On Faith

So it's been a while since I last posted. I've been busy and also didn't really have anything organized to write about. So there, that's my excuse.

I guess I'll talk about #3 in the previous post. This was brought up again in a conversation I had with a friend. The key issue at hand here is this: Is it necessary to know everything possible about something in order to believe in it? That's probably poorly worded, but it's difficult to describe in a single sentence so I'll give you an example.

Bill is a Christian belonging to an large and organized demonination and believes in God but doesn't really think much about the details of his beliefs. He goes to church and prays and does all of the required stuff, but doesn't really question why. He is certain that God is involved in all aspects of his life. Questions such as free will, the extent of God's presence in the world, the nuances between different religions, etc are all unimportant to Bill. He just believes in God and that his belief will get him to heaven.

Is there anything wrong with Bill's philosophy? Let's look at another angle.

Anna is an atheist/agnostic and meets Bill. At some point the conversation turns to religion. Anna begins to drill Bill with questions about his beliefs. Bill of course can't answer most of them since he doesn't really know the history (other than a few bible passages and stories), motivation, or even slightly detailed theologies of the belief system he claims to adhere to.

I'm not saying Bill is necessarily wrong, but in the circumstances I just described he comes off as not invested and perhaps even unintelligent about his beliefs. If he has any evangelical hopes, this is a bit of an obstacle.

So back to the main question. If a person is to believe in something so fully and so important that it affects much of his life, ought not that person to learn everything possible about what he claims to believe?

Now comes the personal part of this post. This question struck a chord with me as a Catholic. Catholicism, if you are unaware, is deeply rooted in ritual and tradition. There are many traditions just within the mass itself that I guarantee most Catholics (myself included) do not fully understand. In fact, I am of the opinion that it is nearly impossible to understand every facet of Catholic faith without becoming a full time theologian. Now I am the kind of person who likes to understand everything that I do, at least to some extent. So being unable to necessarily know or understand all of the beliefs I subscribe to is really what caused this whole discussion.

So I think I've established that I don't necessarily hold with either end of the spectrum. On one end we have nothing but the simplest possible understanding of a belief system. On the other end is the ideal state of understanding everything. So at what point in the middle is it acceptable to say you "believe" in a set of beliefs, and why?

I honestly don't have any kind of answer to that question. I'm not sure an answer would even be appropriate. I can't think of any sort of convincing argument one way or the other.

We dress ourselves in words, armed and overheard