How to become a Christian.

[Aaron]

I've been thinking a lot lately about how a person becomes a Christian. I spend a lot of time reasoning and thinking about Christianity and my life and the world as I find it and how I think other people find it and I always have to come back to my own personal experience. I grew up in a Christian home and learned all about God and the various biblical characters, but now looking back I see all I really learned were stories and how to act around other people to make them think I was a good person. That lasted for a while, but later on I found myself in a place in my life that I didn't really like. I had some how become a phony nice person, I was a double minded fake and at times I was even tricking myself. Things got worse and I got myself into problems that made it clear I wasn't the awesome person I was acting like I was.

Somewhere in there when I was in my darkest time I picked up my bible and started to read Romans. I can't explain it exactly but when I read those words they went into my head like the bible never had before, I believed what I was reading, I believed what Jesus said he did and I believed he did it for me and it was an incredible feeling, a feeling of relief like a burden was removed, a feeling like the room got brighter and my thoughts grew clearer, a feeling of peace and thankfulness... I could go on and on, but I'll cut it short for your sakes.

When I look at the life of Jesus and how he interacted with people while he was on earth I can't help but to notice when he recruited his followers he simply called them. They heard his word and obeyed, they believed him. I don't know exactly how it works all I can say is that is what the bible says happened and I have to say that's how it happened for me. I heard the word and I believed.

So what I'm really getting at is we may discuss Christianity and how it fits or doesn't fit all we want on an intellectual level, which is fine and I very much enjoy doing it. But if a person is really serious about being a Christian I really think they will have to go deeper. If they are looking for the same good news that Jesus was offering then they won't find the answers through solid reasoning of their own, the good news is that Jesus is the way not us.

I realize this isn't the most eloquent post and it will probably be rejected by most people on here, but I just think the power of Christianity is Christ himself, its not in the intellectual ability of the individual Christian. So does anyone else have this same idea about Christianity?

[tirtlegrrl]

Yes--sort of. In fact it was after a years-long process of trying to "get to God" (or figure out whether I should have faith in God) by reading, and reasoning, and "examining evidence" that I eventually concluded that humans are really bad at getting to God on their own. In order to make peace with God I had to reach the end of my rope intellectually; I had to get the the point where I realized that I could die without ever "knowing" whether God existed and I had to decide what I thought was really worth believing in for the now, because my pervasive skepticism was literally making me nuts and destroying my relationships with certain people. That said, I hope that God doesn't require that we should have to DENY all reason or make ourselves believe what we think are untruths in order to be "saved". So while I do consider myself a Christian (in the "accepted him as my personal Savior" sense, as well as some others), that identity for me is one of faith (choosing to act as though certain things are true) not necessarily intellectual assent. And I also don't, for the time being, consider myself an inerrantist, a Young-Earth Creationist, a dispensationalist, or a lot of other "ists" I used to identify myself with before my skeptic years. And I'd still like to know, if God exists and has allegedly raised people from the dead, why he's never made anyone's amputated limb grow back. Call me a Doubing Thomas Christian.

[Kiwi]

I come across this issue a lot Aaron, especially in conversation with my wife. She is a very devoted Christian whereas I'm not, although I used to be. Her take would be that the faith journey is predominantly validated at an emotional level. She says things like "I just know..."

Problem is, in my experience it's impossible for non christians and Christians to properly engage with each other on this emotional playing field. Christians think that atheists are not delving deeply enough into the mysteries of life and the spirit - you have expressed this as 'going deeper' - while atheists think Christians are being intellectually naive. It's kind of a "You're too cold!" argument versus "You're too soft!" The two arguments don't actually intersect. And I can't go deconstructing my wife's legitimate feelings. Those feelings are real for her. As they are for you.

As a former believer I do understand how you can line up all the arguments and evidences and yet eventually just throw your hands in the air and say, with utter conviction, "Whatever! This stuff doesn't matter, it's the change in my heart that is important! It's this inexplicable knowledge I carry with me that God is real and that He loves me!"

