Is it possible to realize simultaneously that there is no ultimate truth and still retain a faith in Jesus?

It seems like the answer is no, but think twice, people like Soren Kierkegaard puts a wrench in your clock.

Can you define what you mean by faith in Jesus? Are we talking what Christians call a "saving faith?"

__________________
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." Alexander Hamilton

The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
Plato

I don't know really how it works. I'm not a christian.

Fair enough. The problem with this view is that I don’t see how the denial of ultimate truths and faith in Jesus can be in any way compatible.

First, belief in Jesus (to state the orthodox view) necessitates believing in God, believing that Jesus is the Son of God, that he died to save man from sin (and bring them into a permanent, loving relationship with God), and that he rose from the dead. These are very specific truth claims and denial of ultimate truth would make faith in Christ impossible.

I am not familiar enough with Kierkegaard’s works to specifically address his argument. If you are familiar with it though it would be really interesting to hear.

__________________
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." Alexander Hamilton

The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
Plato

I've only read one book by Kierkegaard in which he retold the story of Abraham and Issac and the slaying of the Ram (or sheep or whatever). He retells the story emphasizing the personal existential dilemma of the two characters, Issac knowing his father intends to murder him, Abraham knowing he is going to slay his most cherished son.

The idea, or how it would work, and bear with me this is a recent and loosely formed idea. Basically, if one could realize that the "Bible story" was a contingent piece of fiction and yet also believe that in virtue of believing in it that you will reap some sort of benefit. Its the same as an Atheist and a good book he is reading. He will realize, the book is but a book, contingent, contextual, et al. However, he can still chose to learn from it, in fact, he can even chose to devote his entire like to a book. What if that book was the Bible?

...and this is where I wish I had a better grasp of Bayesian epistemology because I'm certain it applies to this. I do believe there is a difference between drawing a lesson from a text and actually believing it. We know fairy tales that teach us lessons but we do not believe them. However, I will not offer any support for this opinion tonight. Perhaps at a latter date.

__________________
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." Alexander Hamilton

The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
Plato

you bring up a good point, wiser perhaps than you even know, i need to rethink this some more. initially, its been my perspective that no, these things can not be reconciled. however, my favorite philosopher says otherwise.

Christianity is not in its modern form, mutually exclusive with anything, because it is a "cafeteria" religion"

Christians have anointed themselves with the right to pick and choose the tenants of their faith that are conducive to their other beliefs and sensibilities


Remove this self proclaimed right, and the faith would disappear from the face of the earth in a decade, and become a historical footnote

__________________
Argue with some..IGNORE the stupid

Yeah it hurts, you have been fucked by an Elephant !

"Happamia, sanoi kettu pihlajanmarjoista kun ei niihin yltänyt" ("Sour, said the fox about rowan berries, being unable to reach them"

What is this western obsession with Ironing? If I have water, I will wash them, if not, I will just wear them to stay warm.

you suck....