In a post "Hey Hugo?" I'd asked Hugo to listen to a message by some Pastor and comment on it. Hugo went far above and beyond the call and I thank him again for his time. In this post I only touch on two or three of Hugo’s comments, so I encourage you to read them in context on the original post.
The podcast that I asked Hugo to listen to was a fairly typical evangelical message explaining, mostly to pre Christians on how a relationship with Jesus usually comes about. While listening to the podcast on my own, I got curious as to how a pre Christian would hear the same message. Jesus spoke in parables so that those who weren't interested wouldn't be able to catch the message accidentally while those who were interested would come to Him later for more instruction. I was curious how someone who was still on the outside looking in would respond to a message that was significantly easier to understand than any of Jesus' parables. Hugo obliged and again, I thank you.
What I thought would happen, happened. Unless God is calling us, outsiders need a Babble Fish to get what is being said. No Babble Fish, no comprehension.
1) What is described by the Pastor / speaker as an event (an encounter with the Person of Jesus) with emotional consequences, is interpreted by the outsider as an emotional event - Period.
While this is False, it really can’t be any other way if the listener is a naturalist with a closed mind. Again with the Babble Fish.
What is said by the speaker about “hurdles to becoming a Christian” becoming less important as a result of this encounter with Jesus, is interpreted by the outsider as saying that Christians think
(a) the hurdles don’t have answers, or
(b) Jesus freaks don’t care about answers.
Both assumptions are false.
Hugo and probably most people like him believe that people are followers of Jesus because they have invested next to zero time into thinking about the issues, the hurdles; they have “shut off their minds,” as Hugo describes. As is typical with those who have never tried to follow Jesus, Hugo describes it as “freakin easy” to follow His commands.
Hugo, I need to ask at this point. Does it really seem to you as though I don’t care about answers to the big questions of life? Does it seem to you that I’ve not put any effort into finding answers? All of the Christians that I know have a significant and varied library.
What has happened to me in my encounter event is exactly how the speaker in the podcast described. At one point I was walking down the path of life and the only answers available to me were naturalistic answers.
And then Jesus stepped into my path in such a way that He couldn’t be ignored. That event caused a seismic shift in the way I interpreted life as I observed it.
Jesus comes at a person in such a way that the encounter is no longer theoretical but intensely personal. It grabs you. It holds you. That is why I believe that people like John Loftus and Bart Erhman never had anything more than beliefs about beliefs - they had a relationship with the theoretical Jesus. In fact they were highly educated regarding the theoretical Jesus, but Jesus, the One who lives has never been a part of their inner lives. Like the Pharisees of Jesus' day, Bart and John have known a lot about God, but they have never known God Himself.
2) Because of the intensely personal encounter that Jesus brings to those of His choosing, two things happen.
a. Finding the answers / solutions to what were former hurdles to even a theoretical relationship with Jesus, is no longer as important as developing a relationship with the real Jesus.
The Person of Jesus in reality becomes far more important than any previous questions about the Person of Jesus.
Here’s something important. You can have all your questions about Jesus answered but without an encounter with Jesus you will not be any closer to a relationship WITH Jesus.
b. Because of my own encounter with the Person of Jesus, I can no longer pretend that the material reality is the only reality that exists.
- My search for answers to the big questions must now of necessity include the possibility of a Supernatural answer.
Hugo, you said something about making yourself believe “is so simple.”
In reality, making yourself become a believer is impossible. You know that so I'm not sure why you said otherwise. That’s the whole point of the podcast! Until something happens (someone tells you about Him, a significant life event, you ask God to show Himself to you on His terms) our spiritual eyes and ears are not ready, not susceptible, not predisposed to recognising His calling.
Until God comes FOR YOU there is no coming to Him, there is no believing in Jesus. (John 6:44)
Of course a person can ask God to reveal Himself. And if done in a genuinely humble spirit He will respond. That’s why Christians tell others about Him; to encourage them to give it a try. Because there is no way of knowing who God is drawing Christians tell anyone who will listen.
However, the bottom line is,
God always and only comes to us on His terms, not and never according to our demands.
Again, Hugo, thank you for your time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
(1/5)
ReplyDelete(yes, 5... but it's mostly because I quoted the whole thing, hehe)
...While listening to the podcast on my own, I got curious as to how a pre Christian would hear the same message. Jesus spoke in parables so that those who weren't interested wouldn't be able to catch the message accidentally while those who were interested would come to Him later for more instruction. I was curious how someone who was still on the outside looking in would respond to a message that was significantly easier to understand than any of Jesus' parables. Hugo obliged and again, I thank you.