I also understand how that same kind of feeling can lead people into Christianity. From this perspective you are dead right that the power of Christianity is in "Christ", not in the intellectual ability of the individual Christian. At an instinctive level it can make sense. There is a very compelling, and I'd dare say valid, emotional pull towards the love of God and Christianity's other 'heart' messages. It almost feels mean to try to argue against it. Depending on who you're talking to I suppose. A forum like this is fair game! [Insert evil laugh here. ]

[Exrev]

I've been thinking a lot lately about how a person becomes a Christian. I spend a lot of time reasoning and thinking about Christianity and my life and the world as I find it and how I think other people find it and I always have to come back to my own personal experience. I grew up in a Christian home and learned all about God and the various biblical characters, but now looking back I see all I really learned were stories and how to act around other people to make them think I was a good person. That lasted for a while, but later on I found myself in a place in my life that I didn't really like. I had some how become a phony nice person, I was a double minded fake and at times I was even tricking myself. Things got worse and I got myself into problems that made it clear I wasn't the awesome person I was acting like I was.

Interesting religion seems to tell us that there is something wrong with us that it can fix....what else does this oh yeah Marketers! Not that trying to improve our lives is a bad thing.

Somewhere in there when I was in my darkest time I picked up my bible and started to read Romans. I can't explain it exactly but when I read those words they went into my head like the bible never had before, I believed what I was reading, I believed what Jesus said he did and I believed he did it for me and it was an incredible feeling, a feeling of relief like a burden was removed, a feeling like the room got brighter and my thoughts grew clearer, a feeling of peace and thankfulness... I could go on and on, but I'll cut it short for your sakes.

Romans was my favorite book of the NT. I too literally would describe aftering study Romans that I had an epiphany of the teaching of god's grace. In fact I can remember that day very clearly. But just because we get excited about learning something new. And of course anything to relieve us of our guilt or shame is going to make us feel great for a while anyways. But the question is not how it makes us feel.

When I look at the life of Jesus and how he interacted with people while he was on earth I can't help but to notice when he recruited his followers he simply called them. They heard his word and obeyed, they believed him. I don't know exactly how it works all I can say is that is what the bible says happened and I have to say that's how it happened for me. I heard the word and I believed.

Why would this impress you? Blind obedience really? This would just lead me to question the judgement of the disciples. Cult leader dream followers...just believe what I say. Its easy to just be a follower.

So what I'm really getting at is we may discuss Christianity and how it fits or doesn't fit all we want on an intellectual level, which is fine and I very much enjoy doing it. But if a person is really serious about being a Christian I really think they will have to go deeper. If they are looking for the same good news that Jesus was offering then they won't find the answers through solid reasoning of their own, the good news is that Jesus is the way not us.

This is what I repeatedly hear from Christians? If we can't get answers through solid reasoning then why should we believe it in the first place? This answer is exactly what I'd expect of a false belief system. At this point we could justify any belief with a simple word called FAITH. The question you should be asking yourself is why does my faith system make claims that can't be backed up by reason. Saying that Jesus has it all figured out and we can't is a total cop out.

I realize this isn't the most eloquent post and it will probably be rejected by most people on here, but I just think the power of Christianity is Christ himself, its not in the intellectual ability of the individual Christian. So does anyone else have this same idea about Christianity?

Your post is fine. But i'd agree that power of Christianity is the lack of intellectual effort (not ability) of the believer

[mitchellmckain]

I've been thinking a lot lately about how a person becomes a Christian. I spend a lot of time reasoning and thinking about Christianity and my life and the world as I find it and how I think other people find it and I always have to come back to my own personal experience. I grew up in a Christian home and learned all about God and the various biblical characters, but now looking back I see all I really learned were stories and how to act around other people to make them think I was a good person. That lasted for a while, but later on I found myself in a place in my life that I didn't really like. I had some how become a phony nice person, I was a double minded fake and at times I was even tricking myself. Things got worse and I got myself into problems that made it clear I wasn't the awesome person I was acting like I was.

Somewhere in there when I was in my darkest time I picked up my bible and started to read Romans.

Yeah. Romans. That is what did it for me too. Without a doubt my favorite book of the Bible. Well.... did something important for me, since I cannot say it did quite the same thing. It was certainly the key to finding value in traditional Christianity or "Pauline Christianity" as I called it right then.

