Faith Alone.

No one ever said that we couldn't prove God's existence. It's our job to convert others to Christianity to save them from eternal punishment. So if we have to give proof of God to do that, it's what we'll do. 😎

Originally posted by zoom3
No one ever said that we couldn't prove God's existence. It's our job to convert others to Christianity to save them from eternal punishment. So if we have to give proof of God to do that, it's what we'll do. 😎

There is no eternal punishment. Oh wait, having to listen to people like you, now that is as close as you get. 😆

So my friend just told me she went from strong atheism to Christian evangelical. Told me all about it on Facebook chat.

I have no idea what to think.

It came as a very low moment in her life: she had just gotten a divorce and lost her job. She was very depressed and was about commit suicide. She still has two kids both under the age of 12.

Well, she was about to go through with the deed (like...holy shit, man...) and decided that she would stop if and only if she got some sort of confirmation that there really was a God and she should continue with her life.

So she prayed for like the first time in her life. Then she said a huge vice was taken from off of her chest and shoulders (metaphor) and she felt peace and comfort like she had never experienced. That's when she realized that there was a God and that He/She/It cared about each and everyone of His/Her/Its children on a personal level.

It was a powerful story. She experienced the transcendent in the lowest of lows in her life. Part of me believes that what she told me is truer than any knowledge I could ever hope to know. Another part of me was a skeptical ***hole because I hate the concept of faith so much.

How can she, who was extremely opposed to religion and the ideas of many of them, turn away and do a 180? She called it faith. She had a hard time accepting her experience at first. She won't tell me what religion she is part of but from how she talks, she is definitely part of a Christian Evangelical church.

I say that if God did this for her, great. She is going to stick around, now, and be a mother to her children. Man...I didn't have anywhere else to share this story that I felt comfortable doing it.

What do you guys think? Is it a case of a person that did not want to really go through with suicide and is blaming it on God?

Originally posted by dadudemon

I say that if God did this for her, great. She is going to stick around, now, and be a mother to her children. Man...I didn't have anywhere else to share this story that I felt comfortable doing it.

What do you guys think? Is it a case of a person that did not want to really go through with suicide and is blaming it on God?

Well to be an ******* for the sake of being an ******* I'd say...yes, she was just scare of death and something just clicked inside the person's mind to give them comfort and stability of sorts. I'm not well versed in neuroscience by an means however I do think that the brain was able to stimulate a way to comfort the the person in order to prevent self endangerment of life; no different than being naturally inclined to flinch from pain.

However to take this as a way to explain how some higher power can influence the whim of others is kind of weird but great in this person's case. I mean, I find it strange how an omnipotent being would specifically tough one individual among countles living organisms. Or maybe access to said salvation was within arms reach and only need the elimination of other distractions in order to properly grasp it.

As you can see I suck at responces concerning faith.

Originally posted by dadudemon
So my friend just told me she went from strong atheism to Christian evangelical. It came as a very low moment in her life: she had just gotten a divorce and lost her job. She was very depressed and was about commit suicide. She still has two kids both under the age of 12.

Well, she was about to go through with the deed (like...holy shit, man...) and decided that she would stop if and only if she got some sort of confirmation that there really was a God and she should continue with her life.

So she prayed for like the first time in her life. Then she said a huge vice was taken from off of her chest and shoulders (metaphor) and she felt peace and comfort like she had never experienced. That's when she realized that there was a God and that He/She/It cared about each and everyone of His/Her/Its children on a personal level.

How can she, who was extremely opposed to religion and the ideas of many of them, turn away and do a 180? She called it faith. She had a hard time accepting her experience at first. She won't tell me what religion she is part of but from how she talks, she is definitely part of a Christian Evangelical church.

What do you guys think? Is it a case of a person that did not want to really go through with suicide and is blaming it on God?