You're welcome.
That comment about Jesus' parables is surprising because I was raised Catholic so I did hear a lot of Jesus' parable already and I think they were a very useful way to teach kids all sorts of morality issues and how one should act in order to be a good person.
I did specify 'kids' because I was taught Jesus' parables maining when I was in elementary school, and I don't recal having problems understanding them. Sure, teachers would help us with some words or some not-so-obvious ideas but it was clear to us that Jesus was using parables as a mean to expose his ideas; stories to help us understand his message. It was helping, not making it harder...
In other words, I never thought of parables as a way to prevent people from catching the message accidentally; I thought it was the opposite! Perhaps I did not get what you meant!?
What I thought would happen, happened. Unless God is calling us, outsiders need a Babble Fish to get what is being said. No Babble Fish, no comprehension.
Hum... I am pretty sure I understand exactly what the speaker meant. As I mentioned, the general idea was that we need not to wait for all our so-called obstacles before believing and accepting Jesus as our Lord and Saviour, the way adults become Christians is by accepting Jesus, submitting themselves, and then the obstacles become smaller are irrelevant.
The problem is that this can be translated to: believe first, think after. Or, in other words, believe Jesus is the Messiah, then look at the reality that surrounds in a way that fits with the biblical story of Jesus, because that must be true, since you start by believing it.
By doing so, your life will be transformed, you will have a personal relationship with God, you will feel the holy spirit guiding you, you will have hope, etc... most importantly, you will know that Jesus is with you and that if you repent, submit and ask for forgiveness, He will welcome you in his kingdom because he paid the price for our sins already.
(2/5)
ReplyDelete1) What is described by the Pastor / speaker as an event (an encounter with the Person of Jesus) with emotional consequences, is interpreted by the outsider as an emotional event - Period.
Yes and no. It is emotional in the first place, but it goes beyond that as the emotions influence the person into re-thinking various aspects of their life or existing beliefs. It starts with an emotional event but transforms into a rational approach.
This is exactly like a long syllogism that starts with one or many false premises. You can build a rational and sound syllogism by starting with something absurd or purely emotional. The thought process is still valid and rational, nothing emotional there, but the base premise(s) are not proven more, or less, true.
I see that the next words say that it's false, that it is not only an emotional event, but I afraid it's going to be an explanation that addresses a strawman because of the clarifications I just gave.
While this is False, it really can’t be any other way if the listener is a naturalist with a closed mind. Again with the Babble Fish.
Ouch, even worse than I thought :\ It's a quick jump to being close minded and not able to understand the good news that Jesus is the Messiah... THAT is an emotional response.
What is said by the speaker about “hurdles to becoming a Christian” becoming less important as a result of this encounter with Jesus, is interpreted by the outsider as saying that Christians think
(a) the hurdles don’t have answers, or
(b) Jesus freaks don’t care about answers.
Both assumptions are false.
It's impossible to generalize the "hurdles to becoming a Christian" so much. Some literaly don't have answers, and some people really don't care about answers. The other way around is true too. Some believers do have answers to all hurdles, and do care about every single one of them.
This, again, does not make the answers more or less true. That's my main concern regarding religion, don't forget...
Hugo and probably most people like him believe that people are followers of Jesus because they have invested next to zero time into thinking about the issues, the hurdles; they have “shut off their minds,” as Hugo describes.
Well I just replied to that but in other words, no, that is only partially true. I think most people do care about the answers and do thing about the issues, but some people don't. And among those who do think about the issues, most do avoid a few of the hardest question.
We all grew up with the assumptions that God exists, we have souls, and there is something after we die. It's hypocritical to say otherwise, and most people rarely question these things. They might discard parts of their childhood religion, like Noah's ark story for example, because this is just absurd, just like Santa Clauss, but they still accept the un-detectable, un-knowable aspects of religion that give answers to question such as what happens when we die. Nobody likes to simply say... nothing.
(4/5)
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, there ARE problems, but they are not with the beliefs themselves, they are with the actions certain believers take because of their beliefs, but that is a complete other issue unrelated to the current discussion.
2) Because of the intensely personal encounter that Jesus brings to those of His choosing, two things happen.
a. Finding the answers / solutions to what were former hurdles to even a theoretical relationship with Jesus, is no longer as important as developing a relationship with the real Jesus.
The Person of Jesus in reality becomes far more important than any previous questions about the Person of Jesus.
Here’s something important. You can have all your questions about Jesus answered but without an encounter with Jesus you will not be any closer to a relationship WITH Jesus.