My story is not much like yours. I wasn't raised the same and there was a very long thinking process before Romans could make that impact. Long before that, I had to figure out what in the world this "God" thing/word or whatever had to do with anything.

When I look at the life of Jesus and how he interacted with people while he was on earth I can't help but to notice when he recruited his followers he simply called them. They heard his word and obeyed, they believed him. I don't know exactly how it works all I can say is that is what the bible says happened and I have to say that's how it happened for me. I heard the word and I believed.

Its not so simple for others of us. Its more like we hear the word and puzzle for a long time wondering, "what the heck does that mean?" "Is it possible that it means anything?" Even when people are raised Christian like you are, we can see from this forum that they sometimes come to a point where they ask these questions and realize they actually cannot find any meaning in this stuff after all.

So what I'm really getting at is we may discuss Christianity and how it fits or doesn't fit all we want on an intellectual level, which is fine and I very much enjoy doing it. But if a person is really serious about being a Christian I really think they will have to go deeper. If they are looking for the same good news that Jesus was offering then they won't find the answers through solid reasoning of their own, the good news is that Jesus is the way not us.

Right. This intellectual stuff isn't why we are Christians. You got that right. It most definitely is NOT the result of some intellectual argument. But unlike what some of the more ridiculously self-congratulating atheists might think, becoming Christians doesn't turn our brains off. So regardless of whether this reasoning of our own gets us anywhere or not, its something that a lot of us do anyway to make some sense of it all.

I realize this isn't the most eloquent post and it will probably be rejected by most people on here, but I just think the power of Christianity is Christ himself, its not in the intellectual ability of the individual Christian. So does anyone else have this same idea about Christianity?

Absolutely. The intellectual stuff is much like other activities like excercise and art -- its something we do because of who we are. So getting this stuff clear in our heads is not much different that painting a picture of Jesus. If it has value it is for the art itself and not because having the picture means you have Him.


P.S. So it seems that both Exrev and I can say to each other, "I've already been where you have been". LOL Or perhaps it is clear to those that are wiser that this is really is more than a simple one dimensional thing and so we really have never really been where anyone else has been. At most it is more like a spiral where we start in different places and athough we seem to be approximately in the same place at different times our paths lead us to be at nearly opposite ends of the spectrum at this time.

[Aaron]

Interesting religion seems to tell us that there is something wrong with us that it can fix....what else does this oh yeah Marketers! Not that trying to improve our lives is a bad thing.

Well as long as they're telling the truth. But you know from what I can see the old testament only gave the law telling us what a person's got to do to be righteous, there wasn't actually a fix for quite a few years, right?

Romans was my favorite book of the NT. I too literally would describe aftering study Romans that I had an epiphany of the teaching of god's grace. In fact I can remember that day very clearly. But just because we get excited about learning something new. And of course anything to relieve us of our guilt or shame is going to make us feel great for a while anyways. But the question is not how it makes us feel.

Mmm, I agree, feelings are not the end game. What really matters is whether or not Jesus is indeed interceding for us at this very time. Our feelings are at the most indicators, however reliable they may be, that Jesus has actually begun his work in our lives (that is if Jesus is actually real).

Why would this impress you? Blind obedience really? This would just lead me to question the judgement of the disciples. Cult leader dream followers...just believe what I say. Its easy to just be a follower

Well I suppose it's impressive to me if the disciples had never met Jesus. It's impressive if the disciples did not expect fame and fortune and yet still followed. It's impressive if the only words they heard were, "Follow me", and that's what they did. Perhaps all this is is evidence of the sheep-like mind of the disciples or perhaps its evidence that God himself called the disciples and that they were primed to follow (just like I was primed to believe by the time I read Romans).

If we can't get answers through solid reasoning then why should we believe it in the first place? This answer is exactly what I'd expect of a false belief system. At this point we could justify any belief with a simple word called FAITH. The question you should be asking yourself is why does my faith system make claims that can't be backed up by reason. Saying that Jesus has it all figured out and we can't is a total cop out.

