Quote from: Pete on July 18, 2020, 08:06:52 pmNothing.
Everyone believes what they believe is correct, otherwise, they wouldn't believe it.
You are correct that there is no irrefutable, empirical evidence that our beliefs are the absolute truth. There cannot be, by the very definition of the word "faith".
That doesn't mean there is no evidence. While I know that correlation does not equate to causation, I have, as scripture says, tasted and seen that the Lord is good. I can't prove that to you, and I won't even try.
Generally speaking, I'm a facts and figures guy, so all of your arguments make logical sense to me. But that all pales in comparison to the Love, grace and mercy that I've experienced.
Quote from: JakeELee on July 18, 2020, 06:55:02 pmSo what would what would preclude someone from another faith of claiming that they had the absolute truth?
Quote from: Bryan on July 18, 2020, 06:27:23 pmHas it ever occurred to you theres a reason its called faith? "Substance of things hoped for, evidence of what isnt seen." It wouldnt be faith if you had every waking detail laid out for you. Id encourage you to stay. Just find a different/better way to express yourself.
Quote from: JakeELee on July 18, 2020, 05:37:58 pmSorry but I am done here :
I posted the following reply about 2 hours ago and yet I see it has been censored which leads me to believe that you people aren't interested in conversation, just confirmation of your beliefs. O well time to move on and leave you all to fantasy :
Thanks for your reply - appreciate the time you took to write it. A lot to discuss and I believe you won't take offence if I offer an alternative :
"Faith without objective reasoning is presumption and not real faith at all. Faith is simply the superlative of belief. It is a belief so strong that you know that you know that you know."
Faith is not the superlative of belief. Faith is the reason that people give when they have no objective reason for the belief".
If "faith" can lead you to a belief in Jesus and can also lead a muslim to a sincere belief in Allah then it is no longer objective - it is subjective. Therefore "faith" is no longer a pathway to truth or reason.
We need some other mechanism to determine what is true and what is false.
You ask the question about how did I come to the conclusion that 1 + 1 =2. Because it is demonstrably true. It is not an assertion but is proven. "Faith" in a "God" is not demonstrably proven - it is an assertion. Logical reasoning demonstrates that assertions are meaningless and that the burden of proof is on the one making the assertion.
I am NOT asserting that 1+1=2 : I am able to demonstrate that is it is true.
You bring into the argument that of evolution, and for some reason jump to the big bang and the assertion of the infinite regress - i.e. "I can't think of anything that would have created the universe ergo "God". That is an argument from incredulity and therefore a logical fallicy.
Whilst I agree that the universe deserves and explanation, to jump to "God" is rediculous. Why not Allah, or not Thor, or Imhotep. Yet I presume you are arguing that "I can't think of anything else other than "Yaweh" so therefore He created it all is a case of special pleading - again another logical fallicy.
Then you jump to pointing me to a book "Evidence that demands a verdict" - I have read it, and also read "Further evidence that demands a verdict" a number of times, both of which make assertions that are not backed up by science.
You sum things up by again confusing objective reasoning and faith. As your scripture asserts "Faith is the evidence not seen, the substance of things hoped for". Basic logic says that if you have empirical evidence then you do not need faith.
You are clearly confused about "objective", "subjective" and "faith".
"Faith" can NEVER be "objective" until there is a test for objective faith. The Hindu who claims that he has "faith" that his path is correct is no different from your claim of Christianity.
You have chosen the God that you want to, have agreed to the assertions but until you can demonstrate that those assertions are testable, empirical and investigatble then you are no different from any other faith claim.
Thanks for your reply btw - no offense intended, but I find the basic grasp of logic and reason sincerely disturbing. If your world view is correct then surely Yaweh could have bothered to provide more substantial proof?