I don't see the difference with this version. It's still a "believe than you will understand why you believe" idea.
b. Because of my own encounter with the Person of Jesus, I can no longer pretend that the material reality is the only reality that exists.
- My search for answers to the big questions must now of necessity include the possibility of a Supernatural answer.
That's a bid sad honestly. You claim to have discussed over what, 4 years?, with non-believers, and you honestly think that we believe that the only reality that exists is the material one? But why?
There is no need to believe in 'X' to disbelief 'Y'; there is no need to deny supernatural answers in order to not accept them. Again, this goes back to what I said earlier concerning "I don't know"; it is hard and non-satisfactory to have to say "I don't know" sometimes, especially when it comes to Big questions...
I prefer to believe as many true things as possible, for solid good reasons. Believing in a material reality is NOT a belief based on solid evidence.
(5/5)
ReplyDeleteHugo, you said something about making yourself believe “is so simple.”
In reality, making yourself become a believer is impossible. You know that so I'm not sure why you said otherwise. That’s the whole point of the podcast! Until something happens (someone tells you about Him, a significant life event, you ask God to show Himself to you on His terms) our spiritual eyes and ears are not ready, not susceptible, not predisposed to recognising His calling.
Until God comes FOR YOU there is no coming to Him, there is no believing in Jesus. (John 6:44)
Of course a person can ask God to reveal Himself. And if done in a genuinely humble spirit He will respond. That’s why Christians tell others about Him; to encourage them to give it a try. Because there is no way of knowing who God is drawing Christians tell anyone who will listen.
I agree; I don't think it's possible that I will ever believe in Jesus being my Lord and Saviour. We cannot prove a negative, like God does not exist, if you define God as un-detectable, but we also have no reason to believe anything based solely on what people say.
Remember what I said a few weeks ago; a book alone is never going to be enough to convince me that a virgin birth and a resurrection took place.
However, the bottom line is,
God always and only comes to us on His terms, not and never according to our demands.
...but if you believe and pray, he might just show up for you :)
Again, Hugo, thank you for your time.
You're very welcome, thanks for the civilized insult-free discussion.
As I always say, I am in no way trying to convert/de-convert anyone to/from anything, I am just expressing opinions and curious to learn about how people think and see their life. That actually took just as much time as the listening of the podcast since I wrote more and thought more about the answer, well not as much as I could to be very clear but at some point I need to stop... anyway, thanks for your time, I hope you do read these long messages with attention and do try to think about them, because I certainly do think about all the aspects that make others believe.
Girlfriend coming back soon, terrible week at work coming up before more business trips, so I fall back into my lurker mode...
Take care!!
*****
ReplyDeleteI think part 3 cannot be posted in full :\
Sorry for the confusion
*****
3A)
As is typical with those who have never tried to follow Jesus, Hugo describes it as “freakin easy” to follow His commands.
Hugo, I need to ask at this point. Does it really seem to you as though I don’t care about answers to the big questions of life? Does it seem to you that I’ve not put any effort into finding answers? All of the Christians that I know have a significant and varied library.
Complete opposite; it seems to me as you DO care about answers to the big questions of life, and you actually care about them too much in my opinion!
Did you put enough effort into finding answers? That's a bit more tricky because I do believe that you spent a lot of time, but in my opinion not in the right places. Religion addresses the big questions of life directly, while anything else addresses them indirectly. One could spend his/her entire life without ever looking at a single religious book and I don't think they would be missing something. The big questions would have answers, but only when possible, while religion provides answers even when it's not possible.
What has happened to me in my encounter event is exactly how the speaker in the podcast described. At one point I was walking down the path of life and the only answers available to me were naturalistic answers.
It is hard to admit that we cannot know certain things...
And then Jesus stepped into my path in such a way that He couldn’t be ignored. That event caused a seismic shift in the way I interpreted life as I observed it.
That's the emotional event... let's see...
3B)
ReplyDeleteJesus comes at a person in such a way that the encounter is no longer theoretical but intensely personal. It grabs you. It holds you. That is why I believe that people like John Loftus and Bart Erhman never had anything more than beliefs about beliefs - they had a relationship with the theoretical Jesus. In fact they were highly educated regarding the theoretical Jesus, but Jesus, the One who lives has never been a part of their inner lives. Like the Pharisees of Jesus' day, Bart and John have known a lot about God, but they have never known God Himself.
Well here's the problem: nobody knows God. People who BELIEVE in God say that they know Him. There is a big difference. I have no doubt that it feels very real, that the inner feelings are there, that everything makes sense and that it gives hope, etc... but it's just not convincing for an external observer.
