How does one come to believe something?

[lumberjohn]

To ALL -- esp. to Atheists -- other FYI. I can now see the atheist MO -- to divert from straight answers to their agenda -- to the litany of their predetermined & worn out arguments. Unless I've missed it in their filibustering, they cannot seem to answer which, to me, is a very simple question -- and my choice & reason, my 1st post, #187 -- Is God or no God the better choice? Let alone asking them "why". Is this just their escape hatch? ;-(

Rather than raging about the atheist "agenda," why not just articulate your question more clearly as several of us have reasonably requested? If I were to ask you "Deal or no deal?" how would you respond? You would probably have no idea because you aren't even sure what I'm talking about. You might understand the terms in isolation, but in the context of this question there is much that is unclear. Likewise, people have very different understandings of what is meant by "God." For some, it is a passive "first cause" that can be demonstrated by logic alone. For others, it is a more active being that intervenes in the physical universe and is therefore, at least in theory, detectable through empirical means. For still others, it is an emergent quality of the universe, such as for those who say "God is nature" or "God is love." Also, what do you mean by "better?" Perhaps you are talking about whether belief in God would improve your social standing or make you happier. Perhaps you are asking whether such belief is more intellectually defensible than the alternatives. I think it is perfectly reasonable to delve a bit deeper into your question so that we can formulate an appropriate response.

It is pretty common to attempt to reach agreement on the definitions of key terms before beginning a discussion. It need not suggest any nefarious ulterior motive.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The fun part is that Pascal explicitly raises this concern, even placing it in the mouth of his interlocutor:

‘Quite; but my hands are tied and my mouth is gagged; I am forced to wager, but am not free; no one frees me from these bonds, and I am so made that I cannot believe. What then do you wish me to do?​

Unfortunately, most folks criticizing the Wager haven't even read it.

That's alright. Most folks propagating the wager haven't either.

 

[KCfromNC]

Read it and see!! Concern yourself with truth rather than mere argument!!

The truth is that any so called god that I could trick by pretending to believe isn't a god worth worshiping. Any truly god-like being would see through my attempts to deceive it.

 

[Kylie]

There was a thread a while back entitled "Belief not a choice?" and several atheists in that thread insisted that people only come to believe things by evaluating evidence. So I thought I'd extend that into a syllogism and see if it floats.

1. People only come to believe something by evaluating evidence.
2. People who are Christians believe that God exists.
3. Therefore, People who are Christians only came to believe that God exists by evaluating evidence.

Is the above a sound argument? If not, why not?

#3 should read, "Therefore, People who are Christians only came to believe that God exists by evaluating WHAT THEY CONSIDER TO BE evidence."

Of course, what someone considers to be evidence may not actually be evidence.

 

[Truly1999]

Hi AllanV,

You make some interesting points. Whilst the power of God can be felt through the Holy Spirit working in Christians, he can only dwell within someone who has accepted Jesus into their lives and who follows him as their Saviour each day. A Christian woman cannot provide a cover for her non-believing husband. A choir cannot redeem a non-believing choir member.

 

[lumberjohn]

Hi AllanV,

You make some interesting points. Whilst the power of God can be felt through the Holy Spirit working in Christians, he can only dwell within someone who has accepted Jesus into their lives and who follows him as their Saviour each day.

Why?

 

[Truly1999]

Why?

According to Scripture

 

[lumberjohn]

According to Scripture

You've answered why you believe this to be the case, but not why it is the case. That is my question. Also, how exactly does the Holy Spirit do this? What is the mechanism?

 

[bhsmte]

According to Scripture

Some don't subscribe to scripture as the end all. You can though.

 

[Truly1999]

You've answered why you believe this to be the case, but not why it is the case. That is my question. Also, how exactly does the Holy Spirit do this? What is the mechanism?

I don't mean to be flippant, but you will find the answers to your questions in the New Testament.

 

[bhsmte]

I don't mean to be flippant, but you will find the answers to your questions in the New Testament.

And how does one determine that is reliable information?

 

[Truly1999]

The New Testament consists of a series of historical documents which have been faithfully reproduced down the centuries with an oversight of different Church denominations, who established a committee of theologians to ensure authentic translation from the ancient Greek, ancient Hebrew. The 1st century AD authors were disciples and witnesses of Christ's ministry, and argue that their writings are of the Holy Spirit.

 

[bhsmte]

The New Testament consists of a series of historical documents which have been faithfully reproduced down the centuries with an oversight of different Church denominations, who established a committee of theologians to ensure authentic translation from the ancient Greek, ancient Hebrew. The 1st century AD authors were disciples and witnesses of Christ's ministry, and argue that their writings are of the Holy Spirit.

Considering even Christian NT scholars agree, the gospels were penned by anonymous authors, you run into trouble early on with that one.

Lastly, many NT historians (which do different work than scholars), will state the gospels, are more a work of theology, vs credible history.

 

[Truly1999]

Considering even Christian NT scholars agree, the gospels were penned by anonymous authors, you run into trouble early on with that one.

Lastly, many NT historians (which do different work than scholars), will state the gospels, are more a work of theology, vs credible history.

Opinions differ between scholars - I cannot say more because it all rests on which scholars you believe.

 

[bhsmte]

Opinions differ between scholars - I cannot say more because it all rests on which scholars you believe.

There is a clear consensus, the gospels are penned by anonymous authors. Names were added to them by the church over 200 years after Jesus died.

Also a consensus, they were penned 40-70 years after the death of Jesus, the originals are lost and only copies exist starting about 200 years after the death of Jesus.

 

[Truly1999]

There is a clear consensus, the gospels are penned by anonymous authors. Names were added to them by the church over 200 years after Jesus died.

Also a consensus, they were penned 40-70 years after the death of Jesus, the originals are lost and only copies exist starting about 200 years after the death of Jesus.

What are u getting at?

 

[lumberjohn]

I don't mean to be flippant, but you will find the answers to your questions in the New Testament.

Could you give me a cite? I'd be interested to know the rationale behind this limitation and the mechanism by which the Holy Spirit facilitates the power of God. Just a simple explanation would be fine.

 

[Truly1999]

Could you give me a cite? I'd be interested to know the rationale behind this limitation and the mechanism by which the Holy Spirit facilitates the power of God. Just a simple explanation would be fine.

 

[Truly1999]

Simple answer: see previous reply. I don't operate on quoting chapter and verse.

 

[bhsmte]

What are u getting at?

The reality of consensus view of the NT from NT scholars and historians. Which by the way, I have spent a lot of time studying.