For the sake of argument let's say the theists have won the "Proof of God" debate. Now, of what use is faith?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Faith will continue to be what it's always been--a tool for persuading the desperate and fearful to fool themselves into parting with their money for the benefit of priests.
You know; I've often wondered that Chimp. At least for the theists who tell us that god can't demonstrate his existence as that would destroy faith; if someone actually managed to write a proof for god, it would seem that would be kind of similar.
Seems odd to me. Why does WLC try so hard to prove the existence of god? If he succeeded they would have to rewrite the entire creed.
Nyarlathotep,
The interesting thing is that according the the biblical fairy tale Yahweh = the God of the Hebrews and the God of the armies = did demonstrate his existence in the Old Testament. Countless people saw him and his acts. They weren't that impressed and tended to put it out of their mind within three minutes.
According to the Mythology (Old Testament), Moses saw god's butt. LOL
Nyarlathotep,
Moses had more face (or butt) time with Yahweh than even Adam & Eve. And everyone saw Yeshua. It would really be cool if Yeshua was still wiggling on the cross or if there was maybe a 10 foot fuzzy black ball floating in the air where he had been crucified.
Faith = Listen + Believe
A method religious cults employ to control people's money, actions and thoughts.
maybe people wouldn`t fear to take on insamountable projects due to fears that they developed.They would go out on a limb and take chances believing there faith will help them.Why do we have faith in the secular world? When we go for open heart surgery or cancer of the brain or some other pressing problem why do we put our faith in the doctors the surgeons who perform this help for us.Why do we make plans way in advance somehow knowing that we will live to enjoy those plans. In a way I would say that for 62 years my life has been built somewhat on faith.As for religious faith of theist they would site a God that Paul spoke so much of in his letters written in the first century ad. I would say as a agnostic that I have faith but not in a god.
Same as its always been. The word faith is not used in Scripture the way atheists have implied, essentially setting up a straw man. In Scripture, Faith is the act of trusting God. Having faith in His promises. Having faith in His forgiveness, etc.
Everyone in Scripture who had faith already won the "Proof of God" debate. Moses, Abraham, the Apostles, and almost everyone else all saw miracles and God. Some were said to have faith, such as Abraham. Other's were called faithless, such as Israel after the Exodus.
It requires faith to trust Moses and Abraham as examples of proof. They are mythical figures with no historical evidence for their existence.
Editing a double post. Ignore this.
I'm using it (and I was very clear about this) the way I've heard it used by Christians for decades; so many times I can't even say. At the very least 100's.
If you don't like it being used that way, don't blame atheists; blame Christians.
Funny, last time I checked I was a Christian. What a dilemma you have on your hands I guess.
Oh I believe you are a Christian, but your views fall way outside conventional Christianity; and you seem ignorant of this. Like the other day when you didn't know Catholics preach free will. Or the time you told us that Catholics were the only denomination that baptizes babies.
....and here we go again, backtracking to old conversations to avoid the current one.
Nyarlathotep,
Twenty-nine English language Bibles omit Acts 8:37, which is the only verse in the Bible that gives the qualification for being baptized. The qualification is that the person must believe with all of his heart that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
By deleting that complete verse it allows for infant baptism because infants can't express belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. It's a very big deal since it's the qualification for becoming a Christian.
Here are some typical examples: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts8:37&version=CEB;DRA;NR...
Since babies can't express free will and belief in Jesus they shouldn't be baptized according to the Bible, Acts 8:37.
But remember, it was also an early Christian practice to use surrogates and baptize them for dead people.
1 Corinthians 15:29 (CEB) = "29 Otherwise, what are those who are getting baptized for the dead doing? If the dead aren’t raised, then why are they being baptized for them?"
So in reality infants and long dead people can be baptized because it's all imaginary anyway.
John - I'm not sure I entirely accept your assertion that atheists set up a Strawman in regards to the usage of faith.
By definition alone, faith is the act of believing or having trust in something without the requirement of proof, especially in the context of religion.
A strawman is the intentional misrepresentation of a proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument...
