On faith

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Magical Realist, Jun 22, 2016.

  1. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    If and when I have that experience, I'll try and remember to let you know.

    Who said I didn't like it?
    Wait a minute!
    You purposely put that one in to get a specific reaction. I didn't bite. So you pretend that I did.


    And as far as you're concerned, there is no evidence for God. Job done.


    I really don't see much difference, given the path you've decided to take in this discussion.

    I've never claimed to ''understand atheists''.

    It's not. Simply because you have no concept of Theos in the first place, other than speculation.
    You can't seriously want evidence of something, that does not exist, to you, as you sit and read this.

    Then accept when I say ''God IS'', regardless of whether that's what you want to hear. That is my answer.
    Most of the evidences for God you find on a google search, I'm okay with.

    You're the one who invoked ''v'' (versus), not me.
    Other than that, there are two categories, Theos, and ATheos.

    It is what it is. There is God, and there is no God. We all come into this atmosphere with that.
    We all express that in some way. It seems to be a natural default for humans. I have come to believe that those two positions
    are correct.

    Well you're not going to understand it, until you accept it.

    I blindly accept what you, and everyone else says.
    It doesn't mean I have to believe it.

    Just answer the question. Or not. It's up to you.

    We all know your position Baldeee. You're atheist (lack belief in God).
    There's nothing to really argue about. I'm not interested in why you're an atheist.
    You have faith, but it's not in God. You don't believe in God, because as far as you can see God doesn't exist.
    You may have notions of thinking that the reason you don't believe in God, is because there is a lack of evidence for God.
    That being said, you believe that if evidence were to materialise, you would believe in the existence of God (atheist notion).
    But as of yet, throughout the whole of history, nothing has really come close to convincing you that there is a God. All notions of evidence of God has thus far been rejected by you. You are, however, still open to the possibility that one day physical evidence will manifest. Hence you regard yourself as agnostic/atheist.

    Other people are.
    So what does that mean?

    ''God IS'', is reasonable to me.
    I don't really need to clarify that.
    I don't need you to clarify why God ISN'T to me.

    I already have. God IS.
    Other than that, I don't think I could top these great thinkers explanation of evidence for God,
    which is why you should consult them.

    As far as pointing out stuff you don't recognise, I think the main one is... God.

    It's not about being born with a default, it is about your conscious and sub-conscious awareness. The way we currently are, at every given moment.

    Last edited: Sep 2, 2016
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Jan doesn't make an argument and doesn't care to. That's why he's frustrating to those who care for empirical knowledge, evidence, science, reason, and logic. I don't know what else needs to be said. He's a convenient punching bag if you want to practice talking to irrational theists.
    Yazata, Kristoffer and DaveC426913 like this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    I accept that there is God, and without God, just as there is one, and there is zero.
    A theist believes in God, and an atheist doesn't (without God). God doesn't exist for those that are without.
    Otherwise God IS. That makes the most sense to me.

    So anyone who believes in God, have faculties to discern the real from the pretend. Is that what you're saying?

    So this occured in some evolutionary past when knuckle-draggers demanded an answer to ''why thunder and lightening?''?

    Thanks for that. At least we now know what you think faith is.

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Quite a lot of them have blinders in this one area, because they are personally invested in the idea.
    Yes, we call it mythology.
    Kristoffer likes this.
  8. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member


    I talked to a Muslim guy one time who said he tried realy hard to find God... but he didnt find him.!!!
    Im almost 70 an i have never even thout about/had any desire to look for a God... any idea why you thank that is.???

    I thank thats a real good answr.!!!
    An i dont know if its the "human default position" or not... but id like to hear from you'r perspective -- what are some reasons that a person woud not be interested in findin God.???
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    It's Not Tough to Figure Out

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Click to hear from those with nothing to say.
    (1) Same reason I'm not interested in hunting snipe.

    (2) If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.

    If someone convinces me to forego the first, I adhere to the second. Thus:

    (3) Something about the futility of undertaking futile efforts goes here.
  10. The God Valued Senior Member

    Unwittingly truthful.

    A scientist while worshipping God, that is while being a theist, leaves aside his empirical knowledge, evidence, science reason and logic. Would you abuse him as irrational punching bag?
  11. The God Valued Senior Member


    Your ignorance about the basic definition of 'faith' is palpable..
  12. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    What is the basic definition of 'faith'?
  13. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    I believe, fairly early on in the thread we stated an assumption that we're talking specifically about faith in a higher power (as opposed to, faith in your friend, or somesuch).

    So at the very least, I think it's a given - for this kind of faith - that the higher power exists. I can't presume it means that this HP watches over or influences us, unless that's the general consensus.

    This is the start of a working definition, for the purposes of this discussion, so anyone feel free to add or subtract.
  14. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

  15. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    You're currently in a better position to answer that, than me.

  16. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Have you ever been in the position of searchin for God... or just not interested in searchin for God.???
  17. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    That's Hebrews 11:1 from the Christian Bible. Can you explain what it means?

    Is the first clause literally saying that faith is a substance? (Or is 'substance' being used metaphorically?)

    Is the second clause literally saying that faith is evidence, allowing people to know things not otherwise knowable? That suggests that faith should be imagined as what Indian philosophy would call a pramana, a way (such as perception or logical inference) of acquiring true knowledge.


    I don't think that either interpretation (the metaphysical or the epistemological) works very well or makes much sense.

    It probably makes most sense to interpret 'faith' psychologically, in the way that the Buddhists interpret 'sraddha'.


    I think that many Christians do interpret 'faith' as 'trust' or 'confidence', as descriptive of their attitude towards whatever they are faithful about. (But not as a way of knowing things they wouldn't otherwise know.) I'm not sure if The God or the author of Hebrews were using the word that way.
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2016
  18. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    In the sense of being able to say whether you found it evidence or not, you did, as per you repeating it in the first line of your response above:
    "If and when I have that experience, I'll try and remember to let you know."
    I was not after any specific reaction.
    Just your genuine response to whether you personally found it to be evidence of God or not.
    You haven't said whether you find it evidence or not, and I'm not pretending that you did.
    I did.
    Yet you were not forthcoming with the example I gave.
    Thus I'm asking you to give an example of something you find to be reasonable evidence.
    Why do you continue to evade?
    No, it's not "job done" as there is still evidence of a concept of God, a concept. that some people believe exists in actuality.
    I've asked you questions in the spirit of honest discussion, which you're simply evading.
    Which path have I taken in this discussion?
    Not in so many words, no, but your comments have that implication.
    If you disagree then please don't respond as though you do think you understand atheists, or try to second guess what atheists might say, or continue to create your strawmen caricatures of them.
    And there you go claiming to understand atheists.
    Contradict yourself much?
    I do seriously want to see what you put forth as evidence that you reasonably consider to be evidence of God's existence.
    Why should I accept that?
    But not Jesus' face on a tortilla?
    How about a statue that supposedly weeps?
    I merely made explicit the underlying tone of your expressed views.
    So you have tried to make clear, yet you don't see it as one view v the other?
    Again, how does this answer the question I asked: you seem to be equating the comprehension of the concept with the acceptance of that concept as true... why?
    And you have come to believe that which two positions are true?
    That there is both God and no-God?
    Let me be the judge of that.
    Otherwise you are simply evading.
    Accept as in "believe or come to recognise (a proposition) as valid or correct."?
    Can you show me a question I haven't answered, other than one I explicitly said that I would only do so after you had satisfactorily answered mine?
    So you do presume to understand atheists.
    Yet enough to think you know why I am.
    No, I don't.
    I can't say whether God exists or not as far as I can see.
    And I'm sure you "don't claim to know atheists" enough to tell me that I'm wrong in my own reasoning,
    I don't believe that, no.
    There may well be evidence that I remain utterly oblivious to.
    But if I did believe in God then it would be in God.
    You keep saying that there is only one God.
    Or are you saying that even if God wanted me to, I wouldn't be able to believe in God?
    Well, throughout my whole history.
    I wasn't around for the vast majority of history, recorded or otherwise.
    I guess the question is why I don't place as much stock in history that is recorded than perhaps others do that they take written and/or oral recordings at face value, etc?
    Not just physical evidence.
    Any evidence.
    I do regard myself not as agnostic/atheist but as an agnostic atheist.
    Similarly a female Democrat does not regard themself as female/Democrat.

