Theist evidence/arguments.

[Sanoy]

This is still a pragmatist angle, it’s just a new approach. I’ve acknowledged that you could overcome the last parts of the dialectical loop by being incoherent or irrational, but that’s its own problem. Isn’t the point of this question for you to conclude that there’s no way we can rationally trust our faculties without invoking the design of God? It’s my argument that trusting one’s faculties is the only live option one has, regardless of whether they’re actually reliable or not. God need not enter the equation.

Maybe trust isn't the right word then? If you trust it, you trust it, I'm not sure how that would fit with pragmatism. Pragmatism wouldn't be necessary at that point because pragmatism was created to get by without trust, I think it would likely disprove pragmatism as well as you might find truth and what is pragmatic don't always align. Trust isn't a light word, trust is jumping out of a plane believing someone packed your parashute. Maybe "submit" or "yield" is the right word? (I don't want to go off topic into pragmatism, I'm just trying to see if "trust" is the right word to use here.)

 

[anx66]

I'm a Christian again. I know it says Atheist, but I'm a Christian again.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm a Christian again. I know it says Atheist, but I'm a Christian again.

Would it be ok if I shout out a "Hallelujah!" Or would that be too much, do you think?

 

[Sanoy]

I'm a Christian again. I know it says Atheist, but I'm a Christian again.

I am so happy to hear that. It is very important to get plugged in to a good church, not just good sermons but a good body of believers who you can grow with.

 

[gaara4158]

Maybe trust isn't the right word then? If you trust it, you trust it, I'm not sure how that would fit with pragmatism. Pragmatism wouldn't be necessary at that point because pragmatism was created to get by without trust, I think it would likely disprove pragmatism as well as you might find truth and what is pragmatic don't always align. Trust isn't a light word, trust is jumping out of a plane believing someone packed your parashute. Maybe "submit" or "yield" is the right word? (I don't want to go off topic into pragmatism, I'm just trying to see if "trust" is the right word to use here.)

Ah, then yes, "submit" or "yield" are better words. The dialogue this prevents is "So now that we know our cognitive faculties are connecting us to reality, how can you account for that?" I generally buy evolutionary answers to that question, but I know that you don't, and I find Plantinga's argument tedious to untangle. We've been through it once or twice now, so I won't be pursuing that angle here.

 

[gaara4158]

I'm a Christian again. I know it says Atheist, but I'm a Christian again.

Aw, jeez. What did it for you?

 

[gaara4158]

...here's another consideration. It could be that our human senses and brains work just fine (most of the time): but it's the World around us that screws things up for us.

How do you mean? I've tossed this around in my mind for a couple days now, and I'm still not sure how to take it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

How do you mean? I've tossed this around in my mind for a couple days now, and I'm still not sure how to take it.

Oh, sorry about the lack of clarity. I simply meant to say that our sensory and mental faculties, usually healthy on average, and usually useful much of the time for most people, can be deterred or disrupted by outside influences. Some of those influences are environmental, some social, some cognitive (like imbibing bad philosophy ), and [from the Christian point of view] some evil forces. But the operative status of one's mind as it might be applied to scientific or just day to day endeavors, like driving, may be just fine.

The upshot of this for religious belief? Well, if what I say above is even partially true, then not only do we have epistemological problems within the bounds of our own healthy minds, but we also have possible disruptive factors from outside. Ever try thinking about how to justify your beliefs on some topic while suffering with severe allergy symptoms or the flu, or a migraine headache? Of course, there's also that classic stand-by: Kierkegaard's philosophical "Sickness Unto Death": otherwise known as a certain kind of "despair." And who knows what causes that?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Every so often I feel the need to have a discussion with Christians, to ascertain whether there is any vestige of truth in Christian claims. Not for the benefit of the other participants in the discussion, but for my own benefit as a seeker after the truth. I lived 30ish years as a Christian, and I guess I sometimes get the desire to find out if I've made a mistake in not being a Christian.

It would be tough for them to have absolutely nothing right at all.

 

[gaara4158]

Oh, sorry about the lack of clarity. I simply meant to say that our sensory and mental faculties, usually healthy on average, and usually useful much of the time for most people, can be deterred or disrupted by outside influences. Some of those influences are environmental, some social, some cognitive (like imbibing bad philosophy ), and [from the Christian point of view] some evil forces. But the operative status of one's mind as it might be applied to scientific or just day to day endeavors, like driving, may be just fine.

The upshot of this for religious belief? Well, if what I say above is even partially true, then not only do we have epistemological problems within the bounds of our own healthy minds, but we also have possible disruptive factors from outside. Ever try thinking about how to justify your beliefs on some topic while suffering with severe allergy symptoms or the flu, or a migraine headache? Of course, there's also that classic stand-by: Kierkegaard's philosophical "Sickness Unto Death": otherwise known as a certain kind of "despair." And who knows what causes that?

