Harold Fletcher said:
This is an interesting point you make here. But is it the same type of faith? The reason that atheists don't beleive is simply because they have never been presented evidence that god exists. The reason that theists beleive is because they beleive they have received some inner revelation.
Indeed, this is a point for discussion. I guess my point is there can't really be any evidence for God's existance, unless we witness a 'miracle', such as healing, God speaking to us, or a thousand angels appearing in a public place! Even if these things happen, of course, one can either accept or reject the testimony of those people who claim they saw these events. So perhaps it is a different type of faith in this sense.
The only evidence most of us have for God's existance is religious teaching. I accept Jesus came to Earth and did the things he is supposd to have done because I trust the testimony of those who (apparently) witnessed his mission. I believe the closest testimony one can get is that coming from people close to him, in the same time period, so that leads me to trust his disciples, one of whom was Peter, who was a co-founder of the Christian church. I accept the Jewish scriptures, because Jesus taught from them, and said that they were true, and the word of God. In accepting the scriptures, I accept one God, who created the universe. I accept the Gospels, because they are the (I believe) best records of his teaching on Earth, and the epistles because they were written (primarily) by Paul, who I mentioned before.
Indeed, I do have faith in something I have never witnessed (the coming of Christ). I do have faith in a God I cannot prove exists. But, assuming a god does exist, Christianity makes sense to me, as it has at least some evidence that it is a valid religion. In having faith in Christianity, I guess I have faith in God. Seems circular reasoning I know, but without assuming a God could exist, then Christianity doesn't make sense...
Harold Fletcher said:
But I suppose if you wanted to use the word "faith" in such a way, then we all have faith that Santa claus does'nt exist.
Indeed lol. I think Christianity requires less faith than the Santa Claus hypothesis though, don't ya think?
Harold Fletcher said:
And faith also, from my understanding, is closely related to hope.Do you think atheists hope that god does'nt exist, in the same way theists hope that he does exist?
Ooh interesting one. Christian fundamentalists would say that there is a reason that you don't want to accept God, although I don't really agree with this entirely. Of course, as I have mentioned, to believe in God requires faith, so Christianity cannot be completely logically proven; some atheists are very reluctant to have faith in something. But I don't think that many atheists
hope God doesn't exist. In many worldviews on God, God would not care what religion (if any) the people on Earth follow. The only reason I can think that atheists would
hope God didn't exist (i.e. are scared of Him) would be if they had a strong, fundamentalist, 'fire and brimstone'-style Christian upbringing, and are honestly scared of eternal damnation. If this is the case, one would have to wonder how atheistic the person actually was; do they not believe in God, or do they not want to believe in God? So I would say no, they do not.
Harold Fletcher said:
God is just not a concept in the atheist world view. To say that they use the same faith seems like an equivocation to me. But as always, I may be dead wrong.
I understand this; I have as far as I remember always been a theist, so I don't think I have really experienced atheism. But from a logical standpoint, if one group says God exists, and one doesn't, then there is no way to prove or disprove either side. Theists believe there is evidence for a God, atheists reject this evidence. This is their perrogative, and really, there is no 'right' answer from an objective standpoint. My point was not that theism is more likely than atheism (as there is no way to prove God, except by witnessing Him), but that in denying the existance of something they cannot detect, atheists are not really being agnostic about God's presense - they assume he does not exist. Of course, Christians do the same thing, but both parties make assumptions.
Harold Fletcher said:
Unless of course, this god was'nt into the religion making business. Like Deism.
Yes, this is true.
Harold Fletcher said:
Did you investigate every other religion to test for truth before you came to christianity? If not, then how do you know that your religion holds the monopoly on truth?
No, I didn't. As I pointed out before, I believe Christian teaching because I put trust in the followers of Jesus to accurately record his teachings, and for those teachings to be preserved. I cannot be totally sure that my religion
is the truth; of course, I have my doubts like everyone else. But as a monotheist, Christianity seems the most historically-justifiable, logical religion to me. As I am not a deist by nature, I cannot accept Islam (which teaches that Christian and Jewish teaching was corrupted from its original form, because this would posit God ignored creation for a good 4000 years before setting it 'right' again. Of course, one could argue that my monotheistic, non-deistic conceptions about God are in part due to my upbringing, and they'd probably be right lol. Indeed, for those bought up in a polytheistic environment, monotheism probably makes as little sense as polytheism makes to me. I guess I can't say anything else than I am a monotheist by nature, and so Christianity makes the most sense out of the monotheistic religions.
What if I wasn't a Christian? Well, thats a good question. If I was still a theist, I'd probably just be a non-religious theist, trying to do my best for other people. Otherwise, I'd probably follow a religion such as Buddhism, Hinduism, or a spiritual religion such as that. I believe that all religions have some element of truth in them. I do not think that Christianity holds a 'monopoly' on truth, but (at the moment) I am pretty sure that Christianity is that truth, or as close to that truth as possible.
Harold Fletcher said:
I would enjoy a further discussion on this in another section of the forum. From my research, I have'nt found any secular historical records that supports Jesus' life as portrayed in the gospels, but I would be interested in hearing what you have found.
I am not sure of the exact details; I would be interested in doing some more research on this as well. From what I have heard, the Romans were pretty good at keeping records on crucifixions, and that there was a Jewish man executed under the jurisdiction of Pilate at the date given by the Bible. Also, I have been informed that there are written records from a Roman historian alive at the time, detailing the crucifixion of Jesus. I have not seen these records myself, but I will try and find some references for you.
Harold Fletcher said:
I'll take that advice to heart. I have prayed before, but nothing ever came of those prayers. Perhaps i'm doing it all wrong; don't know.
Prayer is a difficult one. I can't really give any advice here; I guess its one of those ironic things: you need faith to pray, even if you wish to pray for faith.
I hope that it works out for you eventually.
Peace,
Alchemist