How does one know anything via faith?

[paulm50]

However, I can give you a rough estimate of what would most likely convince me that a god exists (or, you know, Vogons), and any God worth their salt would be able to find out exactly what it would take to convince me and provide that to me. For a being with endless power who wants to a have a personal relationship with me, your God is doing a really lousy job!)

Like you I have a great life without god in it. I follow some of the teaching of Jesus and ignore a lot because it seeks to remove my free will.

This is my take on the Judaic/Christian god being real. He's doing a very lousy job at convincing us.

He picked a minor tribe of goat herders at a time of powerful Empires for his chosen people. They didn't amount to much then and haven't since they discovered banking.

He sent his son to convert the world, or get the jews back on track? To convert the world, he sent him to the wrong place. Christianity success relies on a few followers eventually getting it to Rome.

Dying on the cross was a big mistake. Getting off the cross, appearing in Rome and proving himself as the son of god. would of saved a lot of time and lives.

There are more examples of his lack of power. In the bible.

 

[Chriliman]

Are those really my only two options? How did you get to that conclusion? Personally, I think that if neither option is knowable, the correct answer is "I don't know". I don't know about our origins, and I have no problem admitting this.

No, there's imaginary time, you could believe in that, there's probably plenty more unprovable concepts coming down the pipeline that explain how the universe came to be and the only reason for these explanations is to avoid God.

It also doesn't mean I will. You say everyone has one. I don't know that that's the case. I think it's incredibly presumptuous to take your personal experiences and generalize them to everyone. But then again, I think I've already been over why I think Romans 1:20 is such a terrible passage.

I didn't say everyone, I said some, at least those who claim to believe in God. I don't think you'd be an atheist if you actually had a convincing experience from God.

Of course, this puts the ball firmly in God's court - if he wants me to believe in him, he knows what to do. This also makes the moral element of Hell completely untenable, but I have no idea if you even believe in hell, so...

I believe eternal punishment is possible, but I also believe God does not want this for anyone that He loves. Therefore, if He loves you, He will draw you to Himself.

 

[pshun2404]

One does not know VIA faith one has faith because they know. For you, hope is a wish that may or may not happen, for we who have actual faith it is an eager expectation of that which we KNOW will be. It is like unto the difference between you wishing someone would give you a check and you after working a week anticipating the receiptof that which you know you already have coming.

 

[Chriliman]

This is my major beef with all religions. None of the gods provide evidence, it's people that claim to have evidence. Claims that have to be viewed with logic and questions. Because without questioning the leaders of a religion, we end up worse off.

And they end up better off. If only a warn feeling that they're going to a better world.

I believe God desperately wants you to honestly question Him.

 

[ken777]

I follow some of the teaching of Jesus and ignore a lot because it seeks to remove my free will.

Which teaching of Jesus seeks to remove your free will?


.

 

[ken777]

The analogy is sound.

You are creating a straw man out of my post. I never mentioned the rationality or intelligence of believers, or even called that into question. So be very careful how you tread.

The analogy is ridiculous ... and you know it.
Read my post again carefully and hopefully you might understand it.


.

 

[The Cadet]

No, there's imaginary time, you could believe in that, there's probably plenty more unprovable concepts coming down the pipeline that explain how the universe came to be and the only reason for these explanations is to avoid God.

It's not about "avoiding god". The "god did it" hypothesis is an idea, just like any other idea, which requires its own supporting evidence. It does not win by default. Nothing does. Until we have a solid explanatory model for how the universe came about, one that makes testable predictions and is as a result falsifiable, the only rational answer is "I don't know". Also, I think you're selling the work of modern astrophysics a little bit short.

I didn't say everyone, I said some, at least those who claim to believe in God. I don't think you'd be an atheist if you actually had a convincing experience from God.

Well, that puts you above most believers in terms of "able to discuss with". Most call me a liar. They don't say it like that, obviously, but...

I believe eternal punishment is possible, but I also believe God does not want this for anyone that He loves. Therefore, if He loves you, He will draw you to Himself.

