Elsewhere on the forum I read this:
leon14 wrote: . . . won’t you be stronger in your faith if it is challenged?
That got me thinking . . . is this true?
Preview: a read-only copy of the forum. To post or reply, use the current forum.
Challenging my Faith
38 posts · 8 participants · started Nov 23, 2017, 9:42 PM
. . . is this true?
People get mixed up. What is faith and what is belief. They use the words interchangeably. People can have many beliefs. Faith is singular. You either have it or you don’t, though you can have a mere flicker of it or you can have wavering faith. When you have faith you know it beyond doubting, unless you have a mere flicker of it or if your faith wavers. When you have faith you are stabilized though every challenge and every life difficulty up to and even beyond the portals of death itself.
As to your question Bonita, I will ask a question. If you are given a gift from God, say for example his love of and for you, do you think you will be stronger if you challenge his love for you? Do you think you will be stronger if you besmirch, sully or soil him and the gift he has bestowed on you? No, of course not.
Likewise it is with faith. Faith is a gift of God. It is not a reward for good works. You can’t do anything to earn it. Public displays of so-called virtuous acts and eloquent religious speeches are of no avail in getting it. Either you have faith, a flicker of faith, or you don’t have faith.
Elsewhere on the forum I read this:
leon14 wrote: . . . won’t you be stronger in your faith if it is challenged?That got me thinking . . . is this true?does it take strength to have faith?If so, what sort of strength? faith is not really an intellectual exercise is it?Hi everyone.
Faith
.… When you have faith you know it beyond doubting, unless you have a mere flicker of it or if your faith wavers.
John the Baptist under testing situation have a wavered faith.
… And this experience was a great test of his faith in, and loyalty to, Jesus. Indeed, this whole experience was a great test of John’s faith even in God. 135:11.1
… greatly comforted him and did much to stabilize his faith. 135:11.4
Faith is like a muscle. It had to be submit under forces that intentionally destabilisze it.
I was greatly destabilized in my faith 7 years ago. I though I lost it. And it was after I took a moral choice against all odds.
. . . won’t you be stronger in your faith if it is challenged?
Considered my experiences, it is true.
All great answers everyone. I guess it comes down to the type of challenge. Lucifer certainly challenged people’s faith in Michael and God. What he wanted to do was destroy trust and thereby undermine loyalty. When the trust bond is broken, faith will suffer. But why would a person invite such a thing? How could that be good?
The quote in question was concerning the desire for a sub-forum where folks of different religious beliefs can express themselves without fear. The argument is that this is good because it challenges faith and makes it stronger. Here’s where I think Mara and Gene have it right. Faith is not an intellectual exercise, nor a set of beliefs. Challenges to faith, or tests of faith, come from doubting. Doubting is caused by a lack of trust. Why is it good to instigate doubt and distrust?
Personally, I think when a person attempts to challenge my faith with their personal beliefs, it’s nothing more than harassment, a form of persecution. Jesus said, if you have faith, then have it to yourself (99:5.7). Trying to persuade others to accept your personal beliefs as faith is proof that it isn’t. At least that’s how I see it.
On the other hand, it’s good to learn about other people’s theology, which TUB calls psychology,
103:6.1 Theology is always the study of your religion; the study of another’s religion is psychology.
But what does that have to do with faith? I think you have to already have a strong faith in order to even desire to study another’s beliefs. Wouldn’t the purpose be to get to know a person better? (Human things must be known in order to be loved. 102:1.1) It seems to me if the motivation to discover another person’s beliefs is only to strengthen your own faith, it would be rather selfish in motive and not loving at all. And a person who expects to challenge another with his beliefs is merely proselytizing his own theology, which is also selfish in motive. As I see it, that is.
Bonita – thanks for pointing to the connection between faith and trust. This is exactly what I had in mind at this point (t=2:40) in the fresh version of Part 3 of that video series. From the script:
Evolution has shaped our children to be like containers for hope and trust.
From their trust in us comes a willingness, a wilful faith, to believe what we believe.
And from this faith comes a personal thing: assurance.
Like the assurancewe sceptical souls develop in the reliability of reason, and in the sincerity of friends.
In Paper 101, faith is actually described as “a technique of personality assurance“.
Later, in paper 103, the same author unfolds the concept of faith like this: [ … ]Nigel
Well said Nigel. I don’t think it’s possible to have personality assurance without trust in THE Personality, who is Love.
