Another question for atheists

[selfinflikted]

By 'Biblical faith' do you mean the faith displayed by those in the Bible or the faith that todays Bible thumpers tout.

Very different things.

"Biblical faith" I thought, was self-explanatory. (faith as described in the Bible)

 

[Wiccan_Child]

This sentence does not make sense to me. Should there have been an "and you believed him?" at the end of this?

I was actually asked a similar question to my Christian (about leprechauns, or something like that) and he said he would believe me. When I asked him, did he mean that he believed that I believed it or that he literally believed in the leprechaun.

He said both :/

You have a Christian? Remember to walk him twice a day!

 

[Desk trauma]

You have a Christian? Remember to walk him twice a day!

Must be some new kind of pet play I am unaware of, hey whatever lifts your luggage.

 

[KCfromNC]

Wow.... That's pretty telling what "faith" can do.

I doubt he really believed what he was saying - it goes more to how misleading some people are willing to be (even to themselves) to promote irrational beliefs.

 

[keith99]

The evidence of a trusted friend making the claim would be stronger than if a random stranger had made the same claim, but considering how extraordinary the claim is, I think it would still require close to the same amount of faith.

What if that friend lived in the woods and you had seen he had a 'pet' bear before?

Or what about another seemingly absurd claim, that to turn left when racing a motorbike you lean left and turn the wheel RIGHT? This one is actualy fairly well known now, but what if you had heard it in the very early days of racing, before TV or even movie recordings of races?

There is something we trust all the time in place of evidence, it is authority, the report of a reliable source.

And sometimes a not so reliable source. Lets say I'm a commander of an army and a wild eyed sheperd comes running in claiming a huge enemy force is a couple of miles away. I would believe there is a force. Since he is a sheperd huis livelyhood depends in part on knowing where he is. I would trust his accuracy as to where the force was. I would not be as trusting as to the size and makeup of the force. I'd send out my own scouts, not becasue I disbelieve, but becaseu I need more details.

And that touches on a very interesting point. In large part we trust authority becaseu we CAN check. Not that we do, but that we can. And sometime we do check. An unreliable authority will soon be known as such.

But can we check the claims of Christians or other faiths regarding their God(s)? It seems not.

 

[Mling]

What if that friend lived in the woods and you had seen he had a 'pet' bear before?

Or what about another seemingly absurd claim, that to turn left when racing a motorbike you lean left and turn the wheel RIGHT? This one is actualy fairly well known now, but what if you had heard it in the very early days of racing, before TV or even movie recordings of races?

There is something we trust all the time in place of evidence, it is authority, the report of a reliable source.

And sometimes a not so reliable source. Lets say I'm a commander of an army and a wild eyed sheperd comes running in claiming a huge enemy force is a couple of miles away. I would believe there is a force. Since he is a sheperd huis livelyhood depends in part on knowing where he is. I would trust his accuracy as to where the force was. I would not be as trusting as to the size and makeup of the force. I'd send out my own scouts, not becasue I disbelieve, but becaseu I need more details.

And that touches on a very interesting point. In large part we trust authority becaseu we CAN check. Not that we do, but that we can. And sometime we do check. An unreliable authority will soon be known as such.

But can we check the claims of Christians or other faiths regarding their God(s)? It seems not.

And you trust people specifically to the degree that you know, or feel it is safe to presume, that they are trustworthy. You trust them within their level of expertise--the shepherd is likely to know about terrain and direction, but not about specifics of military forces-- and their not knowing this is not considered a flaw or weakness on their part. If he said he saw a cavalry coming, and it turned out to be infantry, you'd excuse the mistake in terminology and keep asking him questions that you knew were in his field of expertise.

Compare that with the feeling people often have about authorities they have "faith" in--like clergy (or parents), where finding out they aren't right about something, can destroy somebody's faith in them for everything. Or the way people feel they can't read anything in the Bible with a critical eye (like: "is this story, perhaps, a mythological explanation for a natural phenomenon?") because they feel that if one part of it were disproven, they wouldn't be able to trust anything it said.

Reasonable trust, vs. true faith. Faith is kinda fragile that way.

 

[Non sequitur]

You have a Christian? Remember to walk him twice a day!

Aw.

That seemed to be a really telling story about faith, when people know what it's regarding, all ruined by leaving out "friend".

:/

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Aw.

That seemed to be a really telling story about faith, when people know what it's regarding, all ruined by leaving out "friend".

:/

It was a good story, but I just couldn't resist

 

[Illuminaughty]

It's interesting that some theists expect that atheists must have answer to the "ultimate question" (i.e. the origin of the universe) or else atheism is unwarranted. Perhaps that's because they believe that they do have the answer, or at least, a answer, and that is better than nothing. I don't think so. If your answer is purely a theological conjecture, then why should I give it more weight than an honest "I don't know"?

I agree. People tend to turn premature certainty into a virtue for some reason.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Those with No Allegiance to Reality - YouTube

 

[madaz]

Those with No Allegiance to Reality - YouTube

I can think of a few members here that would benefit immensely from this video.

The problem is many may not bother viewing it, and if they did bother viewing it they probably wouldn't understand it. I'm not implying these people lack the mental capacity to understand. I'm suggesting (as also suggested in this video) that a personal definition of "belief" is in itself, a hindrance to understanding. Also in my opinion the narrator in this video lacks the charisma to engage ones attention for any length of time.

 

[plindboe]

What if that friend lived in the woods and you had seen he had a 'pet' bear before?

Not sure that would change much.

Or what about another seemingly absurd claim, that to turn left when racing a motorbike you lean left and turn the wheel RIGHT? This one is actualy fairly well known now, but what if you had heard it in the very early days of racing, before TV or even movie recordings of races?

If it violates common sense it's only reasonable to have a bit more skepticism. But that's where evidence beyond testimonials might come in handy, to show the common sense wrong. If the person telling you this is a professional motorcyclist, that might count as enough evidence in itself.

There is something we trust all the time in place of evidence, it is authority, the report of a reliable source.

And sometimes a not so reliable source. Lets say I'm a commander of an army and a wild eyed sheperd comes running in claiming a huge enemy force is a couple of miles away. I would believe there is a force. Since he is a sheperd huis livelyhood depends in part on knowing where he is. I would trust his accuracy as to where the force was. I would not be as trusting as to the size and makeup of the force. I'd send out my own scouts, not becasue I disbelieve, but because I need more details.

And that touches on a very interesting point. In large part we trust authority becaseu we CAN check. Not that we do, but that we can. And sometime we do check. An unreliable authority will soon be known as such.

That is often not the case. It's true that we all rely on authorities, but this is exactly why we have to keep questioning our authorities. In religious circles, questioning authorities are often discouraged. That's what preaching is all about. I trust many authorities, but their claims are under continual scrutiny by me, and when they mess up, by contradicting the evidence, they stop being authorities.

But can we check the claims of Christians or other faiths regarding their God(s)? It seems not.

Depends on the claim. Sometimes we can check them. But if not, it comes down to how extraordinary the claims are, combined with the fact that adherents of contradictory religions and of non-religious belief systems also make these types of extraordinary claims. Spiritual (in lack of a better word) experiences can be induced by certain drugs, and other practices, like meditation. Due to these facts, we have every reason to believe them when they say they've had self-transcending experiences, but we also have every reason to doubt their interpretations of these experiences.

Peter