What is Faith??

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#23 Nov 19, 2012
Jeff-Job wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible is the most scrutinized book in history. What is a "Religious connotation"?
http://s603.photobucket.com/albums/tt112/ausa... ;

“For The Love Of GOD”

Since: Nov 11

Awaiting My Home

#25 Nov 20, 2012
Faith Strong's G4102 - pistis

1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man's relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it

a) relating to God

1) the conviction that God exists and is the creator and ruler of all things, the provider and bestower of eternal salvation through Christ

b) relating to Christ

1) a strong and welcome conviction or belief that Jesus is the Messiah, through whom we obtain eternal salvation in the kingdom of God

c) the religious beliefs of Christians

d) belief with the predominate idea of trust (or confidence) whether in God or in Christ, springing from faith in the same

2) fidelity, faithfulness

a) the character of one who can be relied on

Roland_Deschain

“Naturalism - Nature is Enough”

Since: Nov 07

London, UK

#26 Nov 20, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Belief without evidence is not taught in the Bible.
I never claimed it was. I merely stated, AFAIAC, religious faith is belief without evidence.
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
It appeals to a number of things such as evidence. After Moses was commissioned by God to lead the Jews, he performed miracles. When he went to the pharaoh to let the people go he showed him miracles so that he would believe.
Using the bible as evidence of your deity is "begging the question" or "circular reasoning".

"Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form.

Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
Claim C (the conclusion) is true.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true."

Some cases of question begging are fairly blatant, while others can be extremely subtle.

Examples of Begging the Question

Bill: "God must exist."
Jill: "How do you know."
Bill: "Because the Bible says so."
Jill: "Why should I believe the Bible?"
Bill: "Because the Bible was written by God.""

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begg...
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW- the Bible is a record of God's dealings with mankind.
Really? I thought it was a collection of books which was decided on by a group of ex-pagans.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#27 Nov 20, 2012
-The Star Reborn- wrote:
<quoted text>
May I make a slight variation of that:
Faith is firmly hoping that no one will guess that you and Armed and Dangerous are the same person, Pastor Bill.
You know, you could be right!
He could be Pasture Bill!

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#28 Nov 20, 2012
What is Faith?

According to Webster's Dictionary faith is "an unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence."
Though Webster's Dictionary says we don'tneed evidence to have faith, as Christians we do have evidence for our faith.
We have the Bible: 66 books, 40 authors, written in 3 languages, over 1600 years, prophecy, and moral and spiritual truth,
We have the resurrection of Jesus; confidence in His words, and evidence of God's truth in our lives.
The nearest definition we have in the Bible of what faith is is found right here in Hebrews 11:1
The NIV says, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see."
The KJV and the NKJV say, "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
The RSV, NRSV and NASB each says, "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."
Literally the Greek of Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is the reality of things being hoped for, the proof of things not being seen."
http://carm.org/christianity/sermons/hebrews-...
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#29 Nov 20, 2012
Roland_Deschain wrote:
<quoted text>
I never claimed it was. I merely stated, AFAIAC, religious faith is belief without evidence.
<quoted text>
Using the bible as evidence of your deity is "begging the question" or "circular reasoning".
"Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form.
Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
Claim C (the conclusion) is true.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true."
Some cases of question begging are fairly blatant, while others can be extremely subtle.
Examples of Begging the Question
Bill: "God must exist."
Jill: "How do you know."
Bill: "Because the Bible says so."
Jill: "Why should I believe the Bible?"
Bill: "Because the Bible was written by God.""
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begg...
<quoted text>
Really? I thought it was a collection of books which was decided on by a group of ex-pagans.
Just wanted to be clear that Christianity is not “religious faith is belief without evidence”. Why would using the Bible as evidence of your deity is "begging the question" or "circular reasoning"? If a document records some event in the past that is not begging the question nor circular reasoning. If the Bible records that Jesus rose from the dead and it gives eyewitness accounts to this claim that is not begging the question nor circular reasoning. Rather it is a historical record of the event. If this is begging the question or circular reasoning, then all events of the ancient past would be begging the question or circular reasoning.
A person can claim to know that God exist because the Bible has been shown to be historically reliable. However, this would not be the only reason to believe God exist. Other pieces of evidence and reason could also be used to support the claim that God exist and has interacted in history. The Bible also teaches certain things for a person to know that God exist and if applied can know this personally.
Even if the Bible as a collection of books was decided by a group of ex-pagans that would not mean it’s not true.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#30 Nov 20, 2012
-The Star Reborn- wrote:
<quoted text>
The Christian "faith" is all about becoming mindless brainwashed Christbots full of hatred.
Rubbish.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#31 Nov 20, 2012
FSM wrote:
Faith is believing what you know ain't so.
Mark Twain
This is a description of your beliefs.

