Sheep

[finder]

A common ridicule people of faith often endure is being called blind sheep. Obviously playing on the stereotype that Christians (in my case) have not rationally considered the tenets of our faith. Indeed we are routinely criticized for following like blind sheep being incapable of independent thought.

Well the opposite is true of course. You see when Jesus said...

25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and my Father are one.~John 10:25-30

He was speaking as the creator of our souls knowing full well our purpose, to live by faith in God. Worship. Of course that rubs the prideful the wrong way but the humble realize the wisdom of his words. You see, we all live by faith. None of us know for certain when we will draw our last breath, or know what the future holds in store for us. We go about our daily lives believing we'll wake in the morning and carry out our plans we've made usually without any thought as to our ability to live according to those plans. We faithfully believe when we say, 'see ya tomorrow" that we will. We've seen bits of the past, live in the present and are completely blind to the future.

The atheist no more knows what knowledge will be gained, if any or with what accuracy, then the Christian on any given day. But Christ being who he is offered to illuminate a small part of the future for us. He gave us insight as to what life really is. An infinite experience as opposed to the widely held belief that it's strictly a temporal existence. No matter what ones views are, walking by faith, not sight, is how life is navigated because that is how we were created. The differences between us are the paths we take. People sit in chairs faithfully, wait for buses, and enter into business arrangements, all done in faith. Whether it be in the knowledge pertaining to them or simply because they exist, we all live by faith. When Jesus said "my sheep hear my voice" he was informing nay-sayers that only by the hearing and following of truth above all else will lead us out of the darkness that's engulfed our lives and deceived our senses. Thus enabling us to see for the first time. Science wouldn't conduct experiments if they didn't have faith it would increase their knowledge. We all walk blind concerning the future but the question is, are you listening?

[iolo]

I think it would be very rude to make fun of people's beliefs or 'faith'. The problem for many of us, I think, is that more and more of the words you use - say 'souls', 'God' and 'worship' - are just sort of blurs, corresponding to nothing in particular in our experience. I often attend Quaker meetings, and find that a valuable experience, but my eyes glaze when they call what we are doing 'worship'. When I go to a Buddhist group I feel the same if they start on the smells and bells. Don't you think we ought to realise that people's worlds are very different and we ought not to force ours on others?

[hensatri]

Indeed we are routinely criticized for following like blind sheep being incapable of independent thought.

Well the opposite is true of course. You see when Jesus said...

Wow, you're kidding right? It's only 10am and I've already found my favorite unintentionally hilarious thing of the day.

[Robert]

No matter what ones views are, walking by faith, not sight, is how life is navigated

I agree Finder in the post, which is largely summed up in that sentence above. People such as Dawkins have misunderstood what 'faith' is, and skeptics have followed that misconception. At the time of Christ, it would have been mostly put forward as an alternative to the 'mosaic law', not that there was no evidence. Romans 1 tells us this. This 'evidence' WITHIN that we have is, in a lot of cases, sufficient for people to live their lives by....but this fuels the idea that they live by blind faith, which is completely false. We, as you have pointed out, all believe in something, even as regards the beginning of 'what we know', the universe. Is it multiverse, nothing (meaning something!) or the Origin we call God. It is all faith based....but ours is based on evidence (within) and theirs is based on a lack of evidence (within).

appendix:
It is this lack of inner witness which stops them seeing the simplicity and beauty of the Truth which we know as God, which brings about and IS everything.

[Robert]

Wow, you're kidding right? It's only 10am and I've already found my favorite unintentionally hilarious thing of the day.

You sound like you're still asleep to me.

[finder]

By Robert: It is all faith based....but ours is based on evidence (within) and theirs is based on a lack of evidence (within).

Good point Robert. I suspect 'fear' keeps them from seeing the evidence from within. Can you imagine, faithfully clinging to the "we don't know" stance while that pesky, seemingly irrational thought keeps entering their minds, "what if the believers are right & I will be judged for my arrogant, rebellious denials?"

[Dave In Canada]

Good point Robert. I suspect 'fear' keeps them from seeing the evidence from within. Can you imagine, faithfully clinging to the "we don't know" stance while that pesky, seemingly irrational thought keeps entering their minds, "what if the believers are right & I will be judged for my arrogant, rebellious denials?"

Why would you believe this & which believers are you talking about? All theists have a different version of their God. Is such a knowledge gained because you have a fear of being wrong? Is it your contention that anyone who doesn't believe in your God must have a fear that keeps them from seeing the evidence from within?

Which is more arrogant, believing that people who do not believe in your God are arrogant & rebellious or the belief that people of other faiths & spiritual beliefs or non-beliefs actually have thoughts about being wrong with regards to your faith?

[Jack]

Of course that rubs the prideful the wrong way but the humble realize the wisdom of his words.

What's "prideful" about seeking convincing evidence in support of fantastic claims? How is it "prideful" to withhold belief if one is not convinced that's what being presented as "the truth" in fact is the truth? How is pride equal to skepticism? On the other hand, what's humble about believing that the creator of the universe is having a personal relationship with you and that only your interpretation of the Bible is the proper one? What's humble about believing you happen to be among those blessed by god and among the few who will be saved? What's humble about claiming to have absolute knowledge regarding the existence of a god?

The atheist no more knows what knowledge will be gained, if any or with what accuracy, then the Christian on any given day. But...

I would have agreed with that sentiment had you not gone and followed a reasonable declaration with an unwarranted exception.