I'm not sure I find the correlation, considering we all basically say that faith is an empty gesture with no substance.
The definition you gave is a misrepresentation, whether it be intentional or not.
"...without the requirement of proof..." The disciples saw Jesus resurrected. Moses saw the Red Sea parting. Everyone else in the Bible claims to have experienced God in some way. How much more proof does a person need, than actually seeing the very from of God upon Mt Sinai like Moses did? Yes the Bible says "By faith Moses left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible." -Heb 11:27.
Chimp's post is basically a realization that he has had a wrong view of faith. He's asking what's the point of faith once you have proof? Here we see that Moses had proof, he saw him who is invisible, and yet was a man of faith.
Why? Cause faith deals with trust, and you can't trust something you don't believe exists.
If you read my original post you will see that I am focusing on the "proof of god" debates such as we have here on this forum. What Moses saw does not pertain.
It does pertain because you asked of what use is faith? If Moses actually saw God which is the ultimate "proof of God" any man can receive, but the Bible still calls him a man of faith, then clearly your concept of faith is backwards.
Why does the Bible say everyone in it walked by faith, when they all saw or experienced God?
Solve that puzzle for me. Its not a difficult concept to grasp.
What the Bible says about mythical people does not matter. The people who wrote and rewrote the book had faith, not first hand knowledge. They were repeating fairy tales like you do.
Great (applause) none of that is an excuse for you to butcher the word faith. Grimm's Fairy are fairy tales, that doesn't excuse my ignorance if I say the big bad wolf was actually a wombat.
Words do not have static definitions. Words have usages. Language is plastic.
Perfect, I agree! That's why people need to make sure they are using the Biblical definition from Biblical times.
No. If a person describes themselves as having faith, one can ask what they mean by it and accept that. I see no requirement to adjust based on how a word was used millennia ago. There are thousands of words with meanings that have changed or have multiple meanings.
Yeah, you certainly can take that approach. But then there's no reason why you shouldn't accept what I'm saying now.
There's also the small detail that we Christians follow the Bible. We use the word faith, because its used in the Bible. You can't just discard that. If another Christian tells me that faith is blind belief, I'll simply tell them to stop listening to Hitch or Dawkins, and start reading the Bible, because faith means something different there.
Or in other words your faith and worldview is based on what an old, very edited, and very translated book says. That is fine. Just do not expect what works for you, to: work for other people that do not build their entire worldview around an old heavily edited and translated book, that feels an awful lot like it is pushing an agenda of the people that wrote/edited it.
Most atheist/agnostics on these boards simply demand a much greater degree of proof and evidence then you do, to believe in all these wild and fanciful ideas that make up that particular god idea.
Wow.
I doubt any atheist/agnostic in this forum demands a higher degree of evidence than me. I'm actually a solipsist, and I believe there is only evidence that my own mind exists but nothing more. Do you have evidence to convince me that your mind exists independently of mine? That you and your words aren't just a projection of my own mind?
"and I believe there is only evidence that my own mind exists but nothing more"
And yet you are a theist. So, you accept something as true with no evidence, eh?
Everything has zero evidence that it is not just a projection of your mind. Their is zero evidence that anything exists outside of your mind once you decide your senses cannot be trusted. Once you go down the rabbit hole that all sensory input, all ideas only exist only in your mind, you have to either accept their is no evidence for anything, or that you decide that you trust that sensory input is from a real world and not your mind, that other's people's thoughts are not your own.
Seeing how it is incredibly lonely to believe nothing is real, and it is all in your mind, I choose to believe in my senses, to believe in other people's thoughts, especially if they can be investigated via my senses, via my own logical and reasoning mind. I set rules, on this sensory and idea input, I demand high amounts of sensory evidence if the claim is a large and fanciful one that goes against all other evidence I have gathered in my life, all other tools I have found to make sense of living. I have learned that it is a good idea to look both ways when crossing a busy street, and to not just cross when ever i feel like without looking, I apply ideas like that to all aspects in my life.
Pages