Personally, I find that assurance is divinely linked to love. Love is the life energy of the universe. When I lose the connection I feel insecure, uneasy and irritable. And they do say that divine things must be loved in order to be known. To know assurance as a reality, you gotta stay connected to Love.
Is that faith? I think so. Can it be strengthened? Sure, but not necessarily by being challenged by other people’s beliefs. Strengthening faith comes from consistency of commitment to remaining connected to the Source, who is Love.
Thank you Bonita, and everyone else for your thoughts. This is a very good thread and for me personally, what the doctor ordered.
I don’t know about you but I sense something profound is happening and I’m honored to be in company with you all.
I’m honored to be in company with you all.
I’ll ditto that.
Why would a person invite such a thing? Put it this way there is no point being declared a world champion if you are a boxer with no one to fight, or a chess master with no one to play. Faith may not be an intellectual exercise but if the formula in that exercise doesnt ‘seem’ right there could be 2 reasons.
1. The formula is wrong
2. The answer is wrongIf the formula is wrong then the answer will always be wrong in the result you wanted. And if the answer is wrong then it will never be right regardless of how much ‘faith’ you have in it. If you have doubts because of what someone said to you, then you always had those doubts and just somehow masked them or employed selective amnesia.
And how can you have faith in that?When I recommended a ‘miscellaneous’ sub forum I did it with other ‘new thought’ adherants in mind, along with mainstream religions as well as basically anybody. Sure you will find matters of contention in regards to dogma of their religions but UB is not an organised religion like the mainstream ones today which are based on politics and simple greed and powerlust. However if the dogmatic issues are set aside then I think you will find that you and they will share many things in common; and the UB can be one of them. Until then less and less people will know about the UB and more and more if they learn about it will think its some sort of new age UFO cult.
Yes we may be born with faith, we might be born into an inherited religion on which we have no say; but we were also born with autonomy. Unless we exercise that autonomy then we will surrender it, and this can be seen increasingly among people without faith. They have no faith in God and no faith in themselves, and this is because of their doubts which they refuse to acknowledge and confront.
What is wrong in examining how other people come to their answers?
1+1=2 but so is 3-1 and so is the square root of 4
If your faith in God is absolute then what can anyone say or do to cause you doubt?
My email - [email protected]
Faith may not be an intellectual exercise but if the formula in that exercise doesnt ‘seem’ right there could be 2 reasons. 1. The formula is wrong 2. The answer is wrong
Formulas have to do with belief systems. Faith is not formula because it is not a belief system; it’s a gift, as Mara explained in the second panel. First you must desire and be able to recognize the gift, then you either accept it or deny it. Since you haven’t read the Urantia Book, I’ll provide a quote for you to consider on that subject, if you’re so inclined:
(1610.2) 143:2.7 Your sonship is grounded in faith, and you are to remain unmoved by fear. Your joy is born of trust in the divine word, and you shall not therefore be led to doubt the reality of the Father’s love and mercy. It is the very goodness of God that leads men into true and genuine repentance. Your secret of the mastery of self is bound up with your faith in the indwelling spirit, which ever works by love. Even this saving faith you have not of yourselves; it also is the gift of God. And if you are the children of this living faith, you are no longer the bondslaves of self but rather the triumphant masters of yourselves, the liberated sons of God.
Yes we may be born with faith,
Children are born with bodies, personalities and minds, but not souls. Faith is born with the birth of the soul, which is that recognition process I mentioned above. The soul comes into existence the moment the child recognizes and accepts the gift of faith. It usually happens between 5 and 6 years old. I would provide quotes for you, but since you haven’t read the book, I think the language would be too confusing for you right now. Perhaps after you read those first 17 pages as Nigel suggested.
Unless we exercise that autonomy then we will surrender it, and this can be seen increasingly among people without faith. They have no faith in God and no faith in themselves, and this is because of their doubts which they refuse to acknowledge and confront.
I will agree that free will is a gift, but I do not agree that it can ever be taken away. As long as an individual has personality, he/she has free will. Some people choose to be complacent and accept the status quo for many different reasons (see quote below). Human nature is basically weak, lazy and fearful. That is the crux of our animal legacy which we are destined to transcend. Our divine nature, which is alive in our souls, is not weak, lazy or fearful. It is full of life, creativity, truth, beauty and goodness. It is bursting with the need to share love and friendship. This divine nature must be chosen, and thankfully God has given us the will to choose it if we want it. The more people who know about this wonderfully exciting life within them, the more who will likely choose it. It is a personal religion, not an organized religion. It’s totally free and liberated.
