Pointedstick wrote:
The reason why "have faith!" is not an especially satisfying answer to me is because being a believer is to have absolute faith in one set of unprovable beliefs, but categorically deny of all other unprovable beliefs held throughout the entire world.
Just within the Judeo-Christian family, for example:
To be an Orthodox Jew, I have to disbelieve in all of Jesus's miracles. To be a Christian fundamentalist, I have to tell myself that Mohammed was just some illiterate warlord high on cave gas. To be a Muslim, I have to believe that Joseph Smith was just some self-deluded idiot who probably created a crank religion to make himself rich like L. Ron Hubbard did (Mormons are required to tithe 10% to the LDS church). Who's right? All of them have faith in miraculous things that can't really be proven one way or another. So who's right?
You see the problem here?
This is something I struggle with as well.
Here is a quote about this topic from CS Lewis'
Mere Christianity, page 35:
Mere Christianity wrote:"I have been asked to tell you what Christians believe, and I am going to begin by telling you one thing that Christians do not need to believe. If you are a Christian you do not have to believe that all other religions are simply wrong all through. If you are an atheist you do have to believe that the main point in all religions of the whole world is simply one huge mistake. If you are a Christian, you are free to think that all those religions, even the [strangest] ones, contain at least some hint of the truth. When I was an atheist I had to try to persuade myself that most of the human race have always been wrong about the question that mattered to them most; when I became a Christian I was able to take a more liberal view. But, of course, being a Christian does mean thinking that were Christianity differs from other religions, Christianity is right and they are wrong. As in arithmetic - there is only one right answer to a sum, and all other answers are wrong; but some of the wrong answers are much nearer being right than others."
I realize this flies in the face of what the majority of Christians believe (particularly in the US), but Christians are also told not to judge others, only God can determine the quality of a persons heart.
Another quote from
Mere Christianity, page 64:
Mere Christianity wrote:"Here is another thing that used to puzzle me. Is it not frightfully unfair that this new life should be confined to people who have heard of Christ and been able to believe in Him? But the truth is God has not told us what His arrangements about the other people are. We do know that no man can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him. But in the meantime, if you are worried about the people outside, the most unreasonable thing you can do is remain outside yourself. Christians are Christ's body, the organism through which He works. Every addition to that body enables Him to do more."
There is also this from the
Catholic Catechism:
Catholic Catechism wrote:"Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself."
(emphasis added)
Then there is Pope Francis who
created some waves back in May 2013:
Francis explained himself, "The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart, do good and do not do evil. All of us. 'But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.' Yes, he can... "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ, all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! 'Father, the atheists?' Even the atheists. Everyone!" We must meet one another doing good. 'But I don't believe, Father, I am an atheist!' But do good: we will meet one another there."
Father James Martin, a Jesuit priest, told the Huffington Post, "Pope Francis is saying, more clearly than ever before, that Christ offered himself as a sacrifice for everyone. That's always been a Christian belief. You can find St. Paul saying in the First Letter to Timothy that Jesus gave himself as a 'ransom for all.' But rarely do you hear it said by Catholics so forcefully, and with such evident joy. And in this era of religious controversies, it's a timely reminder that God cannot be confined to our narrow categories."
Although redemption and salvation are not the same thing, it is still important to remember that Jesus died for everyone. As for how to accept this gift, well that is still a matter of debate among Christians, which I find strange. It seems baptism and faith in Christ is very important, but also good works can help us lean towards Christ even though we cannot or refuse to accept Him and His sacrifice.
Honestly I think too much focus is placed on the afterlife (we tend to focus too much on Paul and not enough on Jesus). I think it is enough to believe that there is an afterlife and that our actions in this life matter. The actual experience of the afterlife is likely so far beyond our comprehension (we can get a hint of it from our longing for paradise or Eden) that it is pointless to give it a definite description. Imagine a fetus trying to determine what life is like outside the womb - it is pointless - the only thing that matters is that it has formed a functioning body and has a strong desire for mother. I see this life as a second womb where the goal is to grow a healthy soul/mind. If I can do this then I feel like I'll be prepared for whatever happens after death. If there is no afterlife than at least I have lived a good and full life.
Re: Pascals Wager, I think it's better to not look at it purely through a Christian lens but rather that an afterlife exists and that our actions in this life matter. If you cannot accept Christ then at least follow the Golden Rule and hopefully God's mercy (if He exists) will be enough to avoid an uncomfortable/painful afterlife...maybe
Limbo will be the destination for good people that cannot accept Christ, which seems like an okay place to be. One thing we need to always remember is that God's judgement (if He exists) will be just, which should both terrify and comfort us.
