Bump #1, thread instantly died for some reason
Didnt even read, ofc the god loving kid is from the USA
shut the fuck up
I have more respect for Man 1, because it's his only truth.
Man 2 know everything, but he still belive that shit, yeas is faith is stronger, but his iq much lower too IMO lol.
keep worshiping in your ancient beliefs.
get some new shit like simulation shit and other stuff
I think this is a really interesting topic. From my point of view, man #2 has a much stronger faith than man #1, but I doubt an all knowing and all good god would distinguish between their faiths. I feel much more similar to man #2 than man #1, with the exception being that I couldn't continue believing with all of the information presented to me. I was raised catholic and participated in the church for ~10 years from elementary school to the end of high school, and I definitely did believe at one point, but I just can't truly believe anymore.
I feel that if I was in the shoes of man #1, I could have been faithful my whole life. Being closer to man #2 is what pushed me to atheism.
I don't think one is held higher in the eyes of God, just one had more experience with the modern world, I don't think there is too much of a divide in these two outcomes.
Yes it's very possible, Christianity just details how we all act anyway in a digestible format
I don't think that Man #2 will have a "stronger faith".
I do fit in the persona of the Man #2. I'm a software developer, have my own software company. I'm surrounded by "really smart people". My brother is a Biology Doctor, and so goes on my friendship circle.
Romans 10:17 says:
"So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
I do think that the Man #2 would be really better prepared for Christian Apologetics.
No, man #2 does not have a stronger faith
I don't think so, faith comes from hearing. Pilgrim's author, for example, was not a cult man, but his teachings are wonderful. On the other hand, Lewis was very cult, previous atheist and his teachings are wonderful. The great thing is not about what you know, but about how closer you are to Christ, the Truth. The #1 man have his own temptations and doubts, and going through it is a proof of his love for God. Also, the author of Ecclesiastes writes about this knowledge x ignorance thing.
There is simply no way a man that is that knowledgeable still believes in religion after learning about the many of them that exist unless he's just afraid of his religion's God, he can still believe in some kind of concept he has accepted as God dont get me wrong but religion is just stupid and you realise how pointless it is to pick a side.
I think #2 does often indeed have stronger faith, and even the Bible tells us to be ready to answer for our faith at all times. But, the Bible also tells us to have a big faith, that is a belief that god might to big things. I think maybe #1 may have big faith, because #2 tend to be more impacted by secular view and be less expectant to miracles etc.
So I am Christian but also have a university degree and love studying about science and space. What if God is an extra dimensional being not constrained by time but rather something else. This would explain why God is omnipotent and omnipresent. That being said, who is to say our day is one day for God? That's why evolution and creationism can go hand in hand honestly.
But idk that's just what I think
man #2 has had all the chances to change faith. He was surely tested more. Maybe he even stopped believing for a moment and questioned Christianity, which is considered a sin.
Luke 15:7 : "I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent"
I AM MUHALLA MUHAMMED MEIKIL SALIM HALAM
Imo there is no proof, so every faith is equal
I agree with dr_fiji answer #19 . I can add from myself that faith is not only the knowledge but also the way you believe and abide the commandments of our God . Stronger u believe and follow in God's word = more faithful you are or in other words stronger your faith is
while mankind can rationally argue that man 2 has a stronger faith since it persevered through all his experiences and through tests both external and internal it will be stronger. but this assumes that God will expect you to eloquently describe and justify your faith before being allowed in heaven, which would be ridiculous. These two points show the issue of this question: the ignorance and lacking capabilities of mankind compared to God, which is why I ultimately believe that while you cannot argue for either being more pure or true, you can say that in material world, man 2 would be a better advocate for proselytization than man 1.
imo, from Gods perspective, they would both be equal as they would both have complete faith in their god (assuming they abide by all the rules and all the rules are just in the eyes of God, but this point doesn't have much purpose in this theoretical argument but does show the unbridgeable disconnect between humanity/reality and that above us). Furthermore, it is not fault of man 1 (unless he actively avoided engaging in discussion, which in Judaism would not be a good sign as debate is a cornerstone of our faith) that he has not had his faith tested or challenged (either from external or internal forces) and so he cannot be punished for it. so you have to default to the basis of it all and the supposedly the question we are asked before going into heaven. which is- did you have faith?
any assessment of the purity and/or strength of ones faith is a matter that is immediately grounded in the physical aspects of our world (features we are impossible to dissociate from). unlike from the perspective of an almighty which would: a) know the individual better then themselves as he is omniscient and also privy to our 'soul' and so would know whether a man's faith was true or not. b) would not be concerned with an individual having a learned approach to his faith as long as the end result is the same, with both men truly being faithful to their God.