And that point, we go back to the start, because the problem is that we are external observers, and we cannot understand unless we are believers, but the only reasons to believe is to believe believers who already believe because... they started by believing and then understood, had the feelings... well I hope you get what I mean after all these uses of the word believe.
The only thing you don't understand however, for sure, is that none of the "true" non-believers really simply disbelieve. I say that because I am sure that a lot of people who claim to be non-believers are just denying the "reality" of God. They think God is real, or at least probable, but think that it does not make sense to follow a religion, or refuse to support certain kind of churches, etc... That's the kind of people who refuse to go to churches, will insult religious people as a whole, and so on. But when we simply disbelief, none of that matter. None of that makes you afraid or anxious or anything else. It's just not real; it's imaginary, and there is no problem with that.
I don't see the difference with this version. It's still a "believe than you will understand why you believe" idea.
ReplyDeleteNope, it’s like, I saw the picture of the woman who is now my wife in the yearbook of the guy I was sharing a house with. Based on the picture, I believed she existed. He said, “She’s going to be at a party I’m going to tonight. You should come.” I went to the part and after meeting her in person, I no longer believed in her existence as much as KNEW of her existence.
The Pastor in the podcast and I are talking about a state of knowing / believing that you can not experience so you are simply not able to comment on it with any credibility. It's a bit like you telling me what the apple I'm eating tastes like.
You are speaking of a theoretical belief. We are not. You can't imagine it being anything more than an emotional experience and unless God has plans to change that, nothing more can be done.
I understand that what I’ve just said is "just not convincing for an external observer.” It can’t be any other way. It would be like me describing snow to an 80 year old man from Africa who has never touched or seen or even heard of snow.
====
"That's a bid sad honestly. You claim to have discussed over what, 4 years?, with non-believers, and you honestly think that we believe that the only reality that exists is the material one? But why?
Why? Because the vast majority of atheists have included in their stated beliefs that the supernatural does no exist. That IS what materialist or naturalist means you know. That the material reality is the only reality that exists.
===
“It's just not real; it's imaginary, and there is no problem with that.”
Unless one millisecond after you die you find out that you’re wrong. At that point there is no greater problem possible.
Hi!
ReplyDeleteI did not expect a response so quickly. It's short but very useful to reply to, because there are a few misunderstandings that I would like to clarify; and since you asked me to listen to something, I would like you to spend a relax 1:20 hour watching something too. It's mainly just fun entertainment if you have the time to, but you don't have to at all to answer the questions I would like you to answer actually.
You said:
Nope, it’s like, I saw the picture of the woman who is now my wife in the yearbook of the guy I was sharing a house with. Based on the picture, I believed she existed. He said, “She’s going to be at a party I’m going to tonight. You should come.” I went to the part and after meeting her in person, I no longer believed in her existence as much as KNEW of her existence.
That is a very good example. If the guy who showed you the picture had said: 'She can fly', you would not believe him until you saw her flying. To believe that she exists as a regular human being does not require as much evidence.
Now, I am not in way comparing this with a belief in Jesus in the sense you think I am doing it. That is very important.
The idea is that I know that you really think you know that the woman can fly. I believe you.
What I also understand clearly is that for you, it's truly impossible to explain to me how great it is to see that woman flying, because I have yet to see her fly.
You also think that I am closed-minded and believe that humans cannot fly. It's not really my fault though, I just don't know any better because I don't even want to try to believe in flying women. You're lucky enough to have seen the picture of one and to see one flying yourself, and you now know how it feels, and I don't, and probably won't.
Or, as you said...
The Pastor in the podcast and I are talking about a state of knowing / believing that you can not experience so you are simply not able to comment on it with any credibility. It's a bit like you telling me what the apple I'm eating tastes like.
You are speaking of a theoretical belief. We are not. You can't imagine it being anything more than an emotional experience and unless God has plans to change that, nothing more can be done...
Than you you gave other examples but it's all the same analogy of the flying woman that I have yet to see.
the vast majority of atheists have included in their stated beliefs that the supernatural does no exist. That IS what materialist or naturalist means you know. That the material reality is the only reality that exists.
ReplyDeleteOk, if you say that this is what these words mean, I say to you that I am NOT a materialist nor a naturalist. I still disbelieve in God, so I am still labelled as Atheist. What's the point?
My "worldview", if we can describe such thing in such a few words, would be the 'claim-by-claim' approach. That's the only way I can describe it.
Let's illustrate the worldview...
Claim 1: The supernatural does no exist
Answer: Disbelief,
I have no proof that what people commonly define as supernatural does not exist because the definition of supernatural always include something that prevents it from being proven until you believe in it, so it is, by definition, impossible to disprove it and impossible to believe claim 1, thus, I disbelieve it.
