RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 11:29 pm
(This post was last modified: March 25, 2015 at 11:31 pm by bennyboy.)
(March 25, 2015 at 9:11 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Where did I indicate specifically what I believe? Do I choose to take God at his word? Yes.
"Let God be true, but every man a liar;" - Romans 3:4
There is a difference between believing God and some random man off the street. I would even go as far as saying it is no longer faith in my case, I have SEEN the evidence, there isn't the slightest doubt in my mind that God exists.
Whether you believe that or not makes no difference to me.
There are 3 sources of evidence: statements by others which you choose to believe, experiences of your own to which you attribute ideas (about what they are and what they mean), and scientific evidence.
You cannot, based on your words, have learned about God from some "random man off the street." And you cannot have gleaned it from scientific evidence, of which there is none.
Therefore, you are depending on your own experiences to provide you with direct insight about God. And yet, strangely, you quote the Bible, which was written by people. It's clear, therefore, that you ACTUALLY learned about God from the people around you and the people who made the Biblical texts-- and that, having learned these ideas, you are interpreting your own experiences through that world view.
So the question is this: do those writers, or church leaders, or you yourself have an unquestionably accurate view of the world, of the universe, or of God? You will answer yes, probably because your feelings are so strong that it seems they must certainly represent reality. However, on what rational basis will you answer yes? On what basis can you establish that your religious texts, your religious leaders, your respected community members, and your experiences be seen as intrinsically more truthful that the religious texts, leaders, respected community members and experiences of a Hindu, a Satanist, or a cult?