Now this question becomes different when placed into a historical context and the substantial changes that most religions have been through over the last few thousand years. In such a case, it becomes very easy to argue for the second man being more faithful while the first being viewed as gullible, and even arguably an idolater as he just accepted the first answer given to him (as has happened historically in the catholic church, most notably, with all the shifting in rules). once again however, this is a definitely human perspective and to assume God would have a similar outlook would be arrogant.
I think a being that would be omniscient and totally merciful would understand why anyone holds the position they hold and as a result accept them equally.
Of course that would include any position, so non-believers or believers of different faiths would be accepted as well.
Now of course the god you believe in may not be omniscient or totally merciful, or neither, in which case your question would be more interesting.
thou shall not believe in bullshit written in a book by people that didn't even know where the sun went at night
tis almost 2020 and you still in 1800 mens))))
Thats why imo all that faith in god gets u to heaven is total bs, even if heaven exists its not like people that are faithful in god are the only ones getting there. Lets say that u were born in 3rd world country and never been taught about the god and the relligion and u die. Why someone like that should not go to heaven? Even if its true then god is an asshole. Its not like i believe in god its just something i never understood and never will
No, I think it's a matter of opinion. I think in God's eye neither would be better because both are devoutly Christian.
Now answer my question (I am a reluctant Christian, I guess):
Does God damn those who came before Him (of course, they didn't 'come' before Him per se, but they certainly weren't exposed to him)?And if not, wouldn't that mean that whatever deity (Dyeus Phter comes to mind especially, because there is absolutely no way a traditional Indo-European religious practitioner would've been exposed to God, whereas one of Odin/Zeus might've been) they were following would've been a representation of God? Expanding on this, wouldn't any religious philosophies still in the current day still be a representation of a 'creator' of some kind? I don't know why, but the Cosmopolitan religious philosophy makes a lot of sense to me. Is there any reason, in your opinion, why we should be Christians rather than Cosmopolitans?
I think I've heard that researching and providing proofs to your faith in your mind while learning other faiths is better for your faith in the purpose of strengthening the belief. At least in our beliefs, I suppose.
Christian myself, so interesting thread.
IMHO I would say you are correct when you suggest that #2 has stronger faith; the Christian/Biblical meaning of faith is not belief in spite of what we know, but because of it (see Hebrews 11:1). In questioning things about life, death and the universe, #2 has sought answers, which is a good thing to do and one that helps strengthen faith; Christianity has to be true for it to be viable and attractive. It is not bad to have doubts and questions, but it is bad to hold them and not seek to resolve or answer them.
To say that #1 is a Christian out of chance is, again IMHO, incorrect. God calls everyone, and each individual chooses to answer yes or no. Many people such as myself were introduced to Christianity by our parents, which is a good thing and one I am thankful for. Without going too much into the mind-bending subject of predestination, I would say God chooses those who are saved, and those who are saved choose God. #1 chose to be a Christian just as much as #2 did, even if they have a very different knowledge base and made their choice by considering a different list of factors.
Having weaker or less developed Christian faith does not disqualify someone from God's kingdom or disappoint God; each of us is on a journey of faith where we are hopefully growing. God delights in all those who choose him, and wants to see each of us grow, as none of us will have perfect faith or live perfectly on Earth.
It is difficult for humans to judge if one Christian is a "better" Christian than another, as again, no-one is perfect. #1 may perform more deeds of faith than #2 (e.g. sharing God's Word with those who do not know, helping the needy, serving their Church), so even if their faith is not as strong as #2 they may be doing more work for the Kingdom. Each individual also struggles with their own sins, and it is dangerous territory to class or rank different sins based on our human morality and then suggest someone is a better Christian because "their sins are less frequent/bad" and vice versa.
Sorry for long answer :)
Fatih best cs player of all time
Santa Claus is a religion. Being lied to saying that santa is watching and only gives presents to good kids
They should learn to adapt to the evidence if they think their god is right. You can believe the evidence and still have faith. Basically, if their faith is so strong, they should learn to accept the new evidence and still have faith that their god is right