There is much that passes for faith, which isn't faith at all. This applies in the realms of religion as much as in the material world. Much embracing of Christianity has been done for expediency (saving yourself from being put to the sword) or for political advantage (Constantine's politics has been detailed here.) The examples given of cars starting, lights going on and summer following spring are not issues of faith but of reason. I assume you refer to faith in God, who is unknowable in a personal way without faith.
That kind of faith is a gift from God. It is transforming - a new person results from it - a new obedience to God develops (nothing fanatical - just godly - Romans 1:5). 'The apostles said to the Lord, "Increase our faith!" He replied, "If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, "Be uprooted and planted in the sea," and it will obey you.' (Luke 17:5-6) Only those who have such a tiny grain of faith and exercise it can understand what Jesus was saying. Also, 'Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.' (Romans 10:17) There's nothing genetic about that kind of faith! That is what the Christian faith is. It is not hereditary. God deals with each person as an individual, reads their hearts, and gives faith to those humbly asking him for it: 'Lord, I believe! Help thou my unbelief!' (Mark 9:24)
2007-10-11 02:48:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Annsan_In_Him 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Excellent question. But you made the flaw of thinking that only a belief in Christianity requires faith. Most religions require faith as they cleave to something they have never seen but remain convinced of its existence. The descendants of Khan and Attila may now embrace beliefs which themselves require faith. If you are asking if genetics pre-disposes us to a certain kind of religion then I would so no. Charlemagne and Constantine embraced Christianity for reasons other than pure genetics.
2007-10-10 22:00:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Gaspode the wonder dog 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Politics, not Genetics
Constantine and Charlemagne instituted Christianity as an ideal control measure. It was the only way they could figure out to weld a State together out of separate cultures. If everybody followed the same religion then they were the same people and could be induced to work together. In effect religion as a nationality.
Atilla and Genghus went the other way and demanded loyalty to the State. So long as you were a member of the state your religion and your tribe were not relevant. In effect The State as a nationality.
Even today we see these opposite approaches to Nation building.
Leo Strauss (Boston College)stessed religion and mythology as the means to unite a people. The Neo-cons adopted his teachings and that is why they went crazy religious and have used the cowboy image so heavily for their presidents. It is an approach that ignores all differences in your country between people by declaring that they are all the same in some way. It is only ever able to be put into place by force and by labelling anything other than the defining feature as its enemy. That is why you see such a demend that USA is a Christian Nation. It is why you see anything other than American Christianity attacked. It is why the war in the Middle East is defined in religious terms.
The style that the Great Khan used is much more like Soviet Russia or the Early USA. Loyalty and definition by State instead of faith. Even in the 60s Everybody in America was calling themselves American. Not Jewish American or Christian American. The push towards religious definitions that began with Joe McCarthy had not really been felt yet. I think in Future the election of R. Reagan will be viewed as the collapse of America. Much like the Rule of Constantine is in Roman history.
Keep in mind that in less than 60 years after the introduction of Christianity as the one state religion the Roman Empire split into the Eastern and Western Empires, and it never recovered. From then on it was steady decline till today all that is left is the Vatican. A global religion with no country of its own.
USA has succeeded in going from "One Nation United out of Many," to being "One Nation Under God"
Not a particularly smart move. The believers are already fighting over their version of God.
2007-10-10 22:02:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Y!A-FOOL 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Any leader of men who is going into battle wants to have the outcome end in their favor
to get the most out of a battle, a leader has to have faith in their soldiers, and the soldiers have to have faith in their leaders, otherwise, they will not win any battles
to get the most out of a soldier, a leader has to convince the soldier of the rightness of the cause of the battle
to say that a god is on the side of the soldier is one way, to say that the ONLY God is on the side of the soldier will be the best way
Constantine was being urged to give up his pagan gods and embrace Ond God, under the banner of Christianity
he told the Christians that if he won his battle carrying the banner of Christianity, then he would convert, and his Empire would be a Christian empire
Constantine won his battle, but I believe that he never actually did convert
the Roman Catholic Church, and the Holy Roman Empire, the eventual spread of Christianity across the continents, was the result
2007-10-10 21:41:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Constantine and the like embraced (or rather, endorsed) faith because it was advantageous for them to do so. Hun and Khan used fear (a tenant of faith in the religious sense) but didn't use that hope part in the mix; so they didn't do as well.
2007-10-10 21:35:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dashes 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is such a thing in faith:
You have faith that you car is going to start & get you from A to B,
You have faith that your Doctor knows what he or she is saying.
But at the same time you may not have faith that you are going to get from A to B in the time you had planned because of a traffic jam you have just hit because of road works.
Like I do not belive or have the faith that I will win the Lottery!
The same was for the people you listed above. Its a freedom of choise. You chose to believe or you chose not to. So Faith comes from the way that you think.
2007-10-11 01:09:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Joolz of Salopia 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
How do you get through the day, IF there is no such thing as faith?
Do you have 'faith' that your car will start in the morning?
Do have 'faith' that the person driving the car in front of you, is fully concentrating on driving and not on their phone conversation?
Do you have 'faith' in your smoke detector?
Do you put 'faith' in the person, who is operating on a family member?
Do you have 'faith' that the mechanic, who worked on the plane you are about to board; actually knew what he or she was doing?
Do ..... (this line of questioning can go on and on)
IF all that boils down to genetics; than I give all thanks to the LORD God Almighty (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). For allowing me to be genetically wired to have faith in Him and mankind.
2007-10-10 21:53:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by yahweh_is_the_lord 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hebrews tells us that "faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for yet not seen." Faith is not built on just stories, but on things that are proven. Example: we have faith the sun will come up tomorrow, or even that tomorrow will come; we have faith that the sun will come up, will go down, and the moon will come up. We have faith in these things, because we have seen them happen, like centuries before us they happened. We know it is going to rain, we have faith it is going to, because either we smell the rain, or see the rain clouds; we know it is summer, because centuries before us summer has always been hot, or at least warmer then other months, therefore as we grow up from childhood, we know there is going to be a summer next year. So faith is the "assured" expectation, assured means there is proof. So faith isn't built on credulity, but fact!
2007-10-10 21:50:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ikeg 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
...... I'm not sure Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan were ever subjected to christianity... for sure.
But then I'd say it is probably down to culture and mind-set. Christianity just isn't as compatible with eastern culture as it is with western...
And I don't see what "faith" has to do with it. That is just a word to excuse one from having abandoned reason.
2007-10-10 21:33:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by Lucid Interrogator 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
I loan a friend money because i have faith he will return it. Someone who is raised in a tribal relationship has a hard time with faith because those not in the tribe are enemies, thus Jesus was attempting to break down the tribal mind of his followers. We who haven't been subject to tribal relations can accept faith easily because we have had to learn trust of strangers from a early age. Faith then is a learned trait.
2007-10-10 21:46:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Marcus R. 6
·
1⤊
0⤋