Science wouldn't conduct experiments if they didn't have faith it would increase their knowledge.

That sort of faith is based on previous experience. When we explore the unknown we increase our knowledge. It's happened that way since we began trying to understand the world and there's no reason to think it won't occur each time we do it in the future. What is there about every theist's experience of god that occurs the same way every time? Is every prayer answered the same way, is every voice you hear in your head the voice of god, is there any consistency in a believer's relationship with their god? If the answer is no, then you can't fairly compare conducting experiments and expecting to advance our knowledge by doing so with having faith in god. Two sorts of faith with two unique expectations.

A common ridicule people of faith often endure is being called blind sheep.

I think you're conflating "sheep" and "blind". That Christians seem proud to be considered sheep is sufficiently amusing to non-believers. We don't need to append "blind" to the image. We tend to reserve that modifier for faith.

[Maryjane]

Good point Robert. I suspect 'fear' keeps them from seeing the evidence from within. Can you imagine, faithfully clinging to the "we don't know" stance while that pesky, seemingly irrational thought keeps entering their minds, "what if the believers are right & I will be judged for my arrogant, rebellious denials?"

I was taught that hell wasn't an actual place but the separation from god's love. Hard to miss what you've never had.

[Robert]

What's "prideful" about seeking convincing evidence in support of fantastic claims?

If you were truly seeking ''convincing evidence'' then you would find it. As for 'fantastic claims', a big-bang from nothing (meaning something) which turns into everything is fantastic is it not? Even the so-called quantum energy and vacuum etc must come from something, unless they really do mean 'nothing' as Dawkins says ''literally nothing''. That is absurd to me, way past ''fantastic''...perhaps plain stupid. Yes, you will say there is evidence, but that takes us back to point one

How is it "prideful" to withhold belief if one is not convinced that's what being presented as "the truth" in fact is the truth? How is pride equal to skepticism?

You look at it from the point of view of someone who believes they only 'exist' as human, and not before within the Mind of God, the Logos

On the other hand, what's humble about believing that the creator of the universe is having a personal relationship with you and that only your interpretation of the Bible is the proper one? What's humble about believing you happen to be among those blessed by god and among the few who will be saved? What's humble about claiming to have absolute knowledge regarding the existence of a god?

If it were not true, it would be arrogance.....but it is true.

That sort of faith is based on previous experience. When we explore the unknown we increase our knowledge. It's happened that way since we began trying to understand the world and there's no reason to think it won't occur each time we do it in the future.

Exploring the Text and the fractal print it can show within the corporeal is 'the unknown and increasing our knowledge' ....this is the outer evidence....it does not necessarily require the inner evidence of Christ to do it, but it does require an open mind. Intuitively, we follow what we think is right, and look for things to back it up. This is from God

What is there about every theist's experience of god that occurs the same way every time? Is every prayer answered the same way, is every voice you hear in your head the voice of god, is there any consistency in a believer's relationship with their god? If the answer is no, then you can't fairly compare conducting experiments and expecting to advance our knowledge by doing so with having faith in god. Two sorts of faith with two unique expectations.

Why should it have to happen the same way every time when follow by the Spirit? Does a car always take the same path? No....do we then ignore cars or not even admit they exist?

[Robert]

Consider this: if all things are, as scientist Goswami puts forward, consciousness, which is in line with my understanding of all things being a print of God, 'Conscious Energy', then it makes sense why we see some who don't believe. All things within the universe are 'one mind'. This is backed up by 2Thess2 which says 'God will send a powerful delusion so they will believe the lie'. It is all part of mind.....eventually, everything will be purified, all will return, and all things will be new, even the skeptics. At the moment, you are just part of that 'gnosis' which is shut off.

[Jack]

If you were truly seeking ''convincing evidence'' then you would find it.

A rather presumptuous statement. It presumes my standards for evidence are the same as any theist's. They aren't. My standard for evidence can best be summed up by the scientific method. Evidence that can be subjected to that metric are, to me, more believable, more convincing, than evidence that cannot, that can only be taken on faith. Religious belief is a matter of "I want to believe so I do". My standards are based on "I want to know so I'll be careful about believing anything that lacks convincing evidence". I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to claim, "If you were truly seeking "convincing evidence" of the Big Bang then you would find it", since cosmologist are not unanimously convinced that the Big Bang is the only plausible explanation for the evidence we have. Likewise, your god is not the only, or even the best, explanation for the evidence of how the universe began (or anything else for that matter).

You look at it from the point of view of someone who believes they only 'exist' as human, and not before within the Mind of God, the Logos

Because theist's have failed to convince me their god exists. No god=no mind of god. You'd need evidence of the former to show the latter is real.

If it were not true, it would be arrogance.....but it is true.

Only in the mind of theists. Those of us who don't share your unfounded beliefs see it as arrogance.

Exploring the Text and the fractal print it can show within the corporeal is 'the unknown and increasing our knowledge' ....this is the outer evidence....it does not necessarily require the inner evidence of Christ to do it, but it does require an open mind.

An "open mind" would be one that consideres the possibility of the evidence not being true or not lending itself to the expected conclusion. Religious belief doesn't allow for that possibility. It's a closed (minded) system that only grants validity to evidence it thinks confirms it's conclusion that god exists.

Why should it have to happen the same way every time when follow by the Spirit?

We're debating "faith" in the validity of evidence, not cars.