I recently took a Hogan personality test at work. I fed the results into ChatGPT and asked for it to analyze and to highlight some areas I should explore and focus on in light of my role and some executive coaching I have access to. Some of my results got me thinking about my faith (or lack thereof) and wondering if our personality types and how our brains are wired can impact how we approach faith and what it may take for people to believe. I asked ChatGPT for additional insights into how my personality type could impact my views on faith and religion.

Some highlights from the analysis and some of the response. For those familiar with Hogan, I scored very high in Science, Learning Approach, Skeptical, and Cautious. Any general thoughts, perspective, etc. would be appreciated.

Religious faith presents an unusual problem to that kind of mind because at some point there is no additional dataset that produces mathematical certainty. You can investigate history, philosophy, cosmology, biblical scholarship, religious experience, and arguments about God indefinitely, but eventually you encounter uncertainty.
And that may be where your normal decision-making process runs into a wall:
"I am willing to believe this once I am sufficiently convinced."
Religion may answer:
"At some point you have to trust without possessing certainty."

Perhaps your path, if you ultimately believe, was never going to look like:
"I heard the message, felt it in my heart, and knew."
It may look much more like:
"I questioned it relentlessly. I examined alternatives. I never became completely free of doubt. But ultimately I concluded that Christianity explained reality better than the alternatives, and I decided to trust beyond what I could prove."
For someone else, that might feel like weak faith.
For someone with your personality, it might be extraordinarily meaningful faithbecause you didn't arrive there through conformity, social pressure, emotional enthusiasm, or intellectual laziness.
And the reverse has to remain possible too. You may investigate sincerely and conclude that you don't believe. Intellectual integrity requires leaving that possibility open rather than deciding in advance what conclusion you're required to reach.
I think the healthier question for you therefore may not be "How do I make myself believe?"
You probably can't.
A better set of questions is:
What do I actually believe right now? What are my reasons? What are my strongest reasons for doubt? What evidence or experience would genuinely change my mind? Am I reacting to Christianity itself or to Christians and religious institutions? And how much certainty am I requiring before I permit myself to call something belief?

Great topic! I've struggle with this to varying extents my entire adult life. I was raised in church, and am still actively involved in church life in middle age.

I have found it hard to explain, but there's just always been this nagging shred of doubt that plagues the recesses of my mind when it comes to belief. I love the idea of the Christian faith, and I think it is the best way of understanding and making sense of the world and humanity of all the faith systems I know about. However, I still go through life with the sense that it could all be false.

I think creationism is more likely than the atheist account of our existence, and I think Christianity is the most sensible form of creationism. I think Christian practice is beautiful, and people genuinely following Jesus do more to make the world a better place than anyone else.

But…none of that proves it to be true, and that kills me sometimes. I've read apologetics books and watched plenty of videos. When I see an atheist debate a Christian apologist I almost always come away with a sense that both make good points, and neither can entirely prove the other wrong, so I remain at an impasse.

In recent years I've decided to just participate in Christian life, and not obsess over whether I'm absolutely certain of my beliefs. I have heard (I think it was Wes Huff on YouTube) faith described as a gift, which resonates with me. Some people just receive this gift to greater degrees than others, perhaps due to brain wiring as the OP implies. I absolutely agree with the premise that some people just believe more easily than others, and for those of us plagued with doubt, it is impossible to reason our way to certainty.

Very interesting topic

Calvinists think that their belief is the result of predestined salvation

In other words, they aren't saved because they have faith, they have faith because they are saved. They wouldn't have the gift of faith had they not been already predestined for salvation

I don't know why some have a tougher time with doubts or even questions, while others have no trouble believing, despite not being able to see or hear direct evidence, even when fundamentals of Christian belief run counter to accepted scientific principals. Many scientists, doctors, biologist, anthropologists who spent their entire education and careers learning and functioning on science and it's applications, have faith in things that science would conclude are impossible

I think some, not all, can be attributed to upbringing, and being raised in the church

Of course that can't explain those who become Christian later in life after decades of atheism or agnosticism, nor would it explain devout Christians, sometimes even clergy, who come to the conclusion that they had it wrong, and no longer believe

matureag said:

---

I'm old and have experienced tragedy in my life to the extent that I wish I could still afford a simple internal debate about the character of my personal faith. I will say only that encountering some of the worst things that life can throw at you places you in a position of having faith (or not) will likely determine the extent to which you find life worth living.