Well first of all I will admit right away that I don't have it all figured out, but I'm not saying that believing on Jesus is by definition unreasonable. The way I see it I have very good reasons for believing that Jesus is real, my reasoning is solid. What I'm trying to say though is that I should not put my faith into my own reasoning, not because it is bad or faulty, but because I believe Jesus is real and worthy of my faith or trust. I am not a Christian because I have constructed a solid argument in my head, I'm a Christian because I trust in Christ.

[WorldlingWatcher]

I came to Christianity after growing up among a rather derisive group of atheists. Their lives were a mess, however, and the moral consistency of their choices was highly questionable, so my gut told me to look for an ethical or philosophical system that would help keep me from turning out the way they were. I started reading philosophy and from there explored a number of religions. When I thought I had run out of leads it occurred to me that my parents' parents seemed to have done pretty well with their life choices, so I decided to read Matthew.

When I was done with Matthew's gospel, I knew I was in deep trouble if this Jesus guy was right, so I started investigating the arguments on both sides. After half a dozen years of picking through the claims I decided the preponderance of the evidence was on the side of the Christians and tepidly became one myself. It took another half dozen years of reading and study before I considered myself to be committed in my beliefs and really have any emotional ties.

[JustJim]

I decided the preponderance of the evidence was on the side of the Christians

Without going into all the details of actually laying out all the intricacies of the evidence, can you at least give some examples of the evidence? I mean, evidence for what, for example. Do you mean evidence that the God of the Bible exists? Do you mean evidence that Jesus was/is God? That Jesus is the one and only way to God? That Jesus was resurrected from the dead? And so on.... What do you consider to be acceptable as evidence? The Bible? Philosophical reasoning? Personal experience? And so on....

I ask this because atheists and most agnostics see NO evidence whatsoever that gods of any kind exist, even though they admit it's possible. It's odd that you see enough evidence to say it's a preponderance of the evidence that supports a Christian belief, while they don't see any evidence at all. How can that be? Since most atheists and agnostics readily admit they'd become believers if they saw sufficient evidence to convince them, maybe if you could just lay it out there for them, they'd convert.

Jim

[Kiwi]

I came to Christianity after growing up among a rather derisive group of atheists. Their lives were a mess, however, and the moral consistency of their choices was highly questionable, so my gut told me to look for an ethical or philosophical system that would help keep me from turning out the way they were.

While this was your experience it doesn't follow that all atheists are derisive or morally bankrupt with messed up lives. I know that's not your point. But I know plenty of messed up Christians and plenty of atheists who live meaningful lives with truckloads of integrity.

This intellectual stuff isn't why we are Christians. You got that right. It most definitely is NOT the result of some intellectual argument. But unlike what some of the more ridiculously self-congratulating atheists might think, becoming Christians doesn't turn our brains off. So regardless of whether this reasoning of our own gets us anywhere or not, its something that a lot of us do anyway to make some sense of it all.

I find myself agreeing with you here, Mitch. This is why I think we sometimes need to be clear about the playing field we're on. If it's an intellectual playing field then great, bring out the big guns. But if it is this 'other' arena, this indefinable, ethereal, "dammit, it just makes SENSE!" playing field, well then ... all the atheist intellectual firepower in the world won't make a dent. This is infuriating to skeptics who pride themselves on their superior critical thinking faculties. Having been a believer myself I can appreciate the aspect of Christianity that seems to transcend the intellectual arguments. Even if I no longer subscribe to it myself.

[Exrev]

I came to Christianity after growing up among a rather derisive group of atheists. Their lives were a mess, however, and the moral consistency of their choices was highly questionable, so my gut told me to look for an ethical or philosophical system that would help keep me from turning out the way they were.

While this was your experience it doesn't follow that all atheists are derisive or morally bankrupt with messed up lives. I know that's not your point. But I know plenty of messed up Christians and plenty of atheists who live meaningful lives with truckloads of integrity.

This intellectual stuff isn't why we are Christians. You got that right. It most definitely is NOT the result of some intellectual argument. But unlike what some of the more ridiculously self-congratulating atheists might think, becoming Christians doesn't turn our brains off. So regardless of whether this reasoning of our own gets us anywhere or not, its something that a lot of us do anyway to make some sense of it all.

