"Blind faith" versus "choosing to believe"

[Davian]

Well, yes it does, actually. So Hebrews 11:3 says "By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command," while Romans 1:20 says this is based on evidence: "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."

Invisible things that are clearly seen? Is that like Wonder Woman's jet?

 

[Davian]

I agree, we do have evidence. Some atheists refuse to admit that much.

I will admit that you have lots. It's all terrible, but there is a lot of it.

Why would you treat all of the multiple attestation testimonies that support the Resurrection any different than any other historical documents (which are also subjective evidences)?

Do you have the names and addresses of those witnesses?

This looks like a priori bias against Christianity.

It is my understanding that the bible does not meet the criteria for being a historical document.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible

 

[ananda]

Buddha just gave advice. He never offered salvation or asked for any personal commitments.

I was merely pointing out that SaintJoeNow claimed that faith was evidence, so anyone who has faith in anything else can also claim that as evidence.

 

[Davian]

An atheist has decided to believe in unbelief.

Belief is not a choice.

They generally believe in nonexistence ending existence, so by unbelieving they hope Hell is negated because it's existence cannot be proved to them as long as they are not in the fire.

Why would I go to hell? For what would I be held accountable for?

Atheists do not want to believe Jesus is God who loved them so much that he took their place in death, and in His bodily resurrection offers them forgiveness for their sins which they deserve to die for after He paid for them with His own blood. They know that if they believe the gospel and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in his resurrection and receive Him as their Savior He will completely change their lives by making them children of God, new creations to honor their Father, their Creator, their Savior.

Are you able to read minds?

It's a willful choice of rejecting belief to believe in unbelief, thinking they will prove Hell is not real by becoming non-existent in death.

Belief is not a choice.

If their belief was true, they would already be non-existent in death.

Atheism is not a belief. It is not a truth statement.

The problem is that they exist and cannot prove they are not in death as they are dying and can't get out of it.

The burden is on the religionist to demonstrate that their religion comports with reality.

Their whole believe system is self-contradictory believing death removes them from existence so they escape life unpunished in death, and as long as they live they believe they are escaping death temporarily, and then in death they believe they escape death and life permanently.

Atheism is not a belief system

It's nonsense, and for good reason the Bible so eloquently states in Psalm 14:1........."The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God"

Are you calling me a fool? I have not said such a thing.

They think they are negating God in their unbelief, when in reality they are only negating their own selves in death......and the sad part is that death and Hell will be cast into the Lake of Fire, where the smoke of their torments will rise forever.

Why would I be sent to hell?

 

[Ana the Ist]

An atheist has decided to believe in unbelief. They generally believe in nonexistence ending existence, so by unbelieving they hope Hell is negated because it's existence cannot be proved to them as long as they are not in the fire. Atheists do not want to believe Jesus is God who loved them so much that he took their place in death, and in His bodily resurrection offers them forgiveness for their sins which they deserve to die for after He paid for them with His own blood. They know that if they believe the gospel and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in his resurrection and receive Him as their Savior He will completely change their lives by making them children of God, new creations to honor their Father, their Creator, their Savior. It's a willful choice of rejecting belief to believe in unbelief, thinking they will prove Hell is not real by becoming non-existent in death. If their belief was true, they would already be non-existent in death. The problem is that they exist and cannot prove they are not in death as they are dying and can't get out of it. Their whole believe system is self-contradictory believing death removes them from existence so they escape life unpunished in death, and as long as they live they believe they are escaping death temporarily, and then in death they believe they escape death and life permanently. It's nonsense, and for good reason the Bible so eloquently states in Psalm 14:1........."The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God"

They think they are negating God in their unbelief, when in reality they are only negating their own selves in death......and the sad part is that death and Hell will be cast into the Lake of Fire, where the smoke of their torments will rise forever.

You know one thing this atheist did decide to believe in? Paragraph structure.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

.....................you are not making sense, you are only arguing in favor of your own eternal death and it's a losing argument.

No I am not. I lose patience by the day here...

God is calling you, trying to get you to listen and believe Him and be saved from Hell and you are pretending to be smarter and stronger than God. You are not making sense.

Reasoning Mode Shut Down. Activating Proselytization Protocols... Startup Successful

Loading Jesus Death.exe...

Load Complete.

Buffering 12%...

The gospel of God in Jesus Christ who took your place in death and rose bodily from the grave offering you forgiveness for sinning against HIm...

Buffering 36%...

offering to save you from your sin,

Buffering 67%...

death, and Hell because

Buffering 78%...

He created you and loves you so much that He died in your place to save you from what you deserve, the same as me, Hell for our sins......

Buffering 98%...

It will never be proven to you if you will not believe it, and if you believe it's too good to be true, maybe it's too late for you to change your mind and believe it...

You okay bud? It's almost like I was actually trying to discuss in a reasonable manner without engaging in a theological discussion like the op asked and you just ignored that.

 

[paulm50]

Per the forum guidelines, I'd like to stay on topic with this thread and not get distracted into a theological debate.