---

One of the most profound things I've read on this site in over 20 years.

I don't want to know or understand the pain that brought you to this insight.

matureag said:

---

I'm old and have experienced tragedy in my life to the extent that I wish I could still afford a simple internal debate about the character of my personal faith. I will say only that encountering some of the worst things that life can throw at you places you in a position of having faith (or not) will likely determine the extent to which you find life worth living.

---

Great post. Thanks for sharing.

I don't know the answer to your question but I will offer some advice from personal experience. Don't compare your beliefs and Christian walk with other Christians. God has made us unique and only desires for us to become the best you you can be. And if you miss the mark, He has abounding mercy and love. I meditate on that and the fruits of the Spirit constantly and it brings me great peace and joy. Shalom.
Philippians 4 8
Finally brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable-if anything is excellent or praiseworthy-think about such things.

What does it take to believe and do some believe easier than others?

Reflections:

Here's an overlay of my introduction to faith in Jesus and how I think it aligns with scripture.


1. The evidence of my own sinfulness.

I got in trouble a lot as a kid. Fighting, cussing, rebellion and lying. Learning about God's rules, the 10 commandments, Law, exposed my sin...and was not a cure because it made things worse. Taken the Lords name in vain was on repeat in my mind and I couldn't make it stop.

Consider how this aligns with the following verses...

because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. Rom 3:20

But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind.. Rom 7:8


2. I felt the conviction/guilt of being bad or breaking these rules.

And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment; John 16:8


3. My need for a Savior was evident. I heard what Jesus did to pay for my sins at vacation bible school and I believed.

Eph. 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvationhaving also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes,


More Theology...


3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus' sake. 2 Cor. 4:3-5

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. Eph 2:8-9


What does it take to believe and do some believe easier than others?

To summarize, what it takes to believe...

1. An understanding of sin.
2. Conviction of sin.
3. Hearing the gospel - There's a God who created you, you have violated His rules, sin separates you and me from Him, because of His great love He wants a relationship with us to the point that He would send His Son to pay the price of our sins on the cross and He rose again.
4. The faith or gift of belief.


Going deeper:

Why do some believe easier than others?

Tons of opposition through lies: Examples: There is no God, the theory of evolution is true, there's no such thing as sin, we cannot know history, everything can be explained by science, we are biblically illiterate, we don't spend enough time in nature surrounded by the works of God's hand and bury ourself concrete cities surrounded by the work of our own hands, we cannot prove it.


Doubt

While I was introduced to Jesus at a young age, when my world crumbled around me (Christian parent having an affair with one of my friends). I was done with God. I doubted His goodness, His love, His caring about me, His existence, and if He did exist, I was so pissed off at Him for the pain I was seeing in my family.


Conclusions:

How do we communicate to the rest of the world that faith and doubt are NOT [edit] opposites?
The opposite of believing is not believing.

To illustrate this: Think about a frozen river. I take steps of faith to walk across the ice. I may have fear and doubts with each steps but I'm taking steps of faith because I believe each step will hold me. My faith is not sustaining me, the ice is.

Likewise, God saves people, not faith. However, God saves people through faith. A Christian is saved completely by the world of God, Jesus and the Spirit through faith. Despite our fears, and doubts, and lack of having every question answered, do we make the choice to believe?

Proofs are testable repeatable processes in Math and science. Proofs are the wrong tools to use when evaluating history. For history we use evidence. Same principle for courtrooms. The jury is not proving anything, but using evidence to draw conclusions.

Does the evidence point to you being a sinner?
Does the evidence point to God existing?
Does the evidence point to Jesus being the unique Son of God who died and rose from the dead?
Will you believe despite your lack of ability to prove this?

This is a tough, tough, tough topic to have a discussion because you're more likely to put seeds of doubt into peoples minds if you actually get into the weeds of it.

The best thing I know to say is that it's called faith for a reason. I have some really, really really big questions that don't make any sense to me and you soldier on.

There have been a lot of things that have been discovered recently that I struggle with a little bit.

Would love to have this conversation here but I've had this conversation before and I think it went really poorly for the people I was having the conversation with.