Below is a quote you may find interesting which explains four phases of religious living:
(1114.2) 101:7.4 The great difference between a religious and a nonreligious philosophy of living consists in the nature and level of recognized values and in the object of loyalties. There are four phases in the evolution of religious philosophy: Such an experience may become merely conformative, resigned to submission to tradition and authority. Or it may be satisfied with slight attainments, just enough to stabilize the daily living, and therefore becomes early arrested on such an adventitious level. Such mortals believe in letting well enough alone. A third group progress to the level of logical intellectuality but there stagnate in consequence of cultural slavery. It is indeed pitiful to behold giant intellects held so securely within the cruel grasp of cultural bondage. It is equally pathetic to observe those who trade their cultural bondage for the materialistic fetters of a science, falsely so called. The fourth level of philosophy attains freedom from all conventional and traditional handicaps and dares to think, act, and live honestly, loyally, fearlessly, and truthfully.
What is wrong in examining how other people come to their answers?
Nothing at all. As I explained, it’s called psychology. Getting to know other people is the only way to learn to love them. Proselytizing, on the other hand, is usually counterproductive. There must be an interest from both parties to get to know one another in order for this to work.
If your faith in God is absolute then what can anyone say or do to cause you doubt?
Exactly! Which is why I question your statement that exposure to other beliefs is necessary to strengthen faith. I’m having trouble making the connection. Certainly there is much to be gained by studying other’s beliefs, but strengthening one’s faith is accomplished through increased devotion to the one who gifted that faith in the first place, not by questioning or doubting that precious bond.
Also, if there is anything I said that you would like to see supporting quotes, please let me know. I’d be happy to dig them up for you.
leon14 wrote: Yes we may be born with faith. . . .
We’re not born with faith.
leon14 wrote: If you have doubts because of what someone said to you, then you always had those doubts and just somehow masked them or employed selective amnesia. And how can you have faith in that?
What you describe is called belief – doubting what someone said to you. Accepting what someone said to you is also belief. It is intellectual and based on reasoning. Thomas was the great doubter. (139:8.9 )He had to be shown. And he was shown. He got it for keeps as part of his personal experience.
181:2.26 And then Jesus went over to Thomas, who, standing up, heard him say: “Thomas, you have often lacked faith; however, when you have had your seasons with doubt, you have never lacked courage. I know well that the false prophets and spurious teachers will not deceive you. After I have gone, your brethren will the more appreciate your critical way of viewing new teachings. And when you all are scattered to the ends of the earth in the times to come, remember that you are still my ambassador. Dedicate your life to the great work of showing how the critical material mind of man can triumph over the inertia of intellectual doubting when faced by the demonstration of the manifestation of living truth as it operates in the experience of spirit-born men and women who yield the fruits of the spirit in their lives, and who love one another, even as I have loved you. Thomas, I am glad you joined us, and I know, after a short period of perplexity, you will go on in the service of the kingdom. Your doubts have perplexed your brethren, but they have never troubled me. I have confidence in you, and I will go before you even to the uttermost parts of the earth.”.leon14 wrote: What is wrong in examining how other people come to their answers?
Nothing.
leon14 wrote: If your faith in God is absolute then what can anyone say or do to cause you doubt?
How would you answer your own question?
- Faith and Belief:101:8.1 [reformatted for emphasis]
Belief has attained the level of faith when it motivates life and shapes the mode of living.
The acceptance of a teaching as true is not faith; that is mere belief.
Neither is certainty nor conviction faith.
A state of mind attains to faith levels only when it actually dominates the mode of living.
Faith is a living attribute of genuine personal religious experience.
One believes truth, admires beauty, and reverences goodness, but does not worship them; such an attitude of saving faith is centered on God alone, who is all of these personified and infinitely more.
Lucifer certainly challenged people’s faith in Michael and God.
Lucifer challenged Michael and God and they did not stop him. Lucifer used his autonomy to defy Michael and God as evidence of their impotency to stop Lucifer’s plans.
