Yes, truth is often preferable when it is available. But in a court room, the evidence doesn't always point you where you think it is. Case in point: America thought the whole Casey Anthony trial outcome was set in stone before the trial. She was guilty to America without reasonable doubt. Despite the evidence that made us sure, she was found innocent.
Well... she was not found innocent. She was just not found guilty... that is a slight difference.
It shows that all of the "evidence" may not be exactly what you thought originally. It could go either way.
Yes, sometimes it can. The method is not perfect... I never said so. But it still is better than anything else we have... including "heart-felt beliefs".
Just go back to the last paragraph and reconsider: "She was guilty to America without reasonable doubt."
People had their beliefs, and they didn't think they had the belief in Casey Anthony's guilt wrong. (Yes, I deliberately phrased that exactly in the same way as you described your belief in God and Jesus)
The evaluation of the evidence showed that it was not conclusive enough to execute her. That's the concept of "reasonable doubt"... err on the side of caution.
We are always searching for the truth but it doesn't always come in hard facts. Sure I may be wrong in my belief (my interpretation of the bible. I do not think I have the belief in God and Jesus wrong-you are free to believe as you do as well), the facts may change things as I learn more about my faith through study and prayer.
But i didn't just get here because I always knew it to be true. I spent a great deal of my teenage years asking these same questions. I spent a great deal of my early 20s believing nothing.
I really mean no offense with that... consider it an inherent flaw in my position: I doubt what you just said.
Perhaps I can relate that back to my conversation with Colter here: I have my own personal experiences... perhaps some more as you do, I am twice your age. I, obviously, didn't have anyone elses experiences, and I cannot directly relate to them.
When you say "I spend a great deal of my early 20s believing nothing.", I don't know what to make of that.
You are 28. Your early twenties are not so long ago. "A great deal" isn't even all of your "early twenties". I on the other hand have been "believing nothing" (and I wouldn't describe it that way) for a lot longer than you are alive.
So when you say "I asked these same questions"... I have to wonder, did you really? How in-depth was your asking? What answers did you find... and why did these answers convince you? What else happened to convince you?
I have found that most believers tend to have a slightly screwed view on their previous position. I have talked to people who said they had been "atheists" before now becoming "born again"... and had been just standard, majority, church-raised, bible-school-adhering, not-totally-taking-it-serious christian teenagers.
Were they "atheists"? Did they "believe in nothing"? Well, perhaps... but not in the way I would describe myself.
If I even become a Christian, my posts here will still be there, for everbody to see what I questioned and what I believed "before". I wish such documentation would exist for a lot more people.
Yes! Please do all you can to find the truth, just remember that this is not some fairy tale to the believers. This is more important than our own lives, many Christians lay down their lives for their views. These aren't just the radicals. Once a person becomes truly committed to their faith (beyond the beginning stages of acceptance) ones life drastically changes. So to approach a person about their faith with mockery, manipulation, or condemnation for their faith (not saying you specifically) the person will become upset. Just as a homosexual would if a Christian started badgering them about their sexuality.
I could say a number of things about that, but I really don't want to go into this direction.
yes, I do believe that. I and many other Christians often pray for the unbelievers.
It isn't just about heaven or hell though. Faith changes your life in the here and now. Take AA or NA for example. It helps millions of people change their lives, and it is faith centered. The largest alcoholics and narcotics groups revolve around faith.
(And evidently don't work. There are some interesting studies about the success rates of AA)
Faith creates change in the darkest corners of ones psyche. You can see this in anyone who converts. I could tell you how I converts and how the medical/scientific field failed mr but Christianity saved me. But I would prefer to do that through pm if you cared to know. It is very personal.
Again, a direction of debate I don't really want to go into... personal tends to get messy.
Just so much: yes, I agree that faith creates change within you. But, based on experience with a lot of different "faiths", I think I can say that is is indeed the act of "faith" that enables this change... irrelevant of the object of this faith.
That's why it is so, erm, "upsetting" when atheists are said to "believe in nothing" or are "without hope".
I do want it to be important to others. I want it to be because i want them to have the amazing aspects that come with it. Not just heaven. That is merely a fraction. The best testimony one can give is through the life they live. I want to live a life so appealing-like my Grandmother was for me- that any unbeliever would second guess themselves. Just saying ��
Personal experiences again... sadly not comparable. Perhaps you should have met my grandfather... whose life was as appealing and exemplary as you could get... and who was a lifelong atheist. Would that make you second guess yourself?
