How do you know

[dlamberth]

When a religion evolves gradually from earlier religions, then divine revelation becomes less believable IMO.

I don't think it's about the religion. Clarity of divine revelation depends upon the person and what they do with it.

 

[cloudyday2]

I don't think it's about the religion. Clarity of divine revelation depends upon the person and what they do with it.

Personally, I have no interest in deifying my subconscious mind. I am only interested in a objectively real God.

 

[dlamberth]

Personally, I have no interest in deifying my subconscious mind. I am only interested in a objectively real God.

With out the subjective aspect found in Love, God can never be real to you. That's just the way it is.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I don't know. I have faith.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[cloudyday2]

I don't know. I have faith.

-CryptoLutheran

Can you define "knowing" and define "faith" such that you can have one without the other?

 

[cloudyday2]

With out the subjective aspect found in Love, God can never be real to you. That's just the way it is.

Maybe that implies that God is not real?

 

[roamer_1]

I don't know. I have faith.

-CryptoLutheran

I know. Explicitly. My faith is in the promise, because I know.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I know. Explicitly. My faith is in the promise, because I know.

Knowledge involves certainty; I can know that the earth is round, I can know that the moon goes around the earth, etc. I don't have that knowledge about the things of faith because there is no empirical certainty. I can't know that Jesus rose from the dead--there's no way for me to verify that this happened with any degree of certainty. Instead I believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Can you define "knowing" and define "faith" such that you can have one without the other?

As in my previous post, knowledge involves empirical certainty. Faith believes even without certainty.

St. Peter, as a witness to the resurrection, could have known with certainty that Jesus having been dead was dead no longer. But succeeding generations of Christians don't have that, instead they have relied on faith on the testimony and witness of people like St. Peter and the ongoing confession of the historic Christian Church.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[LoAmmi]

When a religion evolves gradually from earlier religions, then divine revelation becomes less believable IMO.

Perhaps, or perhaps it isn't revelation that's the problem but our ability to understand.

 

[roamer_1]

Knowledge involves certainty; I can know that the earth is round, I can know that the moon goes around the earth, etc. I don't have that knowledge about the things of faith because there is no empirical certainty.

Barring you being an avid sky watcher, and mathematician, to your own eye, no. You have no empirical evidence in your own being that the earth is round, nor that the moon goes around the earth - You have been told that, and you 'know it' by way of accepting the evidences taught to you.

And those evidences are not empirical - No one has been able to tell me how I can look across 60 miles of water and see the other shore, which should be well below the horizon on a spherical earth... but we accept it anyway...

Likewise the evidences for Yahovah, and his Messiah. The evidence *for* is extraordinary.

There will always be flat earth folks. And there will always be those who deny the Father.

I know.

 

[awitch]

And there will always be those who deny the Father.

I know.

Why not share your empirical evidence then?

 

[roamer_1]

Why not share your empirical evidence then?

I already did on #17. http://www.christianforums.com/threads/how-do-you-know.7932335/#post-69253057

If you would like me to elaborate, I will.

 

[awitch]

I already did on #17. http://www.christianforums.com/threads/how-do-you-know.7932335/#post-69253057

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/how-do-you-know.7932335/#post-69253057

First, He is the ONLY one who does not allow his prophets to change his words - What was said in the beginning WILL BE. That's a neat trick, as far as prophecy is concerned. No other god has laid down such a comprehensive doctrine, and made it wholly set in stone. *none*.

I would argue that the use of prophets at all is nonsensical. It's downright foolish for a deity to allow the potential for miscommunication and false prophets. Also, I reject prophecy on the belief that the future is unwritten.

Secondly, the protection of the text - Especially Torah - is extraordinary (to the point of being supernatural in it's own right). The text is unarguably true to what was delivered. I found *no* other text to contain such protections.

I see nothing extraordinary about the Torah, nor do I find it supernatural in any way.

Do you know what empirical evidence is?