Oh, well, yes. We rely on our cognitive faculties to get us through the day, and we’re aware that they’re sometimes prone to error. We are right to question whatever basis we have for trusting them.

 

[Erik Nelson]

Firsthand witness testimony, from rational mature adults, is "direct evidence", the strongest form of evidence at law

If anyone says "but eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable" then why (say) did anyone believe Paul Revere when rode around claiming "the British are coming!"

Should everyone have said, "it's dark outside, you're biased, eyewitnesses hallucinate more often than see clearly" ?

 

[drich0150]

Hi there,
Give me an argument or two as to why I should believe in God? Not including the sentence or one like this: "You know there is a God really."

Steve C.

P.S. Was a "Christian"/christian for many years.

Shouldn't we have a reason why we should care whether or not you should believe in God, especially since you were already a christian?

If you were one you would know our great commission is to let everyone know the Good news of Jesus Christ not to force belief. nor are we to throw our pearls before swine. (do not argue with people who have their minds already made up)

I believe we have been given this life and a whole life time to do it (some shorter than others) to make one choice. You did. Our job here is to help those on the fence or those who never heard of the choice. However you've made your choice. what is there left for any of use to do for you?

Remember the parables of the sowers.. We 'christians' only cast the seed out. we are not responsible for making it grow. you by your own words received one such seed and it died out in your heart. Unless you change the condition of your own heart every subsequent seed anyone of us hopes to plant there will also die out.

 

[Sanoy]

Shouldn't we have a reason why we should care whether or not you should believe in God, especially since you were already a christian?

If you were one you would know our great commission is to let everyone know the Good news of Jesus Christ not to force belief. nor are we to throw our pearls before swine. (do not argue with people who have their minds already made up)

I believe we have been given this life and a whole life time to do it (some shorter than others) to make one choice. You did. Our job here is to help those on the fence or those who never heard of the choice. However you've made your choice. what is there left for any of use to do for you?

Remember the parables of the sowers.. We 'christians' only cast the seed out. we are not responsible for making it grow. you by your own words received one such seed and it died out in your heart. Unless you change the condition of your own heart every subsequent seed anyone of us hopes to plant there will also die out.

This is a deeply regrettable and mistaken response. Especially given that a little ounce of love and consideration has led him back to the Lord. Please brother, reconsider what you are saying.

 

[drich0150]

This is a deeply regrettable and mistaken response. Especially given that a little ounce of love and consideration has led him back to the Lord. Please brother, reconsider what you are saying.

I do not understand where you see a lack of love.

If this brother has a history of receiving the word believing and accelling in it then losses faith and turns away. This matches exactly what is said by Christ in love mat 13 mark 4 and in luke 8..

Further more how could you possibly know the heart of another outside of what our lord God tells us our hearts are like? do you see an example of a soil type where the seed takes root grows dies and then the farmer coming back and simply plants the seed again (without tilling the soil and it takes root properly and produces much fruit??) that is what you are suggesting..

Love my confused brother comes in all shapes and forms maybe for you treating this wayward brother like a piece of fragile glass is the only way you know to love him. But that does not mean love is limited to your singular approach.

My idea of love comes from the words of Christ concerning people in this very specific situation. They do not seem loving to those who think people are or should be treated like glass. but again they are words of Christ and I believe they should take precedence. in that if his man's heart is shallow, (like the rocky soil) even if he recovers with you and you get another seed planted, the efforts of a few who treat him like glass.. It will all die again according to Christ because his soil is shallow his faith will fall again. His faith is built on you and those who support him. his foundation is not God but his support.

He must first address his heart with God, and the first thing he must do is properly identify who and what he is in the scheme of things. again Jesus identifies his situation and describes the nature of his heart. I did not do that. I am simply relaying what Jesus said and how to fix it.

Because truthfully how are you helping anyone treating them like glass? because the moment you let them go they will likely shatter. if this is the case it is not God in whom they are after but the treatment they get from their fellow man. What good does this do for anyone? where is the love in codependency?

If you where in this situation and God himself posted a way out, would you not want to hear it? whatif his message made you swallow some pride to hear it? would you want to be treated like glass in hopes of figuring things out some well meaning dude's way? or would you want to hear what God said on the matter even if there was a little sting behind it?

Me treating this brother exactly how I want to be treated is to be told specifically where I am at fault, so I can either explain my self and help you understand my intentions or to fix my situation. Which is the extent of the command as to how we are to measure and gauge our love. In that we are to love our neighbors as our selves. I have extended to this brother what I myself would expect from a loving neighbor.