Wow, what a monster.

The analogy is ridiculous ... and you know it.
Read my post again carefully and hopefully you might understand it.

Replace the Teapot with Allah and the analogy works just fine and makes exactly the same point. .

 

[Chriliman]

Wow, what a monster.

He clearly says he loves every person.

John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Only a fool would believe this and then deny His love, yet there is forgiveness, because the price has been paid for all sins.

 

[Chriliman]

It's not about "avoiding god". The "god did it" hypothesis is an idea, just like any other idea, which requires its own supporting evidence. It does not win by default. Nothing does. Until we have a solid explanatory model for how the universe came about, one that makes testable predictions and is as a result falsifiable, the only rational answer is "I don't know". Also, I think you're selling the work of modern astrophysics a little bit short.

Talk about reliable predictions, have you study much Bible prophecy and how its predictions are lining up with whats happening today? I won't go into this on this thread, but don't say the Bible can't predict anything, without researching what it has already predicted that has come to fruition.

 

[The Cadet]

Talk about reliable predictions, have you study much Bible prophecy and how its predictions are lining up with whats happening today? I won't go into this on this thread, but don't say the Bible can't predict anything, without researching what it has already predicted that has come to fruition.

I've heard of quite a few of them, but none of them were really particularly interesting. They usually fall into one of a couple of categories:

• The Retroactive: Daniel, for example, was clearly written after the events prophecized therein
• The Unverifiable: Jesus fulfilling an old testament prophecy doesn't exactly help us if I don't believe the bible to be literally true. Which I don't. This actually gets kind of funny, where a mistranslation led to the authors of one gospel claiming that Jesus rode into town on two donkeys.
  
• The Nostradamus: so vague as to be meaningless. "There will be earthquakes and war and strife!" Name me one decade in history where there wasn't at least one war, one major earthquake, and some strife.
• The Medium Rare Steak: it was prophecized, and then believers did everything they could to make the prophecy come true - for example, Israel.
  
• The "That Wasn't Actually Supposed To Be A Prophecy": see also: "Bible Code".
  
• The Whoopsie: Tyre, among other things.

If you'd like to make a new thread showcasing some of the ones you find particularly impressive, I'd love to participate.

 

[Chriliman]

I've heard of quite a few of them, but none of them were really particularly interesting. They usually fall into one of a couple of categories:

• The Retroactive: Daniel, for example, was clearly written after the events prophecized therein
• The Unverifiable: Jesus fulfilling an old testament prophecy doesn't exactly help us if I don't believe the bible to be literally true. Which I don't. This actually gets kind of funny, where a mistranslation led to the authors of one gospel claiming that Jesus rode into town on two donkeys.
  
• The Nostradamus: so vague as to be meaningless. "There will be earthquakes and war and strife!" Name me one decade in history where there wasn't at least one war, one major earthquake, and some strife.
• The Medium Rare Steak: it was prophecized, and then believers did everything they could to make the prophecy come true - for example, Israel.
  
• The "That Wasn't Actually Supposed To Be A Prophecy": see also: "Bible Code".
  
• The Whoopsie: Tyre, among other things.

If you'd like to make a new thread showcasing some of the ones you find particularly impressive, I'd love to participate.

One particular prophecy that comes to my mind that I'll quickly share is the prophesy in Ezekiel, that predicted to the exact date of when Israel would become a nation in 1948.

Heres a link that breaks it all down pretty well.

http://www.1260-1290-days-bible-prophecy.org/bible_prophecy-Israel-nation-1260-years-x2-A-1.htm

 

[Chriliman]

*****

The Bible (specifically Daniel) predicts that the nation of Israel would be reborn, and its creation in 1948 is often taken as the fulfillment of that prophecy. But of course this happened because people worked to make it happen, in part because of the prophecy. Most scholars believe the Israel that was "predicted" (Daniel was written after the fact) was the Israel created under the Maccabees.