I have a simple question:
1. Many atheists claim that Christians have a "blind faith" (meaning that they believe something with zero evidence to support their belief).
2. Many atheists also claim that one cannot choose to believe something. Rather, they say that people only come to believe something through the evaluation of persuasive evidence.

Isn't it contradictory for a single atheist to simultaneously profess that both claims stated above are true?

1. Many Christians do have "blind faith" in what a man tells the the writers of the bible meant. As for zero evidence, there's reams and reams of evidence t show the bible is wrong.

2. We are persuaded by all that evidence. Only recently another piece of the jigsaw was added to the picture of how we came out of Africa. Some Christians will deny this because men in 1,000 BC said it was gods work.

They even claim the thesis of "Intelligent Design". A claim that's so false it shouldn't hold water. The last thing evolution is, is intelligent. Too many species went extinct because of natural changes to claim anything intelligent had something to do with it.

Is ignoring all the evidence and believing only the bible "blind faith"? What else can it be?

 

[paulm50]

In fact, of course, Christian faith is based on evidence, as other threads have pointed out.

What do you classify as evidence?

Are Paul and Jesus, real people? Well there's reliable evidence they did and I believe it. Is Jesus the "Son of God"? No such evidence exists.

Are the writings of Paul inspired by God or his own thoughts and beliefs? No such evidence exists.

Did the great flood as the bible states it happen? No such evidence exists. Evidence exists to prove the area of the Black Sea flooded after he melting of the ice caps. Giving rise to the fable.

And one can go through the bible time after time to show natural occurrences happened and in ignorance were claimed as act of god. Or acts of men making war, committing genocide and stealing land.

 

[Ana the Ist]

.....................you are not making sense, you are only arguing in favor of your own eternal death and it's a losing argument. God is calling you, trying to get you to listen and believe Him and be saved from Hell and you are pretending to be smarter and stronger than God. You are not making sense.

Hello Saint Joe,

After reading your profile, your posts on this page make a lot more sense. From what I gathered...

1. You think preaching is an effective means for communicating the christian message.
2. You think that the fear of an angry god is an effective means for getting people to understand the christian message.

Unfortunately, when it comes to speaking with atheists (as a general rule) neither of those things are going to be effective at all. I can't speak for every atheist, but I know that I practically shut-down when I see someone preaching. To me, it says that you don't want to engage in discussing anything, you aren't interested in seeking the truth, but most importantly...you don't want to hear what I have to say or try to understand my beliefs. You just want to preach. It's really the worst way to discuss faith, religion, god, or anything similar with an atheist. That's a free tip from me to you...here comes another one....

Atheists aren't scared of god or the afterlife. Again, this is generally speaking, but since we don't believe in those things...why would they scare us? Try to think of how you would feel if I told you that you would end up in ancient Sumerian hell for not worshipping Marduk the magician. You probably aren't scared of this possibility at all are you? Why? I'm guessing that it's because you don't believe in Marduk....right? Well, it's exactly the same for us atheists. We don't believe in Marduk either...nor do we believe in the christian god.

So there you have it...if you try to keep those two things in mind next time you engage atheists here on CF you'll stand a much better chance of those atheists taking you seriously.

 

[paulm50]

Well, no. If that were true, the New Testament would not put so much emphasis on the evidence for the Resurrection.

On the other thread, I quoted these definitions (one Protestant, one Catholic):

"The Christian accepts the truth of the existence of God by faith. But this faith is not a blind faith, but a faith that is based on evidence, and the evidence is found primarily in Scripture as the inspired Word of God, and secondarily in God's revelation in nature." -- Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology

The evidence the bible is wrong, is found in books written by Atheists.

Just because it's in a book, doesn't mean it's true. Someone saying something was inspired by god, usually means he's lying. That person has his own agenda.

 

[juvenissun]

If such an atheist existed, that might be an issue. Are you implying that if an atheist is wrong about something, that it counts towards you being right?

I believe that Christians have a lot of evidence for their beliefs. Terrible, unfalsifiable, untestable evidence, and weak of fallacious arguments. But, they have lots.

Do you dispute that belief is not a choice?

I am a Christian, and I have A LOT testable evidences on Christianity.
Give you one: The earth is the only planet hosts a lot of life forms at this corner of the universe.
is that a good evidence? Why not? If not, how would you like to modify it so that it would become an "evidence" acceptable to you?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I am a Christian, and I have A LOT testable evidences on Christianity.
Give you one: The earth is the only planet hosts a lot of life forms at this corner of the universe.
is that a good evidence? Why not? If not, how would you like to modify it so that it would become an "evidence" acceptable to you?

How is that evidence for Christianity?

 

[paulm50]

How is that evidence for Christianity?

It's not.

If there's any life on any planet anywhere in the universe. Either god didn't tell the scribes, like he missed out so much, or there is no god.

It doesn't even need lots of life on a planet in this part of the Universe. To prove it. Genesis is very clear about god creating the earth. And it's wrong.

 

[JGG]

An atheist has decided to believe in unbelief.

