You may have to be more specific. For instance, I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, and that the moon will wax and wane as it should. However, I have faith in this because I have no reason to believe otherwise. The sun rose today, as it did yesterday, as it did the day before. That's not really faith, that's just reasoning. Harold Camping had faith, look how well that turned out.
Reason and empiricism are not the same thing. There may be forces in the universe that can cause the sun to not rise tomorrow and maybe even make it go nova. Could happen tomorrow morning although the probability is extremely low according to what we know. But like I said, how much do we know? Not much! We just have an over-inflated opinion of our knowledge. The extent of reason in the statement "the sun will most likely rise tomorrow" is that empirical data indicates that the sun has risen a great many times before. You have no future data, only FAITH that the data trend will not suddenly change as a result of unknown factors.
I was doing a 'controlled' experiment back in my undergrad days. The experiment was very well designed and would have yielded important results. That didn't happen! Little did I know, the polymerase was denatured. So the experimental result was a mess. There was a clear trend generated by past experiments but this one unexpected element ruined the trend. A successful reaction in this case would otherwise have been about as probable as the Sun's gravitation not changing tomorrow. But we cannot foresee all outside influences.
Your belief that the sun will most likely rise tomorrow morning has more to do with faith than reason.
Reason is something entirely different. 2+2=4 is reason. A philosophical argument is reason. Empiricism is "the sky is blue" or in this case "the sun has risen many times before".
Ironically, this is approaching my explanation for why I can't believe people when they claim to know even the smallest thing about such a being.
and you would be absolutely correct. We know nothing about the physical nature of God and anyone who claims to know it is a fool and a false prophet.
Why would I start with such an assumption? It's just an arbitrary assumption. Why not start with the assumption that Leonard Nimoy created the universe?
Assuming for the sake of the argument. Have you ever studied philosophy?
That's not a very good reason for belief in such a being. Especially above any other explanation. Why should I wait to accept that Leonard Nimoy is the great creator? Just because I don't understand it? Just because it doesn't really make sense?
I said nothing whatsoever about why you SHOULD believe. My entire argument was about why faith isn't that far-fetched. Did I say something that sounded like an argument for God's existence? I'm looking through my original statement and can't find anything resembling that.
Well, for one, one could be wrong. One could shut themselves off from actual truth because they've already settled on a falsehood. Secondly, I have no reason to believe in God other than that others insist that I must (or suffer eternity in hell).
You don't go to hell for not believing in God's empirical properties. Even the apostles were sometimes unable to believe and Jesus was two feet away from them!
Your salvation is the easiest thing in the world. The only thing you need to do is NOT HATE CHRIST. That's it! The thief dying on the cross next to Jesus was probably choosing him out of desperation. We have no proof that he believed all the hype in any absolute sense. Maybe he only heard one sermon but it doesn't matter! He was saved simply for having the will and the heart to honestly choose! Sadly, this very simple thing is very difficult for much of the world. Probably because many Christians have not been doing a very good job of explaining the simplicity of the Gospel. God doesn't care about what theories you hold in your head about reality, only that you have knowledge of your own sins and have genuine repentance. Absolutely everyone has done something less than the standard of perfect virtue at some point in their lives. The only things you need to do is accept that Christ has covered your sins, to know the spirit of true virtue, and to honestly desire that standard.
Christ did not come to form a new religion. There will be a great many non-Christians in heaven but there won't be anyone who doesn't have the holy spirit of Christ.
The Christian walk is the most difficult thing in the world but salvation is the easiest. If salvation was difficult, Christ's sacrifice would have been less than perfect!
