Blue Jay said:
Saltmeister, your emphasis seems to be on experience. Don't you think we have to believe in Jesus' death and resurrection for salvation?
I suppose we do if it's true, but I guess we need a
reason to believe that it's true.
Our experience gives us that reasoning. Our experience includes everything we have seen, heard, learnt and believe. The reason why I said that is because I reckon if someone tells us to believe something, what they tell us to believe must be compatible with the experiences that we have accumulated so far.
I don't believe we need to prove Jesus' death and resurrection, but I do think we need to justify why we think it's so important. It's about telling people what Christianity means to us. Justifying why it's important doesn't mean we just say what the preacher told us to say. I think the concept should be explored further. We are individuals and because we all come from different walks of life, we have different ways of explaining the same thing. We should seek to discover where we stand in God's kingdom as individuals. Spontaneity should be encouraged.
All beliefs could ideally be justified, so all beliefs would ideally be compatible with one's experiences. If certain beliefs cannot be justified, then we could always explore the concepts further and decide whether or not there's a way to justify them.
Ok, personally, one may not believe that he/she needs to justify their beliefs, that one should simply have faith. However, what happens when you have to share your faith with others?
When we share our religion with other people, I think it's important to share our personality as well. This is where our experience comes in. Our experience is a part of our personality. If we simply say that we believe in something because "we simply have faith," it might be difficult to understand why because it doesn't seem to match one's personality. You're not being yourself. That's why I would think that beliefs and faith work best with our experience and personality. Spiritual truths don't have to come from a textbook, they could come from deep within our heart and soul.
That's what I meant about being spontaneous about one's religion. Be unique. Find your place in the cosmos.
Moreover, this is the post-modern era. In the modern era, people would have been interested in logical reasons for why you believed in something. Some individuals are post-modern in their mind-set, so they'd probably be more interested in why
your personality possesses certain beliefs rather than what Logic has to say about "Truth."
That's why I think experience is so important. I don't consider "logic" to be important. Logic is deterministic. I don't believe spirituality is deterministic and logical. I don't think God made us to be monotonic beings of logic and determinism. Experience tells me we are capable of discerning in the vague and abstract, so God gave us minds to think in the abstract. Logic, science and determinism can't explain or capture everything in this universe. Logic and determinism can't capture spirituality. Spirituality is a completely different dimension altogether. Of course, I can't prove that spiritual beings, to the lowest level of functionality, are deterministic machines -- and that they simply interact in an abstract and vague sense.
But that's the thing: I don't think it matters even if we are deterministic state machines at the lowest level. The point is we
interact in the
abstract. We observe and
experience things in the abstract. That's probably why God gave us emotions. He wanted us to trust abstractions rather than determinism, where we have to calculate and formally prove everything.
When people tell me I am not logically justified in following my religion, they are telling me that my personal thoughts, personal experiences and personality do not matter. But God created my personality. Why should I pay any attention to someone who tells me I am not logically justified in what I believe when their logic, which supposedly refutes my religion, isn't even compatible or reconcilable to my personality? I am God's creation and I don't answer to logic. I answer to God. Who created me, God or Logic?
Logic is not always necessary to justify beliefs. Sometimes abstract sentiment is sufficient, in which case logical and deterministic justifications or refutations are redundant and irrelevant.
I believe we need a reason to believe, but I don't believe we need to formally and deterministically prove that the reason why we believe in something is the
logically right reason for believing. I put my trust in abstract sentiment. I put my trust in the experience. If I have sufficiently explored the reasons for believing why I believe than I am justified in what I believe.
I believe Christianity is rational, but not in a logical and deterministic sense that philosophers (you gotta love that word!!!)
prefer, but in an abstract sentimental sense.
There's nothing wrong with believing in experience if it can be justified. I probably come from a different walk of life to you. If one reckons one should simply have faith, then good luck!!!! We all come from a different walks of life.
The important thing is that we both have the same spiritual leader.
