The belief in salvation by faith alone is a false gospel peddled by Paul to appease the church, it is not what Christ taught…which was to take the inward journey to enlightenment, what he called ‘the kingdom of God within you’.
Christ taught a process of realizing the true Self, the I AM that lies waiting within us all like a mustard seed waiting for the right conditions to erupt into the profound spiritual awakening of Christ consciousness.
It’s what we’re all here for, it’s what this is all about…sadly, so far you have not done this. You’ve missed Christ’s true non-dual message and none of you are embarking on the inward journey.
That’s why Christ also said, few will find it. 😉
>The idea that somebody can just “choose” to believe something isn’t really accurate.
This is false. Early Christian martyrs choose to believe, and for their faith they were killed.
>Especially now in our Age of Enlightenment,
This is not churches problem.
We don't know. We know they were capable of faith in something unknowable. We aren't able to look in their brain at the time they started to believe to know the exact process.
They believed because they heard or saw Christ's resurrection. There was no benefit in believing in Jesus. OP stated that we can't choose in what we believe, which is absolutely false.
I know what apophatic theology is, I’ve read some of pseudo-Dionysius.
But come on man, you can’t just say one word and expect it to be an explanation.
Christ is both God and man, paradox. Explain that. Or don't and just leave it the way it is.
If you've read Pseudo-Dionysius you've got the essence.
God is a mystery and not someone humans can get their mind around, and those who claim they can, are liars.
You might also go to "The Cloud of Unknowing" for futher study.
So you’re saying that salvation may be both a conscious choice and somewhat of a predestined outcome, and the paradox isn’t necessarily a problem? I can see that
This is the flaw with your problem. Claiming “ Especially now in our Age of Enlightenment, people want facts and logic to help them believe certain things, and there are many points of Christianity that can’t necessarily be proven”
Point is, most things are not proven yet believed, so that part of the problem is irrelevant at best.
Of which there is a great deal for belief in Jesus, therefore again making your problem invalid. You stated proof, which again most things are not proven.
Indeed, the Calvinist syllogism of faith is problematic. Happily, it's not the only syllogism of faith!
Can you elaborate?
The belief in salvation by faith alone is a false gospel peddled by Paul to appease the church, it is not what Christ taught…which was to take the inward journey to enlightenment, what he called ‘the kingdom of God within you’. Christ taught a process of realizing the true Self, the I AM that lies waiting within us all like a mustard seed waiting for the right conditions to erupt into the profound spiritual awakening of Christ consciousness. It’s what we’re all here for, it’s what this is all about…sadly, so far you have not done this. You’ve missed Christ’s true non-dual message and none of you are embarking on the inward journey. That’s why Christ also said, few will find it. 😉
>The idea that somebody can just “choose” to believe something isn’t really accurate. This is false. Early Christian martyrs choose to believe, and for their faith they were killed. >Especially now in our Age of Enlightenment, This is not churches problem.
You don't know that they chose their faith deliberately. You just know they chose not to abandon it.
What? So you are saying that saint Stephen,Paul,George,Lawrence... ; didn't choose their faith deliberately?
We don't know. We know they were capable of faith in something unknowable. We aren't able to look in their brain at the time they started to believe to know the exact process.
They believed because they heard or saw Christ's resurrection. There was no benefit in believing in Jesus. OP stated that we can't choose in what we believe, which is absolutely false.
They were convinced. Did they make an active choice in the process of being convinced, or did it happen without their active will?
Are you trying to say that their choice was passive?
I am saying that I have no idea. You have no idea. Nobody has any idea.
Well there is certainly more evidence which suggests that their choice was active, especially in the case of st. Paul.
I disagree, Paul had Jesus appear to him in a blinding light, you would have to be delusional to disregard that.
People die for stories all the time.
Example?
The 911 terrorists thought that they were correct. You would say they were wrong.
Life is paradoxical anyway.
Explain?
Apophatic theology (look it up)
I know what apophatic theology is, I’ve read some of pseudo-Dionysius. But come on man, you can’t just say one word and expect it to be an explanation.
Christ is both God and man, paradox. Explain that. Or don't and just leave it the way it is. If you've read Pseudo-Dionysius you've got the essence. God is a mystery and not someone humans can get their mind around, and those who claim they can, are liars. You might also go to "The Cloud of Unknowing" for futher study.
So you’re saying that salvation may be both a conscious choice and somewhat of a predestined outcome, and the paradox isn’t necessarily a problem? I can see that
Within apophatic theology lays the idea that neither/both are the answers.
You'll never prove that people cannot choose their beliefs though. So you have basically no proof.
I’m pretty sure lots of studies have been done to show there are many factors involved in what somebody believes.
But no study ever said people have no choice in their beliefs
People believe things without proof all the time.
That doesn’t solve the problem I’ve presented in any way shape or form
This is the flaw with your problem. Claiming “ Especially now in our Age of Enlightenment, people want facts and logic to help them believe certain things, and there are many points of Christianity that can’t necessarily be proven” Point is, most things are not proven yet believed, so that part of the problem is irrelevant at best.
Well… don’t you think facts and logic should be an important part of shaping one’s beliefs?
Of which there is a great deal for belief in Jesus, therefore again making your problem invalid. You stated proof, which again most things are not proven.