Can You Believe Christianity is True Based on Hope?

[@joesmith4098]

There was just, a lot of feelings in his video. He went into real detail about just how bad he felt as a non christian and I don't think that was an accident. Neither is the fact a lot of this was happening during the pandemic, so I can see how he is so focused on hope. I do hope he gets real help for his mental health, depression is no joke.

[@koppite9600]

If he sees everything is tainted how do you help him? It's like you are offering a different lie like the one he hopes exists in xtianity

[@hopefultheism]

I say in the video that I was about three years into what ended up being a five and a half year persistent bout of depression. The story picks up in 2019, which is prepandemic. Most of the depression I'm describing was before the pandemic. I also never made the claim that I was depressed because I was a non-Christian and felt bad because I was a non-Christian. By the way, I did get help for my depression, which is how I got out of that persistent period of depression. :)

[@familypicko279]

A profound insight into the kind of sanguine, assured faith I see in scipture. Seasons Blessings Randall.

[@shayneptorres]

Holy crap! I think that you just articulated exactly how I see my faith since my deconstruction. I haven’t been able to really grasp why it is that I still believe. I was unable to “get into the wheelbarrow” of the previous shape of my faith but I am now. Thanks for this breakdown. And I am stoked for HopefulTheism!

[@michaelletourneau9623]

Merry Christmas Randal.

[@karlu8553]

When I see someone deconvert via seminary or grad level study and then reconvert, the reconversion rarely if ever follows an evidential or scholarship-based path back into faith, as was followed out. It usually has more to do with issues of meaning, hope and purpose, other emotions, dissatisfaction with a purely materialistic account of reality (but fuzzy as to how that translates into renewed belief in the historical content and claims of the Apostles Creed), etc. I've followed his account for a few years and am not surprised by the reconversion. I hope it brings him joy joy, peace and hope. The version of christianity he seems likely to return to, is probably better for the world than the version of christianity, he was in previously

[@greenleaf239]

I don't understand how Christians see their belief system as hopeful. I'm specifically talking about those versions of Christianity that think their wrathful deity is going to torture, after death, anyone who doesn't believe a certain set of propositions. When I was mature enough to think about it, I hoped it wasn't true. Why would I want a evil deity in charge? Such a system may be beneficial to those who believe the "right" things, but it's at the expense of everyone else.

[@dianarising7703]

I hope you had a great Christmas. I personally don't think we consciously choose our beliefs. I think we believe for some reason and then rationalize it.

[@thelmaallen9424]

What helped me grasp the meaning of believing was when I saw that the word 'believe' in the Bible is translated from a Greek word which implies entrusting. It's one thing to have an opinion or theory about something. It's another thing to consider it worth entrusting my life to.

[@sohu86x]

You probably want to make sure the object of your trust is real.

[@goblintown]

Definite food for thought. Merry Christmas!

[@unhingedconnoisseur164]

I found the explanation of the Wittgensteinian account of beliefs to be quite fascinating. I was wondering, however, if there might be counterexamples to it; I imagine that many people (myself included) would feel very uncomfortable saying "bloody mary" thrice in a dark bathroom in quick succession, but wouldn't it seem odd to then say that I believe that the ritual is actually real?

[@catfinity8799]

With the lottery analogy, this is more than just believing that a coin flip will be heads because you wish it is. Rather, it is a choice between two worldviews. Although Hopeful Theism is not rationally convinced of the Christian worldview over materialistic atheism, he sees something good and beautiful in the Christian worldview which materialistic atheism is fundamentally lacking: hope. He does not hope, or wish, that Christianity is true; rather, he sees hope, true hope (not wishfullness) in Christianity, and he has decided to make that hope his own.

[@ImpatientTheist]

What’s more is when you add the problem of evil to the proposition, you are now asking if god can save you when The Great Blondin failed to get you across safely. Perhaps we should also hope that hope can float.

[@stephenbailey9969]

Described in the New Testament, the Spirit moves with presence and power, including miraculous acts, pointing hearts to Jesus. Through the Spirit, Christ comes to us directly, Being to being. For some testimonies of works of power, one might investigate Craig S. Keener's book "Miracles Today".

[@KingoftheJuice18]

Wouldn't it make sense to include Pascal's Wager in this sort of discussion? It's not my personal approach, but it seems relevant to the categories you were engaging with.

