The Elephant that is God If you asked any devout Christian or Atheist, to define the meaning of faith, they would give you completely different answers. The Christian might define faith as an unwavering belief in mankind’s salvation through Christ’s sacrifice, whereas the Atheist might say that it is an unwavering belief in something that can never be proved. Regardless of what one may have faith in, faith is not something that is easily discovered. Certainty and doubt constantly contradict one another. Some might say that in order to be a “faithful” believer, one must assert that what one believes, is the true truth. However, Socrates once said that “the unexamined life is not worth living” (Plato 26). Thus he is asserting that one must approach
…show more content…
What Sisyphus had could not be defined as faith, because he ultimately let it go. Paul Tillich defines faith as “a total and centered act of the personal self, the act of unconditional, infinite and ultimate concern” (272). Sisyphus did not let his “faith” inspire him, it was not his ultimate concern; instead he had to let it go in order to be happy. Kafka’s man, however, never gave up. He waited faithfully outside the gate until he died, faithful that one day he would know the “truth.” Similarly, there are people who subscribe to the ideologies of the institutional church who become so personally enveloped in their faith that it transcends both their conscious and subconscious understanding (Tillich 271). These people are ultimately concerned with the doctrines that define their faith. Contrastingly, there are believers who decided to push their faith away in order to validate the situation they are in; like a child who tragically loses their parents, they become angry with God, and say that he must not exist because if he did, then their situation is more tragic than they could have ever imagined. To doubt the existence of any higher power regardless of his designation is acknowledging that that particular entity exists. How can you be mad at someone who is not there? If each man is advocating that their ultimate concern is the key to eternal salvation, how then,
What Sisyphus had could not be defined as faith, because he ultimately let it go. Paul Tillich defines faith as “a total and centered act of the personal self, the act of unconditional, infinite and ultimate concern” (272). Sisyphus did not let his “faith” inspire him, it was not his ultimate concern; instead he had to let it go in order to be happy. Kafka’s man, however, never gave up. He waited faithfully outside the gate until he died, faithful that one day he would know the “truth.” Similarly, there are people who subscribe to the ideologies of the institutional church who become so personally enveloped in their faith that it transcends both their conscious and subconscious understanding (Tillich 271). These people are ultimately concerned with the doctrines that define their faith. Contrastingly, there are believers who decided to push their faith away in order to validate the situation they are in; like a child who tragically loses their parents, they become angry with God, and say that he must not exist because if he did, then their situation is more tragic than they could have ever imagined. To doubt the existence of any higher power regardless of his designation is acknowledging that that particular entity exists. How can you be mad at someone who is not there? If each man is advocating that their ultimate concern is the key to eternal salvation, how then,