So, I cannot be what you just labelled as materialist or naturalist.
Claim 2: The material reality is the only reality that exists
Answer: Disbelief,
Emotions, thoughts, music, numbers, prayers, concepts exist, and are all non-material, therefore there are things that are real that are not material. I disbelieve claim 2.
Unless one millisecond after you die you find out that you’re wrong. At that point there is no greater problem possible.
You conclude with an indirect treat of Hell. What can I say... I just don't believe in it, why do you? or...
Why do you believe claim 3?
Side discussion:
ReplyDeleteWhy did the song starting at 52:00 made me cry? What did it make me think of you think?
It was sad because it made me think of how people, because of religion, literally put themselves on fire.
Some are burned by others for being accused of sorcery. In other countries kids get acid poured on their face to cast demons. Oh, of course, nothing Jesus would approve, nothing a true Christian would do, or should do, or would even condone; but the fact is that they do that kind of atrocities because of beliefs based on faith.
That is why I will never settle down for faith-based beliefs; nothing to do with Christianity in particular. It's just one idea among so many others that I don't believe because I have not seen evidence, just testimonies and stories YOU really believe.
And THAT, I truly believe. I can almost say that I know, but I don't; there is always Poe's law after all.
Thanks again for your time, regards,
Hugo
"You conclude with an indirect treat of Hell."
ReplyDeleteHow do you distinguish between a threat and a warning?
In the context of Hell there is no difference at all since I do not believe Hell exists.
ReplyDeleteWhat you wrote, that we'll find out one millisecond after we die, is meaningless to me as I have yet to find a single reason to think that something will happen, so I am far from even considering WHAT could happen and why one scenario is more probable than another; they are all equally improbable from my perspective right now.
So... can I expect thoughtful responses to the few questions I asked or that's all you had to day?
Should I assume that your answers will always fall back to:
'You need to believe in order to know how believing feels like, so you cannot understand!'
?
Most importantly, do you understand why I disbelief claim 1 and 2 above, and why do YOU believe Claim 3 above?
Good job at making me write 5 times more than you by the way; are you laughing at me when I do that?
"are you laughing at me when I do that?"
ReplyDeleteNot at all. I do wonder why you hear / feel the mention of hell as a threat when you don't believe that it exists. If you told me that I'd be eaten by Martians if I don't pray to one tonight I should feel nothing at all - because I don't believe in them.
======
'You need to believe in order to know how believing feels like, so you cannot understand!'
Again / Still you have it backwards. I don't believe in Jesus and hope that He exists. I know that He lives, therefore I believe / trust in Him. Because your Creator has, for whatever reason not yet grabbed your attention, you have no choice but to think that a relationship with Jesus is something that is conjured up in the mind. It isn't, but you have no way of knowing that.
I do wonder why you hear / feel the mention of hell as a threat when you don't believe that it exists
ReplyDeleteWeird, because that is exactly my point... that it's not a meaningful threat, but you keep using it, it was actually the conclusion of one of your comments...
Since you DO believe that it exists, coming from you, it IS a threat.
Again / Still you have it backwards. I don't believe in Jesus and hope that He exists. I know that He lives, therefore I believe / trust in Him
Backward? I don't have anything backward, you jsut showed, again, that it's circular!
Now you say that you know, therefore you believe.
Tomorrow you'll say that you believe therefore you can know God.
Next week you might go back to, you cannot believe before you know.
Then you'll switch back again to we cannot know unless God makes us know, and then you can believe.
And so on...
It's not because you're insane or anything of course, nothing special about it, you're just one of many believers, of any religion. It's just a bit sad that you don't see that the starting point is the BELIEF, NOT the knowledge. Lots of believers do admit that they have faith and hope, but not knowledge, and it simply gives them comforting feelings. No problem there.
Anyway, I guess I won't get you to analyze what I wrote, what I showed you, the claims I asked to think about, and so on, right?
Perhaps I should change my answers to previous questions then... No, I don't think you want to know the answers to big questions. No, I don't think you spend time for them. No, I don't think you are willing to discuss ideas related to all that.
Thanks anyway for reading parts of what I write; it is always interesting to have discussions with people like you, I do learn a lot and this blog is particularly fun since it does not get any attention so I can interact with you directly.
As I said yesterday I will now go back to not writing. I thought I would see my girlfriend tonight but I have to wait tomorrow so that's why I had some extra time :)
But now it's true, going away for a while at least...
Take care! cya!