridge the gap.

Then a man came and said “I am the way, the bridge that you’ve been hopelessly trying to build. Come to me.” You can accept or reject that call, but you won’t find a real substitute for it anywhere else.

 

[rossum]

I’m sure non-Christians reading this are probably rolling their eyes, thinking “Just objectively evaluate every religion and make your choice.”

In an ideal world, yes. In the real world, time is limited, so you can only evaluate a few.

But honestly, I’m terrified of some other religion being true.

Why? Would you rather stay with the comfortable error or live with the uncomfortable truth?

Christianity has provided my metaphysical and ethical worldview for my entire life. It offers me comfort and hope on a daily basis. To think that something else is true is scary.

If Christianity works for you, then stick with Christianity. There is much that is good in Christianity.

When the Kalamas asked your question of the Buddha, he answered:
“Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are good; these things are not blameable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,’ enter on and abide in them.”
Much of Christianity follows that, so you are doing well to stay Christian as long as those conditions obtain.

Sorry for the rambling and God bless,

Thank you.

rossum

 

[Jmd96]

Thank you to everyone for all the thoughtful responses! These answers will certainly help me in what could be a life changing journey.

Candide West, you have piqued my curiousity, perhaps I’ll start a thread to discuss arguments for God’s existence, focusing on the Cosmological and Moral?

God bless,

 

[57Bill]

To the OP, I would recommend reflecting on the uniqueness and importance of the Chrsitian belief in the Incarnation. You might find similar language in some other religions, but never a similar belief.

Every other religion in the world, except perhaps the most nihilistic ones, is an attempt to reach out to the Divine, to bridge the immeasurable gap between ourselves and the ultimate Source of our Being. Since we are utterly unable to do this and yet have an existential need for it, the religions develop sacrifices, rituals, religious laws, “profound” counterintiutive philosophies, ways of attaining altered states of consciousness, etc. in an impotent attempt to bridge the gap.

Then a man came and said “I am the way, the bridge that you’ve been hopelessly trying to build. Come to me.” You can accept or reject that call, but you won’t find a real substitute for it anywhere else.

That was real, real good:thumbsup: