Faith in God

[mikkel_the_dane]

The reason people believe in these is because there is evidence supporting their existence.

Yes, I get that.
And here is the limit of that evidence.
Science has limits: A few things that science does not do

In part:

Science doesn't make moral judgments
When is euthanasia the right thing to do? What universal rights should humans have? Should other animals have rights? Questions like these are important, but scientific research will not answer them. Science can help us learn about terminal illnesses and the history of human and animal rights — and that knowledge can inform our opinions and decisions. But ultimately, individual people must make moral judgments. Science helps us describe how the world is, but it cannot make any judgments about whether that state of affairs is right, wrong, good, or bad.

A part of how the world is, is that e.g. I am religious. I can even test that. And that exists as a part of the world.
But science cannot make any judgments about whether that state of affairs is right, wrong, good, or bad.
That is in the everyday world the limit of evidence. It is a fact, which can be established using science and evidence, that I am religious.
I know this with knowledge and I have stated a fact about a part of the world.
Now what?

Well, you can't use science now, because science informs that indeed that religion is a part of the world and it is fact, that I can be and am religious.

 

[JJ50]

It is my opinion that the best things in life are those that cannot be proven through any evidence.

How weird!

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

How weird!

No!
Science has limits: A few things that science does not do

Just read.

"Best" can't be done by science as best, so best is without evidence.

BTW - How weird! - is also not science and without evidence in science.

 

[JJ50]

No!
Science has limits: A few things that science does not do

Just read.

"Best" can't be done by science as best, so best is without evidence.

BTW - How weird! - is also not science and without evidence in science.

I prefer fact rather than fiction.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I prefer fact rather than fiction.

Yes, but that you prefer it, is subjective, individual, personal, not objective, can't be established with only reason, logic and evidence.

So I think/fell right back at you, that you prefer fact over fiction, is weird!


If you can do emotions and state personal preferences so can I. I prefer to be religious over being an atheist.

 

[JJ50]

Yes, but that you prefer it, is subjective, individual, personal, not objective, can't be established with only reason, logic and evidence.

So I think/fell right back at you, that you prefer fact over fiction, is weird!


If you can do emotions and state personal preferences so can I. I prefer to be religious over being an atheist.

I disliked being a Christian and was very relieved when I kicked my faith into touch. I prefer reality to fantasy, and hope when I die that is the end of my story.

 

[LuisDantas]

Is that part of your definition of “deity”? If so, then the question is not about deities. It’s about some other things that people imagine, that are not deities according to your definition, that they call “God.”

Assuming that I understand what you mean, those are unhealthy beliefs and should be acknowledged as such.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I disliked being a Christian and was very relieved when I kicked my faith into touch. I prefer reality to fantasy, and hope when I die that is the end of my story.

Yeah, I disliked (emotion) being an atheist and yet I get "hope when I die that is the end of my story". I don't have to believe in souls, the afterlife and whatnot to be religious.
But since you hope, you don't know. It is that fantasy, reality or something else?

 

[JJ50]

Yeah, I disliked (emotion) being an atheist and yet I get "hope when I die that is the end of my story". I don't have to believe in souls, the afterlife and whatnot to be religious.
But since you hope, you don't know. It is that fantasy, reality or something else?

One can never be absolutely sure of anything, however logical it seems.

 

[Spartan]

As there is no verifiable evidence that any god exists, I find it hard to understand why people have faith in them.

There is evidence God exists. One of the best is the remarkable fulfilled Messianic prophecies of Jesus from the Old Testament cited in the Gospels and elsewhere. These fulfilled Messianic prophecies are at rate far, far greater than chance. And that's the signature of God.

To see how significant that is, read the following article: Science Speaks by Peter W. Stoner, Chapter 3, The Christ of Prophecy

 

[Rise]

With evidence who needs faith?

You appear to have a definition of faith that is not consistent with the meaning and implications of the word as used in the Bible.

Biblical faith implies putting your trust in God to the point where you are willing to obey and follow Him. One example of this being outlined is John 15 where belief, obedience, and abiding relationship are all said to be essentially the same thing.
To paraphrase James: if you say you believe but don't do then thats proof that you don't really believe.

Consequently, you can be given all the evidence in the world and still not have "faith" if you don't make the choice to trust Jesus and follow/obey Him. As James said, demons know the truth about God but that doesn't mean they chose to follow God. They rebelled and paid the price.

That is why you being given evidence that what God/Jesus said is true does not invalidate your faith - because faith is not defined as you intellectually saying you believe something is true in the absence of evidence for that belief. Faith is you choosing to follow/obey God, which you ultimately can't expect to do if you don't first believe what He says is true. The amount of evidence you do or don't have for the truth of what God says doesn't change the fact that you are only in faith if you trust God enough to obey/follow Him. Faith in God is the same result regardless of whether you got there with no evidence or a truckload of it. The important thing to remember is that evidence doesn't guarantee someone will submit to God. The Pharisees against Jesus had an abundance of evidence about the truth of what He said yet it seems most never did have faith.

In fact, the idea that faith must be based on having no evidence is entirely unbiblical to it's core. Scripture is full of examples of people who grow in faith as they see more evidence manifested that God's word is true. From Abraham to the disciples of Jesus. Although individuals are often praised in scripture for having great faith in proportion to their limited experiential evidence, it is a wrong understanding of what faith is to believe it requires a lack of evidence in order to be called faith.

 

[Jim]

Through the scientific method...systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

Getting back to your question, some possible reasons I see for some kind of faith in some God, without anything that you would call “evidence,” might be people trusting some religious sources, and/or their own interpretations of their own experiences, more than they trust whatever you think are reasons for abandoning their faith. Also, in some cases, like mine, “faith in God” might not be any beliefs about some God. It might be trust in an imaginary person, as a result of personal experience with that.

 

[ChristineM]

You appear to have a definition of faith that is not consistent with the meaning and implications of the word as used in the Bible.

Biblical faith implies putting your trust in God to the point where you are willing to obey and follow Him. One example of this being outlined is John 15 where belief, obedience, and abiding relationship are all said to be essentially the same thing.
To paraphrase James: if you say you believe but don't do then thats proof that you don't really believe.

Consequently, you can be given all the evidence in the world and still not have "faith" if you don't make the choice to trust Jesus and follow/obey Him. As James said, demons know the truth about God but that doesn't mean they chose to follow God. They rebelled and paid the price.

That is why you being given evidence that what God/Jesus said is true does not invalidate your faith - because faith is not defined as you intellectually saying you believe something is true in the absence of evidence for that belief. Faith is you choosing to follow/obey God, which you ultimately can't expect to do if you don't first believe what He says is true. The amount of evidence you do or don't have for the truth of what God says doesn't change the fact that you are only in faith if you trust God enough to obey/follow Him. Faith in God is the same result regardless of whether you got there with no evidence or a truckload of it. The important thing to remember is that evidence doesn't guarantee someone will submit to God. The Pharisees against Jesus had an abundance of evidence about the truth of what He said yet it seems most never did have faith.

In fact, the idea that faith must be based on having no evidence is entirely unbiblical to it's core. Scripture is full of examples of people who grow in faith as they see more evidence manifested that God's word is true. From Abraham to the disciples of Jesus. Although individuals are often praised in scripture for having great faith in proportion to their limited experiential evidence, it is a wrong understanding of what faith is to believe it requires a lack of evidence in order to be called faith.

I use the dictionary definition, it saves mixed messages and total confusion. That definition of (religious) faith is

Faith : strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.


The bible is not evidence, it is at most a book containing mythology and hearsay with some very good stories.

 

[Vinayaka]

Do you have faith in God?

While I can appreciate such faith in the presence of evidence, in the absence of any evidence (experiential, empirical, or objective), why do you have faith?

Yes, I do. Evidence is experiential, and personal. I also believe that is the only way to obtain faith. But them my religion is an experiential religion.

 

[Audie]

That sounds exactly like the experience of God. The evidence is the experience then.

The experience of god. Or what one interprets as
that?
We read about how native americans would do such
as to fast and chant, by themselves on some hilltop.
Spirit quest.

Eventually, guaranteed, they are going to hallucinate.

Or, more mundane, on a stroll across campus
with another girl, a pretty autumn leaf fluttered
down at our feet. She picked it up, and exclaimed-
"Oh, look, God has sent us a Sign! See the three parts?
It represents the Holy Trinity!

"So why does it have these two smaller parts?"
I asked.
She had an explanation for that, the pentarch or
whatever.

 

[Fool]

Do you have faith in God?

While I can appreciate such faith in the presence of evidence, in the absence of any evidence (experiential, empirical, or objective), why do you have faith?

without faith there can be no new experience of potential. faith is necessary but it should be tested and experienced if possible.

 

[JJ50]

without faith there can be no new experience of potential. faith is necessary but it should be tested and experienced if possible.

I had faith, as a youngster, a ghastly experience!

 

[Fool]

I had faith, as a youngster, a ghastly experience!

everyone starts from the unconditional mind; unfortunately some believe they know it all when they get to some perceived destination and everything will stop. tomorrow you'll be a day older and yesterday you were a day younger.

it's been a strange trip. i admit. extremely harsh sometimes but weirdly enough, it made me a better person because of it.

 

[Fool]

I use the dictionary definition, it saves mixed messages and total confusion. That definition of (religious) faith is

Faith : strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.


The bible is not evidence, it is at most a book containing mythology and hearsay with some very good stories.

you left out a definition, conveniently.


2. Confident or unquestioning belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

 

[JJ50]

everyone starts from the unconditional mind; unfortunately some believe they know it all when they get to some perceived destination and everything will stop. tomorrow you'll be a day older and yesterday you were a day younger.

it's been a strange trip i admit. extremely harsh sometimes but weirdly enough, it made me a better person because of it.

Each to their own, I think I am a better person without a religion to tie me down.