Roland_Deschain

“Naturalism - Nature is Enough”

Since: Nov 07

London, UK

#32 Nov 20, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Just wanted to be clear that Christianity is not “religious faith is belief without evidence”.
In my previous replies I clearly stated this was my opinion. Of course, you are entitled to your opinion. BTW, I am talking about empirical evidence and a falsifiable deity hypothesis to test it against. You don't have either.
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would using the Bible as evidence of your deity is "begging the question" or "circular reasoning"?
AFAIAC the link I provided explains this. IMHO this bit makes it extremely clear.

"Bill: "God must exist."
Jill: "How do you know."
Bill: "Because the Bible says so."
Jill: "Why should I believe the Bible?"
Bill: "Because the Bible was written by God.""
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
If a document records some event in the past that is not begging the question nor circular reasoning. If the Bible records that Jesus rose from the dead and it gives eyewitness accounts to this claim that is not begging the question nor circular reasoning. Rather it is a historical record of the event. If this is begging the question or circular reasoning, then all events of the ancient past would be begging the question or circular reasoning. A person can claim to know that God exist because the Bible has been shown to be historically reliable. However, this would not be the only reason to believe God exist. Other pieces of evidence and reason could also be used to support the claim that God exist and has interacted in history. The Bible also teaches certain things for a person to know that God exist and if applied can know this personally.
IMHO you do not understand what begging the question is.

"Begging the question" is a form of logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. When one begs the question, the initial assumption of a statement is treated as already proven without any logic to show why the statement is true in the first place.

A simple example would be "I think he is unattractive because he is ugly." The adjective "ugly" does not explain why the subject is "unattractive" -- they virtually amount to the same subjective meaning, and the proof is merely a restatement of the premise. The sentence has begged the question."

http://begthequestion.info/
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Even if the Bible as a collection of books was decided by a group of ex-pagans that would not mean it’s not true.
It does not mean it is true either.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#33 Nov 20, 2012
Roland_Deschain wrote:
<quoted text>
In my previous replies I clearly stated this was my opinion. Of course, you are entitled to your opinion. BTW, I am talking about empirical evidence and a falsifiable deity hypothesis to test it against. You don't have either.
<quoted text>
AFAIAC the link I provided explains this. IMHO this bit makes it extremely clear.
"Bill: "God must exist."
Jill: "How do you know."
Bill: "Because the Bible says so."
Jill: "Why should I believe the Bible?"
Bill: "Because the Bible was written by God.""
<quoted text>
IMHO you do not understand what begging the question is.
"Begging the question" is a form of logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. When one begs the question, the initial assumption of a statement is treated as already proven without any logic to show why the statement is true in the first place.
A simple example would be "I think he is unattractive because he is ugly." The adjective "ugly" does not explain why the subject is "unattractive" -- they virtually amount to the same subjective meaning, and the proof is merely a restatement of the premise. The sentence has begged the question."
http://begthequestion.info/
<quoted text>
It does not mean it is true either.
What kind of empirical and falsifiable evidence would I need for God?
It is not begging the question to use the Bible as a record for how God has interacted in history if these things really happened. If these event did happen then that would be proof for the existence of God. These records are not the only pieces of evidence for the existence of God. I actually have a “chain” of evidences for the existence of God. I don’t need to rely on just one argument. I can argue for the existence of God without using the Bible. The Bible though tells us who this God is that exist.
Atheism or naturalism does not carry this kind of weight for its beliefs.

Roland_Deschain

“Naturalism - Nature is Enough”

Since: Nov 07

UK

#34 Nov 20, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
What kind of empirical and falsifiable evidence would I need for God?
I said empirical evidence and a falsifiable hypothesis. As to your question, I don't know. You are the one claiming the existence of something called 'God'. If you don't have empirical evidence and a hypothesis to test it against your position is one of religious faith.
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not begging the question to use the Bible as a record for how God has interacted in history if these things really happened. If these event did happen then that would be proof for the existence of God.
You are assuming something called 'God'.
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
These records are not the only pieces of evidence for the existence of God. I actually have a “chain” of evidences for the existence of God. I don’t need to rely on just one argument. I can argue for the existence of God without using the Bible.
Is it a scientific argument or does it rely on apologetics?
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible though tells us who this God is that exist.
Well it makes a lot of statements regarding your deity. Unfortunately none of them can be tested. Which makes any discussion about 'God' being real rather pointless IMHO.
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism or naturalism does not carry this kind of weight for its beliefs.
1) Do you understand what atheism is/is not?
2) Do you understand what world view naturalism is/is not?
3) Do you understand the two positions are different in many ways?
Big Al