53:4.5 All the merciful delays of justice Lucifer pointed to as evidence of the inability of the government of the Paradise Sons to stop the rebellion. He would openly defy and arrogantly challenge Michael, Immanuel, and the Ancients of Days and then point to the fact that no action ensued as positive evidence of the impotency of the universe and the superuniverse governments.The people had their own challenges. And they were challenged: Would they choose to go with Lucfier, his manifesto and his minions, or would they go with God? It took seven years until everyone made the final choice. Seven years to listen to the arguments of both sides. When you are listening to arguments, pro and con, you are exercising your intellect and your emotions I think.I think Lucifer was challenging sovereignty, not faith. Although, faith does take the sovereignty of God for granted (God’s will over self-will). If faith is a gift from a person (God) and you have a deep relationship with that person, then denying sovereignty creates a whole new set of problems concerning loyalty. It can only result in chaos, especially in the mind.
In my own experience, denial of the sovereignty of God creates a black hole of emptiness in me. Can’t go there and never will. How others were enticed to do so is a puzzlement. But then again, they did not have Adjusters which would have provided them with an intimate closeness with Deity and would have made it more painful to deny him.
I hope I’m not being confusing with this issue concerning Lucifer. For those who found themselves sympathizing with his viewpoints, there must have been a great deal of chaos in their minds. Certainly their faith-trust was being tested, but I think the underlying issue was about sovereignty . . . who’s will is dominant in the universe. Faith is a relationship with the Sovereign. Once that relationship is compromised a person is forced to face reality as an isolated entity. Personality is not capable of functioning like that, at least not for long. Free will, like personality, functions as part of a relationship with other personalities. After all, the first volitional act of God was to create a Son.
“When I recommended a ‘miscellaneous’ sub forum I did it with other ‘new thought’ adherants in mind, along with mainstream religions as well as basically anybody”
dont know what the mods think about this request but mainstream religions are easy enough to study outside of a forum dedicated to study of the Urantia revelation. I vote no FYIW.
new thought from anybody sounds good however.
For those who found themselves sympathizing with his viewpoints, there must have been a great deal of chaos in their minds.
On Urantia who were those people? The Prince’s corporeal staff of one hundred at the planetary HQ which staff were to facilitate communication with the inhabitants of the realm and set up schools; the people who attended the schools the staff set up at HQ; the recently taught groups of people who previously attended those schools; the people who lived in the surrounding vicinity of HQ.
The corporeal staff one hundred had Adjusters but hadn’t fused with them. (50:3.2) But Adjusters were present in the minds of those human contributors of life plasm to the staff of one hundred. (66:2.7 ) “. . . [T]he grandchildren of the corporeal staff — are in status as of the superior races of their day and generation. All the offspring of these semimaterial assistants of the Planetary Prince are Adjuster indwelt.”( 50:3.5 ) After the seven years of debate, of the corporeal staff only forty remained loyal to the way and will of God. Of the midwayers (50,000 primary and about 50,000 secondary) there is a united group of 10,992 who remain loyal to the will and way of God and are now present on our world. (77:8.1 ) Of the angels and their associates read here: 53:7.6 .
Did these persons have *chaos* in their minds? I don’t know. At the Lucifer rebellion many were wowed by the brilliance of their superiors. (67:4.6 )
People believe lies. What more can I say? I myself have believed lies. People do it and rationalize it with all manner of thinking and reasoning. In the past I was a dabbler. Try a little of this. Try a little of that. I didn’t have any *chaos* in my mind. When I joined a cult I would describe myself as being self-deceived. It happens. To a certain extent at least in my case I wanted to believe. The ideas appealed to my mind and at the time those ideas did not seem goofy or ridiculous. I did not want to believe I was deceiving myself. I was not being forced to believe. I believed willingly.
Then I experienced disillusionment – the feeling of great disappointment resulting from the discovery that something is not as good as I believed it to be.
When I joined a cult I would describe myself as being self-deceived . . . .Then I experienced disillusionment – the feeling of great disappointment resulting from the discovery that something is not as good as I believed it to be.
I call all of that chaos. Self-deception is the product of mental chaos, a symptom of the disease. As I see it, that is.
I call all of that chaos. Self-deception is the product of mental chaos, a symptom of the disease. As I see it, that is.
No chaos. No disease. Just a normal person with an inquisitive mind.
I consider myself somewhat of an expert on the subject, and since the experience is part of what I personally acquired by actually participating, I consider the experience a gain-plus from passing through that period of my life. That period of my life was all about beliefs, many beliefs. It was not about faith.