I find myself agreeing with you here, Mitch. This is why I think we sometimes need to be clear about the playing field we're on. If it's an intellectual playing field then great, bring out the big guns. But if it is this 'other' arena, this indefinable, ethereal, "dammit, it just makes SENSE!" playing field, well then ... all the atheist intellectual firepower in the world won't make a dent. This is infuriating to skeptics who pride themselves on their superior critical thinking faculties. Having been a believer myself I can appreciate the aspect of Christianity that seems to transcend the intellectual arguments. Even if I no longer subscribe to it myself.

So it comes down to intellect vs. faith argument. I often ask myself if all these arguments about reality, faith, doubt, intellect doesn't just boil down to us dealing with the fact that we will die one day. For some people it is fear that they will not exist forever that motivates their belief, and for others maybe for other people it is a fear of living forever that motivates our disbelief in an afterlife. It is interesting the topics that get the most popularity on this board and I also noticed that topics that both atheist and theist avoid, seems to be those questions about the afterlife and how uncomfortable this topic makes us feel. Maybe its this angst that we feel toward this issue which makes us fight so hard for our views. Even if they are indirectly related to death and the afterlife. I seem confident that there is no afterlife, but do I have evidence for that, i don't know why do we feel so strongly one way or the other? I could be shoot by my atheist friends, but maybe even this is beyond our intellect is it possible to think of our death rationally and intellectually unbiased? I don't know.

[Kiwi]

Yeah, "intellect vs faith", I guess so. But that would seem insulting to most intelligent Christians. It's tricky. And yet after all the debates most intelligent Christians end up, finally, at the doorstep of this statement: "I don't really know, but this just feels right!"

...which drives the rest of us nuts.

And at that point we get accused of lacking an essential spiritual dimension.

[Exrev]

Yeah, "intellect vs faith", I guess so. But that would seem insulting to most intelligent Christians. It's tricky. And yet after all the debates most intelligent Christians end up, finally, at the doorstep of this statement: "I don't really know, but this just feels right!"

...which drives the rest of us nuts.

And at that point we get accused of lacking an essential spiritual dimension.

Why would it seem insulting to Christians? Most I know will raise faith above intelligence or a "fideistic" worldview. They would site Paul's command to watch out for false philosophies. In fact, many Christians I know are very anti-intellectual, but then they would never admit to "i don't really know"- they will say "i just know that I know" , maybe that was the difference between them and myself, I never could say that. Here is my theory; some people trust there own "gut" or intuition more than others do. When I was a believer was I less intelligent than I am now? Was my thinking process different? No! It was just that my focus was different. Once I realize that I could not trust or accept what my community said...my focused changed.


With this said, not all Christians are like this, there are many different types of Christians out there that do value reason, rational thinking and are very thoughtful. Many Christians on this board show this, such as Mitch, Tirtlegrrl, Scott. They have a very different view than what my Christianity was to me. Tony views reminds me most of the Christianity that I believed for many years.

[Kiwi]

Why would it seem insulting to Christians?

Note that I said "most intelligent Christians". Here I'm thinking of the kind who haunt boards like this. Plus some really good thinkers I know in the real world. And even myself, when I was a Christian. I would have been totally insulted at the phrase 'intellect vs faith', as though you can't have both.

[ChristianHeretic]

I decided the preponderance of the evidence was on the side of the Christians

Without going into all the details of actually laying out all the intricacies of the evidence, can you at least give some examples of the evidence? I mean, evidence for what, for example. Do you mean evidence that the God of the Bible exists? Do you mean evidence that Jesus was/is God? That Jesus is the one and only way to God? That Jesus was resurrected from the dead? And so on.... What do you consider to be acceptable as evidence? The Bible? Philosophical reasoning? Personal experience? And so on....

I ask this because atheists and most agnostics see NO evidence whatsoever that gods of any kind exist, even though they admit it's possible. It's odd that you see enough evidence to say it's a preponderance of the evidence that supports a Christian belief, while they don't see any evidence at all. How can that be? Since most atheists and agnostics readily admit they'd become believers if they saw sufficient evidence to convince them, maybe if you could just lay it out there for them, they'd convert.