That sounds awfully contradictory. What is "unbelief"? I know disbelief. How are they different?

They generally believe in nonexistence ending existence, so by unbelieving they hope Hell is negated because it's existence cannot be proved to them as long as they are not in the fire. Atheists do not want to believe Jesus is God who loved them so much that he took their place in death, and in His bodily resurrection offers them forgiveness for their sins which they deserve to die for after He paid for them with His own blood.

It cannot possibly be that they don't believe it? They actively believe against it? Wouldn't that mean that they do believe?

They know that if they believe the gospel and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in his resurrection and receive Him as their Savior He will completely change their lives by making them children of God, new creations to honor their Father, their Creator, their Savior. It's a willful choice of rejecting belief to believe in unbelief, thinking they will prove Hell is not real by becoming non-existent in death. If their belief was true, they would already be non-existent in death. The problem is that they exist and cannot prove they are not in death as they are dying and can't get out of it. Their whole believe system is self-contradictory believing death removes them from existence so they escape life unpunished in death, and as long as they live they believe they are escaping death temporarily, and then in death they believe they escape death and life permanently. It's nonsense, and for good reason the Bible so eloquently states in Psalm 14:1........."The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God"

The Bible also eloquently states:

Psalm 53:1 - The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

Psalm 5:5 - The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

How are we supposed to believe your claim that Jesus loves us, when it is so plainly stated in the Bible that God specifically hates atheists.

Incoherence.

They think they are negating God in their unbelief, when in reality they are only negating their own selves in death......and the sad part is that death and Hell will be cast into the Lake of Fire, where the smoke of their torments will rise forever.

This is just more incoherence. I don't believe this stuff because it doesn't make sense.

 

[Davian]

I am a Christian, and I have A LOT testable evidences on Christianity.
Give you one: The earth is the only planet hosts a lot of life forms at this corner of the universe.
is that a good evidence?

No.

Why not?

It fails to demonstrate why Christianity might be true, even if we were capable of testing it, which we are not.

If not, how would you like to modify it so that it would become an "evidence" acceptable to you?

Build me a faster-than-light spaceship with planet-fall capabilities. Like the USS Voyager, from the Star Trek TV series.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

I am a Christian, and I have A LOT testable evidences on Christianity.
Give you one: The earth is the only planet hosts a lot of life forms at this corner of the universe.
is that a good evidence? Why not? If not, how would you like to modify it so that it would become an "evidence" acceptable to you?

Whoa you've been to Europa? And Mars? And Jupiter?! Dude you've gotta tell me what it was like! Oh ... darn you haven't.
Drat I guess we're gonna have to accept the fact you don't know this for certain. Also you said this corner. Does God have a side planet he's cheating on us with in another corner?? Hmm? So much for jealous god, more like infidelious god.

 

[Shadow]

I have a simple question:
1. Many atheists claim that Christians have a "blind faith" (meaning that they believe something with zero evidence to support their belief).

The 'blindness' of faith is a question of believing in the authority of scripture or a church rather than through evidence. This does not mean that there is zero evidence, but that something like the bible cannot be taken at face value and necessary requires further evidence to demonstrate it's historical accuracy. Faith can be built on intelligent arguments and so is not necessary blind, but I think 'blind faith' applies to literalist attitudes towards religious texts and passive acceptence of authority more than anything.

2. Many atheists also claim that one cannot choose to believe something. Rather, they say that people only come to believe something through the evaluation of persuasive evidence.

This depends what you mean by 'choose', as yes people do chose to believe something but this does not mean that that choice is independent of other factors, such as who our freinds and family are, and our access to ideas. If we are surronded by people who have the same views, it severely restricts the possibility that we can have independent ones.

Isn't it contradictory for a single atheist to simultaneously profess that both claims stated above are true?

Taken literally, yes, it is contradictory, but this concerns the nature of 'chosing' a faith or belief system and whether that choice is based on chosing to accept an authority. People can and do chose what they believe but there are questions as to how free we are to make those choices and whether there are limitations to what we can do.

 

[dlamberth]

Buddha just gave advice. He never offered salvation or asked for any personal commitments.

What if desire for any kind of salvation has absolutely nothing to do with making God ones reality in life?

.

 

[juvenissun]

Whoa you've been to Europa? And Mars? And Jupiter?! Dude you've gotta tell me what it was like! Oh ... darn you haven't.
Drat I guess we're gonna have to accept the fact you don't know this for certain. Also you said this corner. Does God have a side planet he's cheating on us with in another corner?? Hmm? So much for jealous god, more like infidelious god.

All evidences do not need to be certain. Anything "apparently" true could be used as an evidence.

 

[juvenissun]

No.

It fails to demonstrate why Christianity might be true, even if we were capable of testing it, which we are not.

Build me a faster-than-light spaceship with planet-fall capabilities. Like the USS Voyager, from the Star Trek TV series.

It DOES demonstrate.
The Bible says that God only creates human on the earth, not at anywhere else. (so there is no little green man anywhere in this universe)
We can test it again and again and again. People ARE doing that. So, is this an evidence? Why not?