Was this 'God' in the sense she thinks it is? I would say no. Was this a metaphor which connected her to 'forces beyond her conscious self'? Yes. Are these forces, or perhaps better stated, the source of these forces 'God' as I might define it? I like to think so. But do I see her experience as proof of God? Not necessarily. I would, however, say that, minimally, her experience illustrates the capacity for self-healing (whether or not ultimately backed by a transcendent source).

i know that paul teaches that salvation comes through faith in christ alone, but is there anything in the bible that actually says not to back up religious claims with evidence?

from the book of romans

1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes,
to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
1:17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall
live by faith."
1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
1:20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived,
ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
1:21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became
futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

the first half confirms that faith is the path to salvation and righteousness. the second half though seems to suggest that it should be pretty apparent to the faithful and non-faithful alike that god is real and his word is true.

it seems like even the accounts in the gospels included rudimentary claims of evidence in order to make them seem more persuasive... like the witnesses who saw christ after his resurrection or the witnesses to his miracles, etc.

or the story of elijah the prophet in the old testament. dude could summon fire from the sky on demand, and even went so far as to use this favor with god to set up a controlled demonstration of god's existence in front of all of israel. and of course the plagues summoned by moses.

the bible is littered with accounts of god blatantly putting his power on display. so i do find it quite peculiar, the idea that for him to do so now would somehow ruin 'faith'.

It is easy to say that something happened in the past, and provide evidence of what someone saw or heard. However, this is hearsay and not evidence of anything other then what that person believed. Add on top of that thousands of years rewriting and translating, and facts goes away. All we are left with is belief (faith). You have to believe that the bible is real, and telling you the truth (faith), before you can even entertain the question.

Meh...Christianity is a denomination of Judaism while Judaism being a plagiarism of Zoroastrianism. Mormons like Christianity so much they started writing fan fiction about it, and Muslims are like Christians who follow the old testament ONLY, but managing to contradict the Judaism and Christianity simultaneously.

Gospel according to Mila. If it's not in the Bible, pencil it in.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It is easy to say that something happened in the past, and provide evidence of what someone saw or heard. However, this is hearsay and not evidence of anything other then what that person believed. Add on top of that thousands of years rewriting and translating, and facts goes away. All we are left with is belief (faith). You have to believe that the bible is real, and telling you the truth (faith), before you can even entertain the question.

you can argue that the bible might not be real and thus not evidence (i would agree with you) but if you do believe that it's real then i'd say there's plenty of precedent in the bible to think you can expect to find evidence in reality. i'm not saying faith isn't still important, but it seems like the two can go hand in hand.

at least that's clear to me from the interaction of god with the state of israel. but maybe christ is supposed to have changed that precedent. i honestly don't know.

Originally posted by red g jacks
i was referring more to whether or not the god of the bible wants christians to abstain from looking for hard evidence.. which is what this thread seemed to imply to me

you can argue that the bible might not be real and thus not evidence (i would agree with you) but if you do believe that it's real then i'd say there's plenty of precedent in the bible to think you can expect to find evidence in reality.

at least that's clear to me from the interaction of god with the state of israel. but maybe christ is supposed to have changed that precedent. i honestly don't know.

But if you believe that the bible is true, then you are already believing without proof (faith). My point is why go beyond? Sometimes the obvious is overlooked.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But if you believe that the bible is true, then you are already believing without proof (faith). My point is why go beyond? Sometimes the obvious is overlooked.

i'm not saying faith isn't still important, but it seems like the two can go hand in hand.

why go beyond? i think the better question is why not? if you have faith that the bible is true, why would you assume it'll never be confirmed by any analysis of reality?

Originally posted by red g jacks
...why go beyond? i think the better question is why not? if you have faith that the bible is true, why would you assume it'll never be confirmed by any analysis of reality?

If I believe in 'A', then I should believe anything that is part of 'A'. If I am trying to prove any sub-part of 'A', then that brings into question rather I truly believe that 'A' is true.