You have to be really careful here.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

This is exactly the opposite of deep.

You can't have a serious conversation with somebody who doubts evolution or uses big words like "science" or questions known history.

"It's just the big ol' cities and you just need more time touching that grass & scripture cuz the scientists and historians are liars don't you know"

I immediately come to the conclusion that either you are some combination of low intelligence, unlettered, very old or just simple and require little to nothing to form a belief system and therefore pretty useless for this type of discussion whether you recognize it or not.

If I have misjudged you based on what it is that you have said, I am simply judging you on what you have said.

---

I have my own issues with the post, but that's harsh.

Probably so, but I took the time to personally recognize that the things that you say do you have an impact on other people whenever you get into the conversation of faith?

To get too deep into the weeds and cause confusion is a bad thing. I avoid it.

To also simplify everything down to the level of a simpleton, while making hokey chuckles I assume, is also a bad thing

I think if you're gonna offer a take in the way that he did it should be limited to pretty much " when I have issues of faith, I like to go outside to God's creation open up my Bible and just find grounding in that situation".

I'll stop there…

How do you reconcile this with neuroplasticity? Or something like the hedonic baseline?

DirtDiver said:

---

Does the evidence point to you being a sinner?Yes, but I'm not sure why this is relevant to the question at hand.
Does the evidence point to God existing? Maybe. Many people throughout human history have devoted their lives to answering this question, only to come away with wildly conflicting conclusions.
Does the evidence point to Jesus being the unique Son of God who died and rose from the dead?See above
Will you believe despite your lack of ability to prove this? That's the whole point of this thread

---

ETA to make sure it really addresses OP:I don't know if "easier" or "harder" is the right distinction. Maybe it is. I definitely believe they are very different processes though.

Man, great post. I think a naturally critical thinker can often default to a mathematical approach. 1 + 1=2, and we have doubt about that. Or maybe approach it like a science experiment. When you drop an object, it falls. We have no doubt about that. We can often think that is the only way to get rid of doubt.

The problem with that approach is we don't do that with the vast majority of things we believe. For example, a man can say he "knows" his wife is faithful, but you can never really know until she passes away with a clean record. Does that mean the man isn't justified in believing his wife is faithful? I don't think so. He probably has very good reason, and acts accordingly.

Another: I will never abandon my kids. I can't really know that I won't abandon my kids until I die without abandoning them. Yet I have really good reason to believe I would never do that. So much so that I would say I know I would never do it, and act accordingly

Both of these are things I personally believe in, without concrete proof, and they effect every single decision I make. There are many other things like this that every human "knows" that are really just things they believe very firmly, with really good reason.

I could be wrong. Maybe my wife cheats, or maybe I turn into a grumpy ******* in old age and write my kids out of the will. But I believe the probability to be so low, that I act anyway. If we wanted verifiable proof on issues like this, we would all be paralyzed, never doing these things because we can't know.

The struggle most people have when applying this to God is that, if God is real, there are some moral obligations one must fulfill. It really affects how one needs to live their life. I'm not saying that you are struggling with this, but it's where I started and I think it's most people's biggest, unspoken hang up. "If I come to a reasonable belief that God is real, and if that means I have to make some serious moral changes in my life, and if I am going to be required to submit... am I willing to do that?" If my answer to that was no, I never would have bothered going forward.

I've never had an emotional commitment moment like you might think most believers have. I think that God is the most likely answer of all the answers out there for why there is anything "there" at all (which in and of itself is a large topic). Next step was what is that God like? I think that philosophy and history lends itself to the church I belong to being the most likely to be true. It has answers for the problems of evil, divine hiddeness, etc. And I believe it with an ongoing openness to someone proving me wrong. Maybe one day someone will, but no one has given me a better answer so far. So I can have faith because the skeptical part of my brain is sufficiently satisfied, even if it can't ever be 100% sure. 99% works for me

The Banned said:

---

The problem with that approach is we don't do that with the vast majority of things we believe. For example, a man can say he "knows" his wife is faithful, but you can never really know until she passes away with a clean record. Does that mean the man isn't justified in believing his wife is faithful? I don't think so. He probably has very good reason, and acts accordingly.

---

I've heard this argument, and there is truth to it, but I don't think it completely addresses the issue.

