How does one come to believe something?

[Chozen1956]

Faith in Christ is not a decision that we can make, despite all of the rhetoric in churches today that state Jesus can be chosen or not chosen as Lord. Jesus IS Lord. One day, all will know it. We have no authority or ability to decide to choose Christ. Faith is a gift from God.

The sinful nature and/or flesh, is hostile to God and can never decide to choose Him. The sinful nature or flesh loves darkness and hates God. How can it then decide to choose Him?

However, we were chosen, predestined to believe and have been given the gift of faith since Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith.

This gift of faith can never be revoked. It is not dependent upon our reasoning, logic, will, or moral fortitude. Man is fickle as are his emotions and what he believes in can change over time, even over short periods of time.

Those who God called, He also chose. But, man can reject Christ, the Light, God.

See, Jesus died for the sins of the whole world and therefore has already reconciled the world and will not count men's sins against them. That is, He will count none but the sin of Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which is the ultimate rejection of the Christ. That sin will never be forgiven. So those who reject the light and prefer the darkness, will have what they desire, ultimately.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

The sinful nature and/or flesh, is hostile to God and can never decide to choose Him. The sinful nature or flesh loves darkness and hates God. How can it then decide to choose Him?

I don't love darkness and I don't hate something I don't believe in.

But thanks for playing...

 

[Chozen1956]

The evidence is all around us giving us ample reason to receive the knowledge of God. It is the fool who thinks otherwise. Despite his lengthy explanations and micro-fanatical deductions, he who refutes, epically totalitarian proof of the miraculous God, denies the very relevance of his reason for refuting or believing anything.

 

[Chozen1956]

But you do. For to reject the light, is to choose darkness. I'm not playing.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

But you do. For to reject the light, is to choose darkness. I'm not playing.

But I don't choose darkness. And you're not a mind reader.

 

[bhsmte]

The evidence is all around us giving us ample reason to receive the knowledge of God. It is the fool who thinks otherwise. Despite his lengthy explanations and micro-fanatical deductions, he who refutes, epically totalitarian proof of the miraculous God, denies the very relevance of his reason for refuting or believing anything.

Opinion.

 

[Chriliman]

There was a thread a while back entitled "Belief not a choice?" and several atheists in that thread insisted that people only come to believe things by evaluating evidence. So I thought I'd extend that into a syllogism and see if it floats.

1. People only come to believe something by evaluating evidence.
2. People who are Christians believe that God exists.
3. Therefore, People who are Christians only came to believe that God exists by evaluating evidence.

Is the above a sound argument? If not, why not?

It's sound because anything that can be objectively evaluated qualifies as evidence and truth claims can be objectively evaluated, therefore all believers in God came to believe based on objectively evaluating truth claims and other evidence around them in creation.

 

[bhsmte]

It's sound because anything that can be objectively evaluated qualifies as evidence and truth claims can be objectively evaluated, therefore all believers in God came to believe based on objectively evaluating truth claims and other evidence around them in creation.

Can you demonstrate this objective analysis of truth claims, to reach the conclusions you reach?

 

[Chriliman]

Can you demonstrate this objective analysis of truth claims, to reach the conclusions you reach?

Yes, by claiming that truth claims can be objectively analyzed.

If you disagree, isn't that because you've analyzed my claim and found it false? Yet someone else could analyze my claim and find it true. Why is your analysis any better than there's?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

It's sound because anything that can be objectively evaluated qualifies as evidence and truth claims can be objectively evaluated, therefore all believers in God came to believe based on objectively evaluating truth claims and other evidence around them in creation.

Not all truth claims can be objectively evaluated.

How would you objectively evaluate the claim "I have five dollars in my pocket that will leave my pocket in 10 seconds"?

 

[HitchSlap]

Yes, by claiming that truth claims can be objectively analyzed.

If you disagree, isn't that because you've analyzed my claim and found it false? Yet someone else could analyze my claim and find it true. Why is your analysis any better than there's?

Because our worldview allows us to recognize when we're wrong, and yours doesn't.

 

[HitchSlap]

Not all truth claims can be objectively evaluated.

How would you objectively evaluate the claim "I have five dollars in my pocket that will leave my pocket in 10 seconds"?

Remember, this is the guy who thinks a claim is evidence for itself.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes, by claiming that truth claims can be objectively analyzed.

If you disagree, isn't that because you've analyzed my claim and found it false? Yet someone else could analyze my claim and find it true. Why is your analysis any better than there's?

Precisely why I asked you to demonstrate the method you use to objectively analyze truth claims, to believe what you believe.

 

[Chriliman]

Precisely why I asked you to demonstrate the method you use to objectively analyze truth claims, to believe what you believe.

The method I use is objective analysis based on what I know is true. Is there any other way to analyze something?

 

[HitchSlap]

The method I use is objective analysis based on what I know is true. Is there any other way to analyze something?

How would you know if you were wrong?

 

[bhsmte]

The method I use is objective analysis based on what I know is true. Is there any other way to analyze something?

Not much of a demonstration.

Give me an example. Like, the bible stating there was a global flood, Jesus was resurrected, etc.. You know, the miracle claims in the bible. How do you go about "objectively" determining whether they are true claims?

 

[Chriliman]

Not all truth claims can be objectively evaluated.

How would you objectively evaluate the claim "I have five dollars in my pocket that will leave my pocket in 10 seconds"?

This does not mean no truth claims can be objectively analyzed. The important thing is that the most important truth claims about life and existence can be objectively analyzed and are evidence that help determine what is true.

 

[HitchSlap]

This does not mean no truth claims can be objectively analyzed. The important thing is that the most important truth claims about life and existence can be objectively analyzed and are evidence that help determine what is true.

So true claims help determine what is true, and false claims help determine what is false.

Got it.

 

[Chriliman]

Not much of a demonstration.

Give me an example. Like, the bible stating there was a global flood, Jesus was resurrected, etc.. You know, the miracle claims in the bible. How do you go about "objectively" determining whether they are true claims?

You're asking me to do a lot there, but I'm just on my phone so I'll just provide this link to a neat video that may help you understand why Christians believe based on objectively analyzing claims in the Bible.

https://www.facebook.com/

 

[HitchSlap]

You're asking me to do a lot there, but I'm just on my phone so I'll just provide this link to a neat video that may help you understand why Christians believe based on objectively analyzing claims in the Bible.

https://www.facebook.com/

Actually, there is zero public evidence that Jesus was publicly executed. So based on the evidence, the claim that Jesus was publicly executed is false.