Therefore, if you truly believe that the bible is true, then the only reason you are trying to prove any part is to convince someone who questions the bibles volatility. That seems to be a different point then the thread.

i guess i can see your reasoning; that it shows some signs of doubt to look for proof

does that mean however that christians should expect to find no proof/evidence of any aspect of their beliefs in nature, or that they simply shouldn't have to look for it?

once again, i think that romans verse seems to imply that we all (including non-believers) can expect to see evidence of the christian god all around us. unless i'm interpreting it wrong.

but if i'm not, consider this for a second. they believe the bible through faith. the bible says the signs of god are all around them and that everyone secretly knows its true. therefore, they should expect (via faith in the bible) to see such signs. see where i'm coming from?

Originally posted by red g jacks
i guess i can see your reasoning; that it shows some signs of doubt to look for proof

does that mean however that christians should expect to find no proof/evidence of any aspect of their beliefs in nature, or that they simply shouldn't have to look for it?

once again, i think that romans verse seems to imply that we all (including non-believers) can expect to see evidence of the christian god all around us. unless i'm interpreting it wrong.

but if i'm not, consider this for a second. they believe the bible through faith. the bible says the signs of god are all around them and that everyone secretly knows its true. therefore, they should expect (via faith in the bible) to see such signs. see where i'm coming from?

Seeing proof all around you is different from looking for proof. You could be in a bar and see a fight, and that is different from going into a bar looking for a fight.

IMHO this is a self feeding delusion. If you believe the bible to be true, then you should see proof all around you. If you do not see this proof, then there is something wrong with your faith. Someone confronted with this problem will naturally look for proof, because they don’t want their belief to be in question.

i can see the logic in that. it's sorta counter intuitive to me but i guess i don't fully understand why people have faith.

out of curiosity:

If you do not see this proof, then there is something wrong with your faith. Someone confronted with this problem will naturally look for proof, because they don’t want their belief to be in question.

Originally posted by red g jacks
i can see the logic in that. it's sorta counter intuitive to me but i guess i don't fully understand why people have faith.

out of curiosity:

i agree that's the natural reaction, but as you have demonstrated it doesn't show good faith. what would be a more faithful alternative to looking for proof in this scenario, assuming there is one?

Do what Job did.

I believe this is a way to manipulate people. Believers are encouraged to assume that proof exists.

good answer.

so i have always been under the impression that having faith just meant having an unsubstantiated belief in something, but apparently it means having a belief that one is not even allowed to try to substantiate lest they sully the resolute nature of their 'faith.'

Originally posted by siriuswriter
I always thought that Christianity was supposed to be based on faith alone - and that Christians are not supposed to try to prove any of the aspects of their faith - God, The Holy Spirit, Jesus, miracles, nothing.

So why does it seem that more evangelical Christians are trying to catch up with Atheists who find "proof" that a god doesn't exist? Christians are supposed to be okay with this; the greatest link to Christian diety is faith, the belief in something that cannot be proved true.

So why do Christians feel like they suddenly need to prove the unprovable?

God's existence cannot be disproved; hence, no atheist has found any such proof.

However, there is a plethora of evidence that God does exist i.e. the universe that we live in, the sun, the stars, the moon, the planets, the earth that we live on, the complexity of life, the human brain, the human heart, the predictability and reliability of science based on known natural laws, the Bible, accuracy of Bible prophesy, miracles, conversion of the unsaved, those who have been resurrected from the dead, the spirit world, all of these things attest to the existence of God because they confirm His handiwork.

Originally posted by red g jacks
good answer.

so i have always been under the impression that having faith just meant having an unsubstantiated belief in something, but apparently it means having a belief that one is not even allowed to try to substantiate lest they sully the resolute nature of their 'faith.'

I think we are now talking about blind faith. The word faith is wider in meaning then how it is used in Christianity.

See JIA's post for proof. 😎

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I think we are now talking about blind faith. The word faith is wider in meaning then how it is used in Christianity.

See JIA's post for proof. 😎