The reason a man can reasonably "know" his wife will be faithful is based on a body of evidence that supports his belief. If he's been married 30 years with no indication whatsoever of unfaithfulness, and a really strong relationship with his wife, we would say his belief is reasonable. If we're talking about a newlywed in his mid-20s whose wife slept with a handful of guys through college before settling on him, we might say he is foolish for "knowing" she'll never leave or cheat on him. Maybe he's right, but the evidence is lacking to support that level of belief.

Such is the case for many who have doubts. There is difficulty "knowing" a thing when the evidence may exist, but isn't entirely convincing. Not only that, but a more remarkable claim carries a higher burden of evidence. If you tell me a guy survived a 10' fall from his roof, I'll take you at your word. If you tell me it was from a 50-story building onto concrete, I'm not going to believe you until I read about it and see the evidence for myself.

The Christian story is the most remarkable claim made in human history. It shouldn't be surprising that skeptics struggle to believe it when absolutely proof is unattainable.

The last paragraph is something I've thought about a lot lately. The idea that any aspect of science disproves God doesn't resonate with me...if anything there are open scientific questions (such as where did spacetime come from...i.e., what preceded cosmic inflation and the big bang) that I think an intelligent designer actually explains pretty well.

Another poster mentioned comparing to other Christians. That is less the issue for me. My question/observation is more of a curiosity and perhaps a bit of an excuse as I think about it. Analysis paralysis is a thing and you can always ask for more evidence.

Trying to be careful as this easily wades into other discussions. I appreciate the comments and thoughts thus far.

It all comes down to faith. You can't prove it.

Scotts Tot said:

---

The Banned said:

---

The problem with that approach is we don't do that with the vast majority of things we believe. For example, a man can say he "knows" his wife is faithful, but you can never really know until she passes away with a clean record. Does that mean the man isn't justified in believing his wife is faithful? I don't think so. He probably has very good reason, and acts accordingly.

---

I've heard this argument, and there is truth to it, but I don't think it completely addresses the issue.

The reason a man can reasonably "know" his wife will be faithful is based on a body of evidence that supports his belief. If he's been married 30 years with no indication whatsoever of unfaithfulness, and a really strong relationship with his wife, we would say his belief is reasonable. If we're talking about a newlywed in his mid-20s whose wife slept with a handful of guys through college before settling on him, we might say he is foolish for "knowing" she'll never leave or cheat on him. Maybe he's right, but the evidence is lacking to support that level of belief.

Such is the case for many who have doubts. There is difficulty "knowing" a thing when the evidence may exist, but isn't entirely convincing. Not only that, but a more remarkable claim carries a higher burden of evidence. If you tell me a guy survived a 10' fall from his roof, I'll take you at your word. If you tell me it was from a 50-story building onto concrete, I'm not going to believe you until I read about it and see the evidence for myself.

The Christian story is the most remarkable claim made in human history. It shouldn't be surprising that skeptics struggle to believe it when absolutely proof is unattainable.

---

I'm not so sure. We also know people regularly overlook red flags and excuse or explain away behavior when they think things to be fine, that in retrospect are all indicators of infidelity or problems. I've seen this many times. Most of us give the benefit of the doubt in places where high trust should exist (friendship, marriage, church) until the extreme or explicit example is unexplainable.

Scotts Tot said:

---

The Banned said:

---

The problem with that approach is we don't do that with the vast majority of things we believe. For example, a man can say he "knows" his wife is faithful, but you can never really know until she passes away with a clean record. Does that mean the man isn't justified in believing his wife is faithful? I don't think so. He probably has very good reason, and acts accordingly.

---

I've heard this argument, and there is truth to it, but I don't think it completely addresses the issue.

The reason a man can reasonably "know" his wife will be faithful is based on a body of evidence that supports his belief. If he's been married 30 years with no indication whatsoever of unfaithfulness, and a really strong relationship with his wife, we would say his belief is reasonable. If we're talking about a newlywed in his mid-20s whose wife slept with a handful of guys through college before settling on him, we might say he is foolish for "knowing" she'll never leave or cheat on him. Maybe he's right, but the evidence is lacking to support that level of belief.

