In the conservative circles I grew up in a very high value was placed on “making your faith your own” as a teen, which did involve questioning and critically evaluating our beliefs.

I heard a lot about “making your faith your own” too. What it boiled down to was becoming committed as an adult to what you were taught to believe as a child.

Questioning deeply into other religions, or even trying them out, or coming to different conclusions than the approved doctrines was NOT encouraged. Those people were called backsliders, doubters and – in some extreme cases – possessed by Satan. They were discussed in hushed tones and their stories were gossiped about as cautionary tales, not to be talked about aloud, let alone emulated.

Sorry, but my experience is that “making your faith your own” was a hypocritical platitude.

Projecting doubt about one’s religious beliefs is not only not encouraged in conservative religious circles (and one can hardly get more conservative than Liberty) it’s viewed as sinful and dangerous.

It depends. In the conservative circles I grew up in a very high value was placed on “making your faith your own” as a teen, which did involve questioning and critically evaluating our beliefs. The assumption was that if our beliefs are true then they should have no trouble standing up to scrutiny. (In my case, some did and some didn’t, but I’m still grateful to my evangelical heritage for giving me a passion for pursuing truth.)

My original comment, way back when, was about the sister’s reaction to what the student projected about her faith, which was fervent devotion to an abstraction. I still don’t think that the student’s witness to her unbelieving family members is likely to have included lots of doubt and uncertainty, but if it seems that way to you, fine.

I think it does say something that one of the positive stories Theresa told about her sister was about how she critically evaluated her opinion of the death penalty changed her mind about it. Perhaps that’s not enough of a basis to judge on, but it certainly points to Kristen being open minded and a critical thinker.

At any rate, the whole point of my post was that in my experience most conservative Christians do not fit the typical stereotypes that you are referring to. Yes, there are those in leadership that discourage doubt and critical thinking, but the average conservative Christian does those things anyway in my experience. Part of the reason I did get resigned from my previous church was precisely because I refused to ignore the questions the kids in my youth group were asking. But it was only a small handful of the church leadership that were frightened by this. The majority of the kids and their parents completely understood and supported my decision to encourage the kids to ask questions and think for themselves. Which again underscores my point that the stereotypes don’t always (or even often) fit individual Christians like Kristen or like the kids in my youth group.

I just don’t buy the premise that passion and critical thinking don’t go together. Of course, we don’t have enough information to say whether or not they do go together for Kristen, but then, that was exactly my point.

Listen, even if this 18 or 19 year old, homeschooled, Liberty University student is a giant of the faith, like Wilberforce or you, Mike – and that’s a rather big IF, but whatever – I know what conservative religion says about doubt. You should know it, too, because IIRC you were fired from a conservative institution after you expressed doubts about some of the fundamental beliefs, right?

Projecting doubt about one’s religious beliefs is not only not encouraged in conservative religious circles (and one can hardly get more conservative than Liberty) it’s viewed as sinful and dangerous. It’s “not a good witness” certainly, to an unbelieving relative. Over on the deconversion blog, we are following the story of a seminary student who posted some doubts on his blog about beliefs like the 6,000-year-old earth and the rapture. He still believes these doctrines, actually, but he was honest enough to blog about having his doubts and wanting to do more research to shore up his beliefs in these rather ancillary points of dogma.

Well, guess what happened? One of the lurkers at deconversion saw his comment, looked at his blog and saw the doubts expressed, then he reported the student to the conservative ministry that employed him. The student was promptly fired. He has a wife and three children and no training to do anything other than work in a Christian ministry. In short, he’s screwed. Not for being an apostate, not for blaspheming, just for doubting and being honest enough to express that doubt publicly (not a good idea for the conservative Christian, I guess he’s figured that out by now).

My original comment, way back when, was about the sister’s reaction to what the student projected about her faith, which was fervent devotion to an abstraction. I still don’t think that the student’s witness to her unbelieving family members is likely to have included lots of doubt and uncertainty, but if it seems that way to you, fine.

People doubt, someone who is fervent in their faith, and has “strong belief”, doesn’t doubt. Doubt is the source of critical thinking, and without it you have faith. If you doubt a belief, you don’t believe it, you don’t have faith.

Someone maybe religious, tell other people to have faith, say they have faith, even be an employee in the church, but have doubt, and in fact lack faith. To question is to lose faith. Some people have lost it only to regret it, they go through withdrawal, scream even louder about how faith is good, and their (former) beliefs are right. These people believe in belief, they do not have belief.

Do you believe this proposition without evidence or reason? If the answer is yes, you have faith, if no, then you either don’t believe or you have a justified belief. Some faithheads may say they have reason to believe, but don’t expect them to tell you, don’t expect them to come up with an argument that couldn’t be used to believe in anything and everything, which as a tool for discovering objective truth is entirely useless.

How can something involving questioning and critical thinking lead to an answer that includes all possibilities? Is it wise to base your life, laws, morals, actions on such a system?

As for fervent, I would say most passionate belief tends to be devoted and unquestioning.

That seems like an overly broad generalization. Was the passion of a Martin Luther King “unquestioning”? Or William Wilberforce? Or Susan B. Anthony? We’ve learned recently that Mother Teresa, while passionate for her calling to the poor, actually had lots of questions. Billy Graham is a man of passion, and yet has also demonstrated a willingness to question and rethink his beliefs, even in old age. And, while I hesitate to place myself in such august company, I can honestly say that I am more passionate than ever for the vision of the kingdom of God, while at the same time constantly in a process of questioning and refining my beliefs (as I have been for over a decade now).

I just don’t buy the premise that passion and critical thinking don’t go together. Of course, we don’t have enough information to say whether or not they do go together for Kristen, but then, that was exactly my point.

As for “spiritual experience” I’m confused as to why you say this derogatorily.

Spiritual experience is anecdotal, and its usefulness as evidence is confined to the person who’s had the experience. Someone’s spiritual experience is not evidence to anyone else, unless they are credophiles who believe every UFO, ESP, religious, New Age and ghost story they hear.

As for fervent, I would say most passionate belief tends to be devoted and unquestioning. I wouldn’t call someone whose belief is conditional and ephemeral and oft-doubting “fervent” and I doubt that’s what the sister was conveying. And I would say all that doubly for someone who chooses Liberty University over many other universities, even Christian universities.

But now I must quit using the internet as an excuse not to write!