There's a Difference Between Inheriting Faith and Having Faith

Q: Years ago, I attended an interfaith dinner hosted by the church I belonged to at the time. One of my dinner partners, whom I knew well, was of the Jewish faith. Many questions came up concerning each of our religions. During our conversation, I made the statement, "Aren't we all pretty much of the faith with which we were raised?"

Most people at our table agreed that as Christians, we may well switch between denominations, but the majority of people will remain with the same faith - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

My Jewish dinner partner strongly disagreed, saying, "If I'd been born a Christian, I'm certain that as an adult I would have converted to the Jewish faith." No arguments took place, though there was obvious disagreement around the table. What are your views on this subject? -- C., Ocala , FL via godsquadquestion@aol.com)

A: As a matter of sociology, I agree with you. Most folks I know remain within the religious parameters of their childhood. This makes sense, since only a part of our faith is intellectual; the rest is emotional. The smells and tastes and sounds of holiday observances and worship services comfort us and root us in both our family and our past.

Religious continuity is also reinforced by the fact that all faiths have profound and resonant answers to the mysteries of life and death and God's providence. However, one of the most powerful facts of our open society is that boundaries that were once barriers to the exploration of other religions have broken down. In general, I favor this new openness to other ways up the same mountain. Today, we're all free to learn from the faith of our neighbors. In this way, we can enrich our own faith lives even if we don't convert.

I've learned much about meditation and serenity from Buddhists. I've learned to appreciate God's grace from Christians, and I've learned about total submission to God's will from Muslim friends. All this has not made me want to convert. My exposure has reminded me that each faith has a particularly deep and moving understanding of some aspect of God's work in the world, which either echoes some underdeveloped element of my own faith, or causes me to think and pray about what my friends have learned that I still need to learn.

The main point is that there's a difference between inheriting faith and having faith. There must come a time in our spiritual growth when we're confirmed personally in some religion (or no religion). This is our personal choice and it shapes our adult life. The choice is deeply influenced by our childhood but not totally determined by it.

We're given a religion at birth without our consent. We decide on our faith when we're finally comfortable in our own spiritual skin. This decision is one of the most exciting and decisive moments of our time here on earth as we prepare for our eternal life after death, where the final choice is made by our unclouded souls.

NOTE: I received many comments on my recent column about miracles and my preference to view them in a naturalistic way. Here's one such letter from S. in Durham, N.C.:

"Another quote by Einstein is, 'The miraculous thing about the universe is that there are no miracles,' by which he meant he didn't believe in an interventionist God who would meddle with the laws of nature. As a scientist, I liked your comment that, if it were otherwise, 'we would have no confidence in anything.'

"Science rests on the assumption that the world is governed by natural law and if we were to allow miracles the whole enterprise would become meaningless. By the way, Einstein's quote that 'God does not play dice' was really a reference to his dissatisfaction with quantum theory, but he would have agreed with your interpretation -- about having trust in the 'regularity of nature.' I use the word 'trust' and not 'faith,' since this belief is well supported by evidence.

"Also I sympathize with your letter writer who finds it hard to understand why God would choose to save some sufferers and not others. My own wife, who belonged to an extended Catholic family, died of cancer at a young age and had many friends, family members and a whole congregation praying for her, but to no avail."

A: As I wrote, I do believe that miracles, true miracles, are possible because I believe in the Bible and in God's omnipotence. However, I don't believe that miracles which violate the laws of nature actually occurred as described in scripture. I believe they are metaphorical.

The miracle of the Exodus, for example, has less to do with the plagues and the splitting of the Red Sea than in the miracle of God's help in freeing the slaves. Freedom was the miracle. Some biblical miracles, however, may have happened exactly as described but I can't find a way of understanding this and also affirming God's decision to establish the regularity of scientific laws. Those laws are not secular to me; they're God's way of governing the universe and giving us confidence in its order.

If being religious involves believing in a talking snake in the Garden of Eden or Balam's talking donkey, then I (along with Maimonides and Spinoza) am out of the religion biz. I do respect those who believe in biblical inerrancy, but I ask them to respect my religious rationalism, as well.

I am, of course, aided by the fact that Judaism doesn't have creeds or a canon, which requires me to believe that violations of natural law are a prerequisite for my Jewish faith.

(Send QUESTIONS ONLY to The God Squad, c/o Tribune Media Services, 2225 Kenmore Ave., Suite 114, Buffalo, NY 14207, or email them to godsquadquestion@aol.com.