[@koppite9600]

People didn't get in the wheelbarrow because it comes with a different experience regardless of them knowing they'd be safe.

[@weirdwilliam8500]

While hope, like literally anything, can be a reason for believing something, it just isn’t a good justification for that belief. Emotional appeal is in the same bucket as superstition and vivid dreams.

[@sohu86x]

Yep.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

Most beliefs that aren't strictly based on narrow, empirical observations (and some people would even include these) are grounded in human emotion, not just abstract reason. When a person chooses a career path, just to take an example, they really don't know and can't know how things will turn out following that path. It would be absurd to tell someone, "just choose logically and don't appeal to your emotions, desires, and hopes." Existential commitment based on everything you know, feel, and believe (which is what Randal was referencing at the end of the video) is radically different from mere "superstition." There's nothing in this universe that commands: Thou shalt only believe what is scientifically demonstrable-and stake your whole life on it."

[@Electricalpenguin]

@@KingoftheJuice18 I agree with you in part. Most human beliefs in areas like religion/politics/philosophy are not primarily driven by logic. If they were, I think we’d expect people to converge over time on the same answers. For religions that are more akin to philosophies or ways of life, I think your career-choice example works. But some religions are making specific factual claims, both about the past (things like the Exodus, the resurrection of Jesus or the revelation of the Quran) and the future (what will happen to you if you don’t believe the right things). Believing in one of those religions based on one’s feelings is a bit like if, in choosing a job, you went with your feelings to determine factual questions like “What is the salary range for this job?” or “What types of tasks would I be doing in this job?”

[@KingoftheJuice18]

@@Electricalpenguin Thanks for your reply. Well, my religious faith-just for the record-is that nothing bad at all will happen to you if you're an atheist or in another religion (I'm a traditional, but liberal Jew), as long as you live decently. In fact, things might be even better for you than for a "correct believer"! So you might think Judaism is more of a "way of life." But let me defend beliefs here, since all religions and philosophies involve some sorts of beliefs. I don't think your job analogy works and here's why: According to the religions mentioned, that information has been provided (history of the company, job description, future salary, etc.) in sacred scriptures; the question is whether you should fundamentally trust the answers you've received. This is where most analogies tend to break down because the way to evaluate religious claims is more personal and complex than, say, just getting a direct answer from the boss in her office. Although there certainly is an important sense in which you need to "trust your gut" above all else in tough job decision-making, and not simply rely on the verbal answers you are given by employers. I probably would need to go on and on, but let me just say one more thing. We mustn't fall into a false dichotomy. Randal noted that "Hopeful Theism" does have reasons for belief in God, they just aren't totally decisive for him; there are good counter-arguments, he feels. On that note, also accepting any anti-religious argument as persuasive isn't just a matter of "objective reason"; it definitely involves various kinds of feelings.

[@weirdwilliam8500]

@@KingoftheJuice18 Thanks for your thoughts. The key distinction I was trying to make is the difference between correspondence to objective reality versus personal values or benefit. If following a faith based on hope is what finally lets someone quit a drug addiction or get relief from chronic anxiety, then that's a good reason for them to hold their religious beliefs. However, it is not a good reason to think that their religious beliefs are true - that they in fact correspond to reality. It can be true that a belief in a god has a good impact, and false that the god actually exists. There is no correlation, because it's not a good justification. Note that even though they only have bad justifications for the belief being true, that suggest but doesn't necessarily indicate that the belief is in fact false. The example you gave, of making career decisions, is not something I would call a "truth statement." That's an inherently subjective area, dependent on someone's subjective needs, preferences, and values. And my comment doesn't mean I embrace scientism, or even that I have any existential commitments. If you are making empirical claims about reality, like a god existing, then you need to show your work by pointing at something in reality that thoroughly corroborates your claims. Theists have never done this, to my knowledge. (Although I do see a lot of Affirming the Consequent fallacies: Pointing at growing trees is not evidence for my claim that magic turtles cast spells on trees to make them grow.) However, outside of empiricism we can create definitional truths, like what it means to be a widow, and axiomatic truths, like math and logic. These are all semantics and exist only in our mind, but are still "true" by definition. THE POINT IS: You should be able to recognize that your values and preferences are subjective and important, and also that is objectively true that you value and prefer those things. If you value holding beliefs that make you hopeful, that is absolutely fine, so long as you recognize that your hopefulness is completely unrelated to the objective truth of the belief in question.