Is Jesus just a 'crutch'?

[secondeve]

Second, the problem I have with this is, as a believer, one of the major tenets of the Christian faith is...well...faith. And this is something that has struck me recently in my walk with Christ. Faith is a beautiful thing. It stretches you. It takes you places you never thought you could go. Because see, if there really is a God you can put your faith in, then it's the belief that He's looking out for your best that's so comforting and what He desires.

Do you like it when people can put their faith in you? To keep your word? To show up somewhere on time? To comfort them? The God of Abraham does too...Would you rather your own child know everything there is to know about anything or sometimes have to rely on you?

Maybe I understand why nonbelievers don't like it so much now...If you don't understand it, then it is annoying to see someone hiding behind faith constantly. It's not that we're trying to be cheap, it's that we admit we don't know everything, ever will, nor want to, and that our faith is going to get us through a lot more things than knowing what the square root of 89,876 is.

K.R.E.B.S, just to clarify, it's only percieved as 'hiding' when the religion in question doesn't seem to have any answers on the dissenting subject - then you're trusting in a lack of answers just because the bigger concept is familiar, rather than because, as on other areas, it would appear to make sense. It's seen as a crutch on the implication that the actual truth (or something more likely) is disbelieved, not because it's been researched and/or disproved by the believer, but because, if it was true, they couldn't stomach it, and would rather put faith in a comforting (but potentially false) idea than to accept a realistic (but likely) truth.

[Guest LadyC]

in the words of mike warnke, Jesus may be a crutch, but that ain't a bad thing when you're crippled!

(hope nobody had already said that one!)

[secondeve]

in the words of mike warnke, Jesus may be a crutch, but that ain't a bad thing when you're crippled!

(hope nobody had already said that one!)

Words to that effect had been mentioned, yes.

[apothanein kerdos]

It refers to the intellectual plausibility of Christ. In this, Christ is not a crutch at all. A crutch is that which we use to limp on by even though we cannot rationally explain the problems of the world. Jesus, being the answer to the problems, fails to meet this definition.

[Guest K.R.E.B.S]

Second, the problem I have with this is, as a believer, one of the major tenets of the Christian faith is...well...faith. And this is something that has struck me recently in my walk with Christ. Faith is a beautiful thing. It stretches you. It takes you places you never thought you could go. Because see, if there really is a God you can put your faith in, then it's the belief that He's looking out for your best that's so comforting and what He desires.

Do you like it when people can put their faith in you? To keep your word? To show up somewhere on time? To comfort them? The God of Abraham does too...Would you rather your own child know everything there is to know about anything or sometimes have to rely on you?

Maybe I understand why nonbelievers don't like it so much now...If you don't understand it, then it is annoying to see someone hiding behind faith constantly. It's not that we're trying to be cheap, it's that we admit we don't know everything, ever will, nor want to, and that our faith is going to get us through a lot more things than knowing what the square root of 89,876 is.

K.R.E.B.S, just to clarify, it's only percieved as 'hiding' when the religion in question doesn't seem to have any answers on the dissenting subject - then you're trusting in a lack of answers just because the bigger concept is familiar, rather than because, as on other areas, it would appear to make sense. It's seen as a crutch on the implication that the actual truth (or something more likely) is disbelieved, not because it's been researched and/or disproved by the believer, but because, if it was true, they couldn't stomach it, and would rather put faith in a comforting (but potentially false) idea than to accept a realistic (but likely) truth.

Thanks, I know...what religions would you say this is true with?

Blessings,

Joe

[secondeve]

Second, the problem I have with this is, as a believer, one of the major tenets of the Christian faith is...well...faith. And this is something that has struck me recently in my walk with Christ. Faith is a beautiful thing. It stretches you. It takes you places you never thought you could go. Because see, if there really is a God you can put your faith in, then it's the belief that He's looking out for your best that's so comforting and what He desires.

Do you like it when people can put their faith in you? To keep your word? To show up somewhere on time? To comfort them? The God of Abraham does too...Would you rather your own child know everything there is to know about anything or sometimes have to rely on you?

Maybe I understand why nonbelievers don't like it so much now...If you don't understand it, then it is annoying to see someone hiding behind faith constantly. It's not that we're trying to be cheap, it's that we admit we don't know everything, ever will, nor want to, and that our faith is going to get us through a lot more things than knowing what the square root of 89,876 is.