 

[orangeness365]

I believe because of prophecies in the Bible, because I had a dream that I think was sleep paralysis where God talked to me and I saw Jesus as light in the shape of a man, and because if there is a heaven, I don't think I would be let in based on earning my way there, I think I could only get in through Jesus just giving me grace and forgiveness.

 

[cloudyday2]

Barring you being an avid sky watcher, and mathematician, to your own eye, no. You have no empirical evidence in your own being that the earth is round, nor that the moon goes around the earth - You have been told that, and you 'know it' by way of accepting the evidences taught to you.

And those evidences are not empirical - No one has been able to tell me how I can look across 60 miles of water and see the other shore, which should be well below the horizon on a spherical earth... but we accept it anyway...

Likewise the evidences for Yahovah, and his Messiah. The evidence *for* is extraordinary.

There will always be flat earth folks. And there will always be those who deny the Father.

I know.

I agree with you on this @roamer_1
Like most people I believe the earth is spherical, because I learned that in school.

Knowing that Jesus was resurrected is not too different from knowing that Julius Caesar was assassinated. Resurrections are supernatural, and Julius Caesar was more important during his life. I can't think of too many other differences.

Finally, empirical evidence can be wrong. A hallucination is empirical evidence, because it is directly observed by human senses.

This whole topic (epistemology?) is confusing. I think nothing is certain, so when I hear people distinguishing between knowledge and faith, I disagree. We humans can know nothing for certain. We subjectively assign probabilities to different possibilities. When the probability is very high, we claim to "know". When the probability is very low, yet we choose to act as though it is true, then we say we have "faith". Sometimes this choice results from childhood brainwashing that is difficult to escape. Sometimes people see miracles and the probability increases.

 

[Soyeong]

I would like to know how each of you know what you believe is the truth or the right way to believe. Now some are going to answer that they do not think they are the only way but one way. I still want to know how you came to this point in your life. This is for everyone. If you had some sort of spiritual experience please explain how it was manifest to you. If you have come to the conclusion that there is nothing explain how you came to this conclusion. I know I have asked this before and if you have and don't want to repeat yourself I understand.

I grew up as a Baptist, but towards the end of high school I started questioning my faith to see if what I had been taught could stand up to scrutiny. Since then I have had many discussions on various forums about religion and read books by scholars of religion, and so far the veracity of Christianity has withstood scrutiny, though during that time I've changed my views about many things, even about something that was major, which led to me join Messianic Judaism. I've been wrong about many things in the past and I very likely will be wrong about many things in the future, so it is very likely that some of the beliefs that I currently hold to be true are actually false, I just don't know which ones they are. I want to know which ones they are, so I see learning as a process of taking in new true and false beliefs, weeding out true and false beliefs, and reinforcing true and false belief. Hopefully I'll continue to change my views as I continue to study and interact with others in ways that weed out false beliefs and reinforce true beliefs rather than wrongly weeding out true beliefs or reinforcing false beliefs.

 

[MehGuy]

I would like to know how each of you know what you believe is the truth or the right way to believe. Now some are going to answer that they do not think they are the only way but one way. I still want to know how you came to this point in your life. This is for everyone. If you had some sort of spiritual experience please explain how it was manifest to you. If you have come to the conclusion that there is nothing explain how you came to this conclusion. I know I have asked this before and if you have and don't want to repeat yourself I understand.

I realized I had no good evidence to believe in a God so I stopped believing in him and turned into a horrible atheist creature in the process.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

I realized I had no good evidence to believe in a God so I stopped believing in him and turned into a horrible atheist creature in the process.

Spooky! Do you have sharp teeth, claws, horns and a pointy tail?

 

[cloudyday2]

Knowledge involves certainty; I can know that the earth is round, I can know that the moon goes around the earth, etc. I don't have that knowledge about the things of faith because there is no empirical certainty. I can't know that Jesus rose from the dead--there's no way for me to verify that this happened with any degree of certainty. Instead I believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

-CryptoLutheran

Why would you believe something for no reason? I think you believe in Christianity, because you were taught to believe from childhood maybe? That is a reason. People don't simply have faith IMO.