Grand Rapids, MN

#35 Nov 20, 2012
"Faith, as well intentioned as it may be, must be built on facts, not fiction- faith in fiction is a damnable false hope." -Thomas Edison
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#36 Nov 20, 2012
Roland_Deschain wrote:
<quoted text>
I said empirical evidence and a falsifiable hypothesis. As to your question, I don't know. You are the one claiming the existence of something called 'God'. If you don't have empirical evidence and a hypothesis to test it against your position is one of religious faith.
<quoted text>
You are assuming something called 'God'.
<quoted text>
Is it a scientific argument or does it rely on apologetics?
<quoted text>
Well it makes a lot of statements regarding your deity. Unfortunately none of them can be tested. Which makes any discussion about 'God' being real rather pointless IMHO.
<quoted text>
1) Do you understand what atheism is/is not?
2) Do you understand what world view naturalism is/is not?
3) Do you understand the two positions are different in many ways?
One way to falsify the existence of God is to demonstrate that naturalism is true by necessity. Since there are there only 2 possible explanations for the beginning of the universe i.e. naturalistic or intelligent (God) then we can test to see which of these explains the cause of the universe. The naturalist has to explain where the big bang came from and the laws of the universe. One thing we know about the universe is that it had beginning and it is finely tuned at a razor’s edge. The naturalist needs to explain this. If the naturalist fails, by default the theist would be correct since there is no 3rd alternative.
The Bible does not just assume the existence of God but gives solid reasons for His existence. I can make the case for the existence of God as the best explanation for things like the beginning of the universe, beginning of life and the design of the universe and this planet that supports life.
Since the Bible tells us the name and character of God in its pages that would be more like a historical issue. How would we “test” that Alexander the Great existed?
Naturalism claims that all things in the universe can be explained by naturalistic causes. Atheism is the non-belief-rejection of any kind of supernatural being. They are different but they do complement each other.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#37 Nov 20, 2012
Big Al wrote:
"Faith, as well intentioned as it may be, must be built on facts, not fiction- faith in fiction is a damnable false hope." -Thomas Edison
Edison certainly is not talking about biblical Christianity.

Hell Sucks

“THE HEAT IS ON”

Since: Apr 12

Satan IS in "The Church"

#38 Nov 20, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Edison certainly is not talking about biblical Christianity.
Edison was an atheist, or at most, a deist or pantheist. He did not believe that there is an immortal soul, or Heaven.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#39 Nov 20, 2012
Hell Sucks wrote:
<quoted text>
Edison was an atheist, or at most, a deist or pantheist. He did not believe that there is an immortal soul, or Heaven.
Probably right. Even smart people can err in fundamental issues.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#40 Nov 20, 2012
Peace For Christ wrote:
Faith Strong's G4102 - pistis
1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man's relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it
a) relating to God
1) the conviction that God exists and is the creator and ruler of all things, the provider and bestower of eternal salvation through Christ
b) relating to Christ
1) a strong and welcome conviction or belief that Jesus is the Messiah, through whom we obtain eternal salvation in the kingdom of God
c) the religious beliefs of Christians
d) belief with the predominate idea of trust (or confidence) whether in God or in Christ, springing from faith in the same
2) fidelity, faithfulness
a) the character of one who can be relied on
Too bad you deleted the most important definition that is directly related to your mythology:

Belief that is not based on proof.

Which means you fell for a pack of lies without even asking for PROOF.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#41 Nov 20, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Edison certainly is not talking about biblical Christianity.
Prove it.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#43 Nov 20, 2012
-The Star Reborn- wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
read the gospels and compare it with what Tom wrote. You will find it not the same thing.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#44 Nov 20, 2012
-The Star Reborn- wrote:
<quoted text>
Too bad you deleted the most important definition that is directly related to your mythology:
Belief that is not based on proof.
Which means you fell for a pack of lies without even asking for PROOF.
Help me out. What you believe has no proof either. Right?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bible Interpretation 24 min Big Al 418
The Moral Failure Of Christians 25 min blacklagoon 188
Mother Teresa a Saint? What a cruel Joke!!! 39 min I love Jesus 146
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 58 min Cookie_Parker 20,704
gen 49: 27 1 hr I love Jesus 88
YESHUA SAID DONT TRUST Pharisses!!!! 1 hr messianic114 99
PAUL OUR FATHER . 1Cor 4: 15 (Feb '16) 1 hr I love Jesus 162
ROM 5: 20 or HEB 10: 26 / Rev 14: 12 2 hr I love Jesus 53
More from around the web