K.R.E.B.S, just to clarify, it's only percieved as 'hiding' when the religion in question doesn't seem to have any answers on the dissenting subject - then you're trusting in a lack of answers just because the bigger concept is familiar, rather than because, as on other areas, it would appear to make sense. It's seen as a crutch on the implication that the actual truth (or something more likely) is disbelieved, not because it's been researched and/or disproved by the believer, but because, if it was true, they couldn't stomach it, and would rather put faith in a comforting (but potentially false) idea than to accept a realistic (but likely) truth.

Thanks, I know...what religions would you say this is true with?

Blessings,

Joe

Potentially, all of them - in fact, scrap that. It can be true of any belief, even athiesm. What it ultimately boils down to is the situation of the individual, and their willingness (or lack thereof) to ask questions. I'm trying to think of a good, coherent way to put this. Alright. Imagine you've spent your entirel life believing that all music is evil. Everyone in your immediate family and circle of friends believes this. Because of this, you have never heard music. But one day, in a new town, you hear something beautiful - and you find out that it's music. Well, then you're left with three choices. 1: Persist in what you've always believed, exactly the same way you've always belived it. 2: Reassess your beliefs - try and learn how, within the framework of your knowledge, something can be both beautiful and evil. Or, 3: Question your belief as a whole, comparing it to other points of view. Even if you eventually reach the same conclusion - that music is evil - the point is, you're more learned in the area, and you have a more solid basis for belief.

The 'crutch' option is the first. Confronted with a new idea that challenges their beliefs, the person studiously ignores it, at best putting faith in the idea that someone, somwhere has already solved this problem for them (although there's no need to actually check), and at worst, flatly denying their experience as false, a glitch, a weakness in them or the work of a malevolent entity trying to sway them from truth. The point being that for whatever reason, they don't want to think and they don't want to learn.

The second position is a midway point. Depending on how extreme your criticism is, this can be a crutch, or not. Largely, I'd say it's dependant upon the incident. If the question you're posed is only a small one, it's perfectly reasonable to look within your existing view for answers. But if the experience is bigger, and potentially troubling to a key tenet of what you believe, then it would be reasonable to expect the person to look futher afield.

The third view is the inquisitve one. This is where you go if you're really making an effort to understand. It doesn't matter what you conclude: the point is your desire to understand and, potentially, your flexibility - to consider (although not necessarily accept) new things.

This can happen to anyone: athiest, Christian, Hindu, Muslim. Whatever. You see what I'm saying?

Edited December 14, 2006 by secondeve

[terter]

I haven't read all the posts - but whenever someone says Jesus is just a crutch, they evidently have not tried to live a Christian life according to God's Word. Just a few examples - turn the other cheek as many times as it takes, love your fellow man, put God's will above your own 24/7, listening and obeying what God tells you, etc. Any one of those things is a lifetime "project." Chrisitianity isn't for wimps.

[apothanein kerdos]

It refers to the intellectual plausibility of Christ. In this, Christ is not a crutch at all. A crutch is that which we use to limp on by even though we cannot rationally explain the problems of the world. Jesus, being the answer to the problems, fails to meet this definition.

I was recently this past year rebuked by someone for using the word rationalizing..

I was misusing it...It appears it's taken on a negative connentation...instead of being part of the principle of "rational"...

so here's an interseting add to the concept of rationally............not a rebuke or kudos...just a thought....

to use rationale......or to rationalize. this seperates the real from the intentionally blind.

The only negative aspect to rationality is rationalism, which is false because it puts the center of rationality at man's mind. Rational thinking, at least true rationality, puts the center of thinking at God and subsequently works from there. In this, we are to have a very rational faith, one that we can explain. We should be able to explain both the physical and theoretical core elements of our faith and very rarely should we have to implore a, "That is something we should simply believe."

Blind faith, faith without rationality, is not faith at all and even contradicts the literal meaning of faith in Greek and Hebrew.

[GeneV]

Religion may be a crutch - but Jesus? No I don't think so....if so then this previously hard bitten, get to the top at any cost, old curmudgeon freely admits "I AM A CRIPPLE" JESUS be my crutch.

[Gerioke]

I haven't read all the posts - but whenever someone says Jesus is just a crutch, they evidently have not tried to live a Christian life according to God's Word. Just a few examples - turn the other cheek as many times as it takes, love your fellow man, put God's will above your own 24/7, listening and obeying what God tells you, etc. Any one of those things is a lifetime "project." Chrisitianity isn't for wimps.