As I see it, people are people. Whatever they do in "good" or "bad" comes from within, from themselves. A "good Christian" is a good person who happens to be a Christian. An "evil atheist" is an evil person who happens to be an atheist.
If you had true desire to have faith it is granted to you. It doesn't just happen because you want to believe.
I can't see it this way. If I had "a true desire to have faith"... I would already have faith.
Yet, if faith is something that is "granted to you"... why would you need a "true desire"?
Free will? God respecting my wishes? Well, I didn't have a "true desire" to be born... and yet here I am.
You (well I did it this way) recognize many things cannot be explained through science. And even what is explained through science doesn't explain why, just how. We know how the universe was likely to start, not the slightest idea of why. We know how we have life but not the slightest idea why. We only have a fraction if a fraction of the knowledge this universe has.
That may be one of these personal experiences that make the difference between you and Colter and me: I recognized that the existence of a question does not necessarily imply the existence of an answer. And I recognized that inventing answers for meaningless questions might provide comfort, but not truth.
Once you have accepted that you can move on to prayer. Most people accept the fact that there are questions left unanswered. Most people have completed step one. Step two comes (if you have not been around the faith forever) more often by getting to a point in life where you humble yourself. You have to go to the Father humble. Most people get to this point after many trials and they fall on their knees begging for Him to save them. Some people see the fruit in another and see their own fruit is withered away and want more than anything to have what the other person has (look up fruit of the spirit to understand if you are not familiar).
One of the things I just don't understand, and that believers seem to be unable to explain.
This makes no sense to me. None at all.
You may consider this part of "these same questions" that you and I ask(ed). I don't know what kind of answers you think you found for them... I didn't find any.
Despite which way you go, eventually most converted Christians got to a point in their life where they ran out of answers, they were unsatisfied with the simplicity of this world and needed more than the every day mundane life. They need purpose more than superficial. This isn't speaking for every Christian but those who were far from the faith and found their way, these are the most common ways I have heard.
Yes, I agree with that observation. But based on my own experiences, for example with "converted" Buddhists or Muslim, who make these exact same statements... I have to wonder whether they really found something external to answer their needs, or if all that is just based on their own self.
Considering that many of these "purposes more than superficial" contradict each other... but still seem to fulfil the believers... my bet is on "their beliefs makes them happy... not the object of their beliefs".
And again, based on my own experiences: all the "unanswered questions", the "not being satisfied with this world", the "needing more", the "purpose"... there is none of this that I didn't find in my atheistic worldview.
I may be wrong... but I just don't see any difference.
Once you humble yourself and realize we are dust in the wind compared to the big picture, and you feel a need for more than life as you know it to be, you pray. Even if you doubt your prayer being answered. You would pray to ask for eyes to see truth (I pray this every morning). Pray that your heart be touched (another daily prayer).
Again, no offense meant (I hate to have to repeat this), but as I see it, I fear your view on that may be rather limited. As an insider, someone with an investment in this view, you may be unaware of all the other complex factors that lead to the "people around" you being (and saying) what they are.
Or just read the bible, starting in the new testament. Jesus is the best example of how a Christian ought to be.
This isn't a "how to become a Christian" instruction sheet, just relaying what I have seen in the people around me and myself.
I know that this is a big "no, no!" around Christian (and even non-Christians)... but I did never see Jesus as such a huge thing. If this is the "best example of how a Christian ought to be", I don't think they are aiming very hight. (and, yes, I did read the Bible ;()
I dont. What I think is unreasonable is trying to get someone stuck in a constant "show me proof for your proof for that proof", or the lack of opposing ideas, or the ignoring facts that you can not explain, or comments like "well maybe Santa can come visit". This is unreasonable. I'm not saying you specifically do this but this kind of talk is frequent in this board.
One thing that you should be aware of: the difference in the concepts of "proof" and "evidence".
I know that commonly, these terms get convoluted a lot, but in philosophy and in the approach the sceptics take, these terms have different meaning.
"Proof is for mathematics and alcohol", is a saying that is often mentioned in this regard.
Proof is clear. It is unambigous. It does indeed "prove" something... there is no space left to wiggle.
Sceptics never ask for proof. (If they use that term, chide them, and mostly they will accept that they are using the term in its vague, common-language variant.)
Sceptics ask for "evidence": " [...]facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:" (definion from the Oxford dictionary).
I think this is the post I said I would get back to? If not, please let me know. If I respond any further it will likely be through pm. Take care freodin
That was the post... thank you for taking your time.
I'd like to continue this conversation, by PM if you need to, but I'd prefer this public space.
Ideas and opinions should be out in the open, to be seen and scrutinized by everyone.