This is a miss understanding. The Ezekiel prophecy was for the 1948 re-establishment of Israel as a nation, which is a precursor to the prophesy in Daniel that is prophesying the full establishment of Israel as the nation of God, where God will dwell in the new Jerusalem, this is yet to come.

http://christianitybeliefs.org/end-...-rebuilt-temple-in-jerusalem-is-not-biblical/

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You have claimed that the existence of both God and the teapot cannot be proved. Where your analogy fails is that there is evidence for the existence of God accepted by the majority of rational people and and there is no evidence for the existence of your teapot.

Argumentum ad populum.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

No, there's imaginary time, you could believe in that, there's probably plenty more unprovable concepts coming down the pipeline that explain how the universe came to be and the only reason for these explanations is to avoid God.

If introducing theological concepts improved our understanding of cosmogony in any way then scientists would be eager to integrate those concepts into their models. As it stands, theology has little to nothing to offer cosmology, so it's largely ignored.

 

[The Cadet]

One particular prophecy that comes to my mind that I'll quickly share is the prophesy in Ezekiel, that predicted to the exact date of when Israel would become a nation in 1948.

Heres a link that breaks it all down pretty well.

http://www.1260-1290-days-bible-prophecy.org/bible_prophecy-Israel-nation-1260-years-x2-A-1.htm

...So how did you determine that this was actually a prediction made, and not just an odd coincidence discovered after the fact? The website seems to hold it up as particularly meaningful that it was 1260 years between the prophecy and the rebuilding of israel, and that you can pull these numbers together, add them, subtract a few, and come up with some other significant number. It's numerology, and it's incredibly unimpressive. There is no reason to believe that this was actually any sort of prediction in the first place.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Except that I can use sound reason and logic to show why I believe in God, you'll just choose to ignore the tough questions that my sound reason and logic present, and you'll choose to ignore the questions because they threaten your beliefs.

Only a moment ago you conceded that your "personal evidence" does not obligate anyone to share your theological commitments, so I'm assuming you are referring to something other than "personal evidence" here?

 

[Chriliman]

If introducing theological concepts improved our understanding of cosmogony in any way then scientists would be eager to integrate those concepts into their models. As it stands, theology has little to nothing to offer cosmology, so it's largely ignored.

Ideas and concepts are slow to populate throughout humanity. Whats important is to realize the true source of a genius idea or concept.

 

[Chriliman]

...So how did you determine that this was actually a prediction made, and not just an odd coincidence discovered after the fact? The website seems to hold it up as particularly meaningful that it was 1260 years between the prophecy and the rebuilding of israel, and that you can pull these numbers together, add them, subtract a few, and come up with some other significant number. It's numerology, and it's incredibly unimpressive. There is no reason to believe that this was actually any sort of prediction in the first place.

Each number has significance, they aren't just random numbers pulled from out of now where. One has to understand the Jewish 360 day calendar in order to figure out the significance. One has to believe there is significance there, in order to determine the truth. Just like a scientist has to believe there is significance to a tower having a shorter shadow than another tower miles away. He believes there is significance there and so he investigates and determines that the truth is that the earth is round, not flat. Same reasoning applies here.

 

[Chriliman]

Only a moment ago you conceded that your "personal evidence" does not obligate anyone to share your theological commitments, so I'm assuming you are referring to something other than "personal evidence" here?

Are you saying I shouldn't use logic and reason to determine what makes the most sense based on the evidence that has been presented to me? I can't show you the evidence I've been presented with because its not physical, therefore, you can either believe me or you can question me (which you have and I've done my best to answer honestly).

Or you can just wait and see if God will provide evidence to you of His existence, or better yet, take action and ask God to provide evidence of His existence to you and the best way to do this is to ask Jesus to come into your life and show you His truth. Always expect a different result when doing something in a different way, this is what makes life interesting

 

[ken777]

Argumentum ad populum.

In the case of a jury considering evidence, we assume a majority has arrived at a correct verdict.

If a majority of rational people think the evidence shows that God exists, it is reasonable to assume they are correct.

.