Jim

Jim, not to speak for WW, but I don't know why this concept is so difficult for some atheists to grasp. Without rehashing our entire "evidence" thread, I honestly don't understand why it's so difficult for someone to see how another could make the following statement:

When I was done with Matthew's gospel, I knew I was in deep trouble if this Jesus guy was right, so I started investigating the arguments on both sides.

Surely it's at very least a "remote possibility" that this Jesus existed and actually said and did the things that his biographers documented Him saying and doing? And if He did, why would it be unreasonable for someone to make the statement that "I knew I was in deep trouble if this Jesus guy was right?" I honestly don't know if the atheists participating in the other thread were just stubborn or if they were so blinded by their ideology that they simply can't think objectively. I'm more than happy acknowledging that it's possible that any one of the 4 million theories out there on Jesus could be correct, but it just seems that they are hell-bent on the absolute impossibility of this historical Jesus?

[JustJim]

I decided the preponderance of the evidence was on the side of the Christians

Without going into all the details of actually laying out all the intricacies of the evidence, can you at least give some examples of the evidence? I mean, evidence for what, for example. Do you mean evidence that the God of the Bible exists? Do you mean evidence that Jesus was/is God? That Jesus is the one and only way to God? That Jesus was resurrected from the dead? And so on.... What do you consider to be acceptable as evidence? The Bible? Philosophical reasoning? Personal experience? And so on....

I ask this because atheists and most agnostics see NO evidence whatsoever that gods of any kind exist, even though they admit it's possible. It's odd that you see enough evidence to say it's a preponderance of the evidence that supports a Christian belief, while they don't see any evidence at all. How can that be? Since most atheists and agnostics readily admit they'd become believers if they saw sufficient evidence to convince them, maybe if you could just lay it out there for them, they'd convert.

Jim

Jim, not to speak for WW, but I don't know why this concept is so difficult for some atheists to grasp. Without rehashing our entire "evidence" thread, I honestly don't understand why it's so difficult for someone to see how another could make the following statement:

When I was done with Matthew's gospel, I knew I was in deep trouble if this Jesus guy was right, so I started investigating the arguments on both sides.

Surely it's at very least a "remote possibility" that this Jesus existed and actually said and did the things that his biographers documented Him saying and doing? And if He did, why would it be unreasonable for someone to make the statement that "I knew I was in deep trouble if this Jesus guy was right?" I honestly don't know if the atheists participating in the other thread were just stubborn or if they were so blinded by their ideology that they simply can't think objectively. I'm more than happy acknowledging that it's possible that any one of the 4 million theories out there on Jesus could be correct, but it just seems that they are hell-bent on the absolute impossibility of this historical Jesus?

I have no problem with that part of WW's story. I'd be happier if he had said that after he read Matthew he believed (as opposed to "knew") he was in deep trouble and emphasized the IF this guy Jesus was right, but I know what he meant. He believed the story of Matthew, and applied it to his life in a way that led him to investigate further, even if his investigation was "flavored" by his newly found sense of being in trouble. That's fine. I don't think there's anything wrong with reading something you consider to be authoritative, believing it, applying it to yourself, and making whatever changes in your life you think you should make based on what you've read and "learned" from it.

I'm just asking why he thinks there's a "preponderance of evidence" that would lead one to believe in the message, doctrines, and teachings of Christianity. I'd like to see what he includes on that list of evidence. If it's only the Bible, fine. But I don't think that would be a "preponderance" of evidence. If it's also philosophical reasoning, done without presuppositions that Christianity is true, that's okay as well. But I don't think that qualifies as a "preponderance" of evidence, either, since philosophical reasoning should always include "the other side of the argument," which is just as "preponderant." If it's also personal experience, that's fine, too. But that can't be considered a "preponderance" of evidence because there are so many widely varied and contradictory experiences people have reported involving many, many gods and many, many personal revelations from and experiences with those gods. So, even if it's a combination of the Bible, philosophical reasoning, and personal experiences, I still don't think that would comprise a "preponderance" of evidence.

And that's why I asked. If the evidence is so bountiful and obvious as to be considered a "preponderance of the evidence" in support of Christian beliefs, then where is it? What is it? Why doesn't everyone in the whole world clearly and easily see it and accept it?

Jim