George's follow-up post gives this tidbit of information:
"I feel that I should clarify that I am not looking for God for myself. If I had a strong desire to find him, I know that I could very easily - it is easy to believe something that you want to believe."So what appeared to be sincere questions is actually a forensic exercise to figure out why people believe what George does not and doesn't intend to.
It makes you wonder how we go about finding sincere questions. We are given a constant stream, it seems, of "sincere questions", but the truth seems more like this constant stream is more of a smoke screen. Perhaps, if the questions pile up high enough, the reality of the underlying discussion can get obscured.
It's an effective ploy. The evangelistic mindset likes questions. And we are so easily deluded that perhaps, if we are careful enough and thoughtful enough and logical enough, we might talk this one into the kingdom. Give them the answers to the questions they are asking, and maybe they'll come to Christ! Right? What you'll find more often than not that the answers are irrelevant, and the goal is to obfuscate.
Should we stop offering answers? No, indeed! We need to always be "ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence" (1 Peter 3:15). What we need to do is remind ourselves that it is not our eloquence, our learning, our apologetics, our wisdom, or even our deep and abiding concern for the lost that brings them to Christ - it is the Lord.
6 comments:
Dear Stan,
I must say that I was upset to read your post. I am sorry if I caused any offense. Indeed, the reason I opened my follow up post with that remark is because I didn't want to mislead people like yourself. However to accuse my question of not being sincere, and of being 'an effective ploy' is extremelly offensive to me. After all if you check the description of my blog, it is and always has been 'Questions about Christianity to try to find out why people believe'. And what, may I ask, is wrong with that, with a forensic exercise?
I was extremelly pleased and interested in everyone's response to my first post. I have the same feelings towards the responses to my second post. I am however very disappointed to discover that you are no longer interested in answering my questions (indeed even rather rudely questioning my motives) because I 'have no intention of believing'. Are you saying that non believers and even those yet to form a decision (like myself) shouldn't ask questions to try to find out more about Christianity? Several of the responders said that they were atheists, asked questions similar to me but with a very closed 'I'm going to rip these beliefs to pieces' state of mind, only to become Christian. And I never closed off that possibility for myself.
I stick with my original statements. I am not trying to find God. Surely you would agree that if I was I am taking completely the wrong path. It is only too easy to open the bible with the assumption that every word is true, and worship God. I have not done that. Does this mean I have no right to ask you questions? What really confuses me is your implication that the only reason for answers the questions of people like me is to lead them to God. Why not answer those who are just curious?
I repeat that I did not mean to offend you, and I did not want to mislead anyone. I am sorry that you felt this way. I am also sorry that someone who seemed to keen to provide answers not only shunned me after you realised that I was not actively looking for God, but went so far as to insult and accuse me online. I understand that Christians feel that it is important to steer others towards God, but I never knew that it was custom to abuse someone who is just curious.
George Frodsham
George,
I wasn't insulted. Nor did I think you were attempting to intentionally mislead anyone. My comment was to Christians.
The evangelical mindset thinks, "Hey, they're asking questions ... I've got a live one!" The common belief is that if I can answer your questions, I can get a convert. And the most common reason that people ask question is not to find answers to their roadblocks to belief, but to simply put them up as roadblocks.
I was not offended by your questions. I was pointing out to Christians that questions don't mean interest, that questioners aren't necessarily looking to become Christians, and that we need to avoid getting sucked into that kind of a mindset.
Should you ask questions? Sure. Should we answer them? By all means. I said so in my post. I'm not warning non-believers from asking; I'm warning believers from unrealistic expectations.
As for you, do you find it odd that in your questioning about God you are not asking anything of the Muslim, the Jew, the Hindu, or any other religion? Why only the Christians?
Dear Stan,
I am relieved to find out that I misunderstood your post. I repeat that I did not intend to mislead anyone and my questions were sincere.
The reason that I ask Christians is quite simply because it is the only religion I have even a basic knowledge of, and I live in a Christian dominated society. I have started a quest to find out more about spirituality and the mindset of believers, and I have no doubt that this will lead me to ask the same questions of other religions and believers. We must all start somewhere!
Whilst I originally only intended to post once on http://helpwithgod.blogspot.com, I think that I shall continue to ask questions on there as long as people are reading them. I think that anything that makes people think is worth reading. Please feel free to continue reading my questions, and answering if you wish.
All the best,
George
And I am relieved to hear that the initial tension my post created has been relieved.
In answer to your forensic examination, George, there are a variety of reasons people believe. Some are raised in it and never forced to question it enough to believe anything else. Some are raised with it, discard it, and then realize that they were wrong. Some are raised with it, believe it, then become convinced further by the evidence. Some are raised without it, but become convinced by the evidence. Some come to believe simply by "sensing" it is true. There isn't "one reason" why anyone believes, some "magic bullet" of faith. Neither does "faith" occur by mere wish. There is plenty of evidence available for the inquiring mind. See, for instance, my post on Feathers of a Bird. Contrary to popular opinion, faith is not opposed to reason. Faith may be without evidence, but it doesn't have to be. When evidence is included, it can simply strengthen faith, as is my case.
I think that questioning a person's motives for asking a Q to obtain other people's opinion is a cheapshot and it is a way to "poison the well". I ask Q's all the time about my ideas as well as other people's ideas. I may believe differently than the idea conveyed in the Q I have asked. Truth is your answers should not be conditioned on what my motives are for any number of reasons- not the least of which that you are inferring things about the asker that are based on your biases, not the askers. All Q&A communication becomes an opportunity to explore old and new ideas. Personally I find your critique of the person's Q's dismissive and even arrogant-definitely anti-intellectual! He was polite to reveal where he was coming fom and you saw it as a weakness to be exploited. That's a low blow.
Heeltap,
This was a long time ago! If you read the post and read the comments, you'd find 1) why I made the post (it wasn't for the person asking the question, but for Christians), and 2) in the exchange with the original author of the question in question (got it?), you'll find that he wasn't offended by my post (once I explained my point).
My point was that just because people ask questions doesn't mean "you've got a live one." He himself said he wasn't interested in finding God. The question about where to find God, by his own admission, was not as insincere question about where to find God. I wasn't questioning his motives. I was pointing at his own explanation of his motives.
Post a Comment