    So not bad in trying to understand... you only got most of it wrong.
    It means I am interested in what they find reasonable, and why they find it reasonable.
    Hence my purpose for being in this thread.
    I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it, even after you asked me what my agenda was.
    You've clarified that as your position numerous times now.
    I am interested in why you think that, on what basis you think it, etc.
    If you are not interested in that, why didn't you just say so at the start?
    Who is asking you?
    In the honest discussion that would be for me to explain my position, why I think it reasonable etc.
    Jesus on a tortilla it is, then.
    Yes, evidence for the existence of God that I don't recognise is... God.
    Question beg much?
    Ah, so you think atheists aren't as aware, consciously and/or subconsciously?
    So what is it that you are aware of that I am not?
    And please, in the spirit of honest discussion, do not just say "God" as that would be most unhelpful.
  19. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    I wrote what I said. Stick to it.

    Right at this moment 'God' does not exist for you. Fact.

    Firstly, you're not honest.
    Secondly, you going down the 'does God exist' path.
    You need to start a new thread.

    I understand the term ''atheist'', and how it is ''atheos'', despite new designs.

    What part of ''you'' (as in who I responding to) don't you comprehend?

    You mean you seriously want to change the discussion to 'show me evidence of God existence', because that is all you have.
    Like I said, start a new thread. Who knows I may even bite.

    Because you asked me, and I responded.

    When I typed 'evidence for existence of God' into Google, these didn't appear.
    Did the people who reported this claim it was evidence for the existence of God?

    Well you may as well converse with yourself.

    I said what I said.

    Things aren't always as they seem. If you don't like my response. Too bad.

    Yes. Truth and illusion.

    How can you be the judge that?

    How do you know that I'm evading?

    More like 'consent to receive or undertake (something offered).
    I'm not surprised you bypassed the prime definition and went straight to the secondary one.
    You're desperate.

    I have answered your question. Not my problem if you are satisfied.

    You all lack belief in God. Right?

    Simple. You're without God.

    Yes you do.

    God doesn't exist for you.

    You are without God, so you're atheist reasoning (lack of belief) cannot be wrong.

    It's your choice Baldeee.

    That's good.

    A female is a female, and an atheist is an atheist, no matter how you dress them up.

    Good luck with that.

    I think it is as natural to me, as God isn't (for whatever reason), is as natural to you.
    They're both foundational points.
    As of yet, you see no evidence of God, and I see that God IS.
    Why don't you see evidence of God?

    Why is that not evidence of God?

  20. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Given the tone and the assumption that you intended for this to make sense, I think you missed out "not" before the last word.
    Which is a pity, as it does rather signal the end of any chance of an honest discussion with you, Jan.
  21. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    I'm not being dishonest Baldeee, and I am not being evasive. The answers I give are genuine responses.
    You wish to draw this into an existence debate, and I'm not going there. It is a thread on faith, and that's where I'm coming from. I think it is obvious that you don't have much to offer this thread, why you want to take it down another path.

    Now how about answering these questions, instead of avoiding them.

    Last edited: Sep 6, 2016
  22. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    In what way can a proposition such as, say, "God IS", be offered by someone such that someone else can "consent to receive or undertake" it? It's not an object, or a challenge, a gift, a token, a blessing. It's just a proposition. And as such I'm not sure there should be any dispute as to the meaning between the two offered.
    Jan... you're wrong. Worst still I think you know you are and it is rather you who is desperate, trying to achieve a victory where none sensibly is. And in doing so you highlight once again your "us v them" mentality, tiresome as it is.
    And I have to ask again, as I've asked many times in the past: is English your first language?
  23. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    I'm asking him to accept that 'God IS' is my response, not that it is true. He must find that out for himself.

    There is no victory in this thread. It is about 'Faith'.
    It is not about 'does God exist', or 'where is the evidence for Gods existence', under the guise of 'I want to know why you believe in God'.

    Yes English is my first language.


Share This Page