Such is the case for many who have doubts. There is difficulty "knowing" a thing when the evidence may exist, but isn't entirely convincing. Not only that, but a more remarkable claim carries a higher burden of evidence. If you tell me a guy survived a 10' fall from his roof, I'll take you at your word. If you tell me it was from a 50-story building onto concrete, I'm not going to believe you until I read about it and see the evidence for myself.

The Christian story is the most remarkable claim made in human history. It shouldn't be surprising that skeptics struggle to believe it when absolutely proof is unattainable.

---

Agreed. That's why when Jesus preaches with authority, He also does miracles. Extraordinary claim gets the extraordinary evidence. He says He puts His apostles in charge, they also perform miracles.

I don't want to gum up OP's thread with the entire bread trail unless he asks for it. I'll just say that the evidence that those things actually happened is much, much stronger than "it's in the bible" and "the apostles wouldn't go to their death for a lie". Two younger, Ivy League kids recently converted from agnosticism/atheism precisely because they realized the evidence isn't nearly as weak as is commonly claimed in their former circles, and they've done a pretty good job of explaining that with their content.

I'll also say that it is a process that is digested in stages. Much like you're talking about the varying degrees one should have confidence in their spouse, these things take time and exposure. After examining more and more evidence as you learn about this person, you develop more and more trust. Using this analogy, often times it seems like the level of certainty the atheist/agnostic wants is similar to asking for concrete, undeniable proof that this person will never cheat before going out on a first date.

agpetz said:

---

The last paragraph is something I've thought about a lot lately. The idea that any aspect of science disproves God doesn't resonate with me...if anything there are open scientific questions (such as where did spacetime come from...i.e., what preceded cosmic inflation and the big bang) that I think an intelligent designer actually explains pretty well.

Another poster mentioned comparing to other Christians. That is less the issue for me. My question/observation is more of a curiosity and perhaps a bit of an excuse as I think about it. Analysis paralysis is a thing and you can always ask for more evidence.

Trying to be careful as this easily wades into other discussions. I appreciate the comments and thoughts thus far.

---

I think one of the biggest issues is that we're all made differently, so coming to faith a little differently should be expected and ok. But oftentimes, especially in evangelical circles, they can sort of ask you to check your brain at the door and "just believe" because that worked for them. It's hard to understand how that doesn't work for other people. There is a reason some saw Jesus's miracles before they believed, and others approached Him already believing just by hearing the rumors of what He did.

Christianity throughout history is full of titans of intellect, and that's a good thing. If our unique attributes are seen as gifts from God, the differences are awesome, but they do all need to be considered when evangelizing. I'm glad not every Christian is like me because a group of massive introverts wouldn't spread the message very well haha

I've come to the realization that I'll never be an academic Christian like some of the Catholic and Orthodox apologists on this board. Don't get me wrong, I'm awed by their knowledge of theology and history. I read their threads with interest. I'm also somewhat bored by it if I'm being completely truthful.

I struggled with my faith for a long, long time. At this point in my life, I'm absolutely sure that there is a prime mover and that the universe (potentially all of them) has a divine creator. The evidence simply points in that direction for me. Even the great agnostic minds on this board (and there are a few with significant intellectual muscle) can't reduce the concept of God to a state of nothingness to my satisfaction. Deism and Agnosticism to me are just opposite sides of the same coin. Both are intellectually defensible positions.

That being said, I made my choice to embrace Christianity. However, right or wrong, I view faith through a minimalistic lens. Faith like a child. There is a God who loves us because there is. It is what works for me, and after walking without him for a significant portion of my life, it is enough.

AggieRain said:

---

I've come to the realization that I'll never be an academic Christian like some of the Catholic and Orthodox apologists on this board. Don't get me wrong, I'm awed by their knowledge of theology and history. I read their threads with interest. I'm also somewhat bored by it if I'm being completely truthful.

I struggled with my faith for a long, long time. At this point in my life, I'm absolutely sure that there is a prime mover and that the universe (potentially all of them) has a divine creator. The evidence simply points in that direction for me. Even the great agnostic minds on this board (and there are a few with significant intellectual muscle) can't reduce the concept of God to a state of nothingness to my satisfaction. Deism and Agnosticism to me are just opposite sides of the same coin. Both are intellectually defensible positions.

That being said, I made my choice to embrace Christianity. However, right or wrong, I view faith through a minimalistic lens. Faith like a child. There is a God who loves us because there is. It is what works for me, and after walking without him for a significant portion of my life, it is enough.

---

All that call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.
Don't make it harder than it is.

dermdoc said:

---

All that call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.
Don't make it harder than it is.

---

I know you mean well, Derm, but this is exactly the point of the post. What seems so simple to you is not always simple for others. Why call upon the name of the Lord if you're not sure the Lord even exists? If you don't have a really well thought out answer to that, that's fine. But simplistic responses can leave those that struggle to understand feeling like something is wrong with them. Why is it so easy for you and not them? They can end up in a position worse than they started.

The Banned said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

All that call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.
Don't make it harder than it is.

---

I know you mean well, Derm, but this is exactly the point of the post. What seems so simple to you is not always simple for others. Why call upon the name of the Lord if you're not sure the Lord even exists? If you don't have a really well thought out answer to that, that's fine. But simplistic responses can leave those that struggle to understand feeling like something is wrong with them. Why is it so easy for you and not them? They can end up in a position worse than they started.

---

I think the problem with the op is they are being told it is more complicated. Agree to disagree.

Could you elaborate what you mean here? Respectfully, as a person who relates to the OP, I find it bewildering that anyone could possibly find questions about the creation of the universe and a resurrected human to be uncomplicated.

What are the things you think he is being told that make faith harder than it should be?

" You can investigate history, philosophy, cosmology, biblical scholarship, religious experience, and arguments about God indefinitely, but eventually you encounter uncertainty."

+++

The cloud of unknowing and the dark night of the soul are two ways Catholic Christian mystics have described what you have alluded to above. So you are on the right path if that makes any sense.

John of the Cross writes about this stage as God bringing a soul closer to him free of emotional highs commonly experienced by some in their early stages of spirituality.

The cloud of unknowing is a better example of what ultimately needs to happen in a soul searching for God. A complete abandonment to the divine will.

As you have already realized, it is a leap of faith. Faith is a gift we can hope for through prayer. Like everything it takes work, but it is worth it to read scripture and hear those words come to life in your time and in your experience. What maybe starts off as a small monologue can become this recurring conversation with the creator.

The proof is love.

Scotts Tot said:

---

Could you elaborate what you mean here? Respectfully, as a person who relates to the OP, I find it bewildering that anyone could possibly find questions about the creation of the universe and a resurrected human to be uncomplicated.

What are the things you think he is being told that make faith harder than it should be?

---

Sure. You have to become like a child and have faith. Makes everything so much better.

dermdoc said:

---

Scotts Tot said:

---

Could you elaborate what you mean here? Respectfully, as a person who relates to the OP, I find it bewildering that anyone could possibly find questions about the creation of the universe and a resurrected human to be uncomplicated.

What are the things you think he is being told that make faith harder than it should be?

---

Sure. You have to become like a child and have faith. Makes everything so much better.

---

I have 6 kids. They all fall in line with what they're told is right and wrong at wildly different timelines. I have some who don't know what disobeying is, and two that started talking back the second they started talking. This is only scratching the surfaces of their differences. But they're all children, acting like children. If I treated each one of them the same, I would undoubtably fail all but the one(s) who happen to have the natural disposition that matches my approach.

Child like faith doesn't mean we all naturally experience relationship with the Lord exactly the same. He didn't make us all exactly the same, so it would make sense we will all have our unique relationship with Him

The Banned said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Scotts Tot said:

---

Could you elaborate what you mean here? Respectfully, as a person who relates to the OP, I find it bewildering that anyone could possibly find questions about the creation of the universe and a resurrected human to be uncomplicated.

What are the things you think he is being told that make faith harder than it should be?

---

Sure. You have to become like a child and have faith. Makes everything so much better.

---

I have 6 kids. They all fall in line with what they're told is right and wrong at wildly different timelines. I have some who don't know what disobeying is, and two that started talking back the second they started talking. This is only scratching the surfaces of their differences. But they're all children, acting like children. If I treated each one of them the same, I would undoubtably fail all but the one(s) who happen to have the natural disposition that matches my approach.

Child like faith doesn't mean we all naturally experience relationship with the Lord exactly the same. He didn't make us all exactly the same, so it would make sense we will all have our unique relationship with Him

---

Completely agree.

dermdoc said:

---

Scotts Tot said:

---

Could you elaborate what you mean here? Respectfully, as a person who relates to the OP, I find it bewildering that anyone could possibly find questions about the creation of the universe and a resurrected human to be uncomplicated.

What are the things you think he is being told that make faith harder than it should be?

---

Sure. You have to become like a child and have faith. Makes everything so much better.

---

When Jesus calls on his followers to be like a child, he is referring to the posture of their spirit. We must be humble and meek to enter the kingdom of heaven. And yes, that also implies trust in areas we simply cannot understand.

I think many people mistakenly use the phrase "child-like faith" to mean "turn off your brain and stop asking questions"

Scotts Tot said:

---

Great topic! I've struggle with this to varying extents my entire adult life. I was raised in church, and am still actively involved in church life in middle age.

I have found it hard to explain, but there's just always been this nagging shred of doubt that plagues the recesses of my mind when it comes to belief. I love the idea of the Christian faith, and I think it is the best way of understanding and making sense of the world and humanity of all the faith systems I know about. However, I still go through life with the sense that it could all be false.

I think creationism is more likely than the atheist account of our existence, and I think Christianity is the most sensible form of creationism. I think Christian practice is beautiful, and people genuinely following Jesus do more to make the world a better place than anyone else.

But…none of that proves it to be true, and that kills me sometimes. I've read apologetics books and watched plenty of videos. When I see an atheist debate a Christian apologist I almost always come away with a sense that both make good points, and neither can entirely prove the other wrong, so I remain at an impasse.

In recent years I've decided to just participate in Christian life, and not obsess over whether I'm absolutely certain of my beliefs. I have heard (I think it was Wes Huff on YouTube) faith described as a gift, which resonates with me. Some people just receive this gift to greater degrees than others, perhaps due to brain wiring as the OP implies. I absolutely agree with the premise that some people just believe more easily than others, and for those of us plagued with doubt, it is impossible to reason our way to certainty.

---

For what its worth, God promises to compare Israel to What to console them. Lamentations 2:13. With a wound as deep as the sea only comparing Israel to God would heal them. Therefore, God is What. Every honest search ends with What. What has been staring you in the face, but you could not see him because you did not recognize him. God himself is uncertainty, he is What. Therefore if you find yourself feeling uncertain, What may be closer than you think.

Captain Pablo said:

---

Very interesting topic

Calvinists think that their belief is the result of predestined salvation

In other words, they aren't saved because they have faith, they have faith because they are saved. They wouldn't have the gift of faith had they not been already predestined for salvation.

---

This is a very common statement made on TexAgs. However, as someone raised a Southern Baptist, I can tell you that this is NOT universal Calvinist belief. At no time in all my 57 years have I heard a Southern Baptist pastor say anything remotely like this.

Rex Racer said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Very interesting topic

Calvinists think that their belief is the result of predestined salvation

In other words, they aren't saved because they have faith, they have faith because they are saved. They wouldn't have the gift of faith had they not been already predestined for salvation.

---

This is a very common statement made on TexAgs. However, as someone raised a Southern Baptist, I can tell you that this is NOT universal Calvinist belief. At no time in all my 57 years have I heard a Southern Baptist pastor say anything remotely like this.

---

Most Southern Baptists are not Calvinists. Stats show only 10-30% are Calvinists. Calvinists only make up 1-3% of professing Christians.
I grew up Southern Baptist and never heard of Calvinism until I went to A&M. I was taught free will and adult baptism. And that I had to make a decision for Christ. I did. The idea that God created people pre ordained to eternal conscious torment hell would have been an abhorrent thought in my church.

Rex Racer said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Very interesting topic

Calvinists think that their belief is the result of predestined salvation

In other words, they aren't saved because they have faith, they have faith because they are saved. They wouldn't have the gift of faith had they not been already predestined for salvation.

---

This is a very common statement made on TexAgs. However, as someone raised a Southern Baptist, I can tell you that this is NOT universal Calvinist belief. At no time in all my 57 years have I heard a Southern Baptist pastor say anything remotely like this.

---

If you were raised Southern Baptist, especially over 50 years ago, you almost certainly grew up on Arminian free will doctrine, NOT reformed Calvinism.