Faith-based beliefs

[William]

There seems to have been a misunderstanding as to the purpose of my first thread on this subject due to the nature of some members making personal comments about other members in their posts, comments which were not directly related to the thread topic, and as a result the thread was locked.

I was using a disclaimer another member often uses, as a means of example - which is not contrary to any of the forum rules - not as a means of personal attack - which is contrary to the forum rules.

Certainly - as can be clearly seen, the OP does not make any such thing as a personal comment/attack or debate against any individual member.

The way I see it, debating is a form of schooling, in which the participants are both teaching and learning, whereas proselytizing clearly has no intention of learning, and in that is not teaching so much as preaching.

Is it fair that individuals use such a platform as a debate forum to preach from, when it is clear that their intention is not to debate at all, but to consistently spam the forum with their particular brand of organised religious indoctrination?

It is clear that the forum rules allow for some proselytizing to occur as a matter of 'par for the course', but when it is clear that individuals are not interested in any actual debate - especially in regard to their own particular sect - and even go to lengths to make disclaimers in order to avoid having to. Does this contravene the rules sufficiently to be dealt with in the same manner as any other type of rule breaking is dealt with?

Faith-based beliefs...Are they debatable?

What do you think?

PS - please don't use the OP question as an opportunity to make personal unrelated comments against other members. Just answer the question the OP is asking.

Thanks.

[Tart]

[Replying to post 9 by Tart]

So those are the two aspects i take on Faith.

So will you now state in one sentence each, what exactly these two things you take on faith are please, for the sake of simplicity.

1: "I take on faith_____________________________________."
2: "I take on faith_____________________________________."

Thanks.

I dont really know how to answer that.. Becuase it seems like you are suggesting i take these beliefs without evidence, when you suggest they are on faith, because that is how nonbelievers usually define it, but i dont believe they are without evidence. And i dont think that kind of definition is a Christian understanding of "Faith"

But if im wrong please feel free to elaborate.

[William]

[Replying to post 11 by Tart]

I dont really know how to answer that.. Becuase it seems like you are suggesting i take these beliefs without evidence, when you suggest they are on faith, because that is how nonbelievers usually define it, but i dont believe they are without evidence. And i dont think that kind of definition is a Christian understanding of "Faith"

Okay, so you appear to be hedging. To take something on faith, one does so without evidence, which is the point of faith as generically understood.

Now you are implying that when Christians speak of faith, they are not doing so in the same understanding. They do have evidence.

I will not ask you to show the evidence, because you have yet to give any succinct examples (I only asked for 2 - in the form of simple sentences) in which I could ask you for this evidence you imply exists, but rather I will ask you where you source this evidence, and perhaps we can see if faith in the source can count as one such example I am asking you for.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 9 by Tart]

Faith is a perfect expression of righteousness, and it is to live Faithfully that an all knowing, all loving, all powerful God is in control...

But when you take a look at the real world without wearing Bible glasses, it is patently obvious that an all loving, all powerful God is not in control.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 9 by Tart]

Like i said, Paul wrote that if Christ wasnt really risen from the dead, then our Faith is useless...

The way I see it, your faith is useless because Christ wasn't really risen from the dead.

[Tart]

[Replying to post 11 by Tart]

I dont really know how to answer that.. Becuase it seems like you are suggesting i take these beliefs without evidence, when you suggest they are on faith, because that is how nonbelievers usually define it, but i dont believe they are without evidence. And i dont think that kind of definition is a Christian understanding of "Faith"

Okay, so you appear to be hedging. To take something on faith, one does so without evidence, which is the point of faith as generically understood.

Now you are implying that when Christians speak of faith, they are not doing so in the same understanding. They do have evidence.

I will not ask you to show the evidence, because you have yet to give any succinct examples (I only asked for 2 - in the form of simple sentences) in which I could ask you for this evidence you imply exists, but rather I will ask you where you source this evidence, and perhaps we can see if faith in the source can count as one such example I am asking you for.

If there was no evidence for Christianity, we wouldnt even know of its existence...

"Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence


I have never understood the suggestion that there is no evidence for Christianity...

If the claim is "God exists"... The evidence might be Jesus Resurrection. If the claim is "Jesus was risen from the dead by God", the evidence for that might be that Jesus fulfilled the destiny of the Messiah... If the claim is "Jesus is the Messiah" the evidence might be the fulfillment of prophecy and works of miracle. If the claim is "Jesus fulfilled prophecy", the evidence might be the testimony the eye witnesses. If the claim is "People witnessed Jesus fulfill the prophecy of the Messiah", the evidence for that claim might be the historical evidence supporting the existence of the Disciples and their written words.

I cant even understand how someone would assert that there is no evdience for Christianity... How do you even make sense of that claim so that we can understand it? As to make it intelligible?

[William]

[Replying to post 15 by Tart]

I asked you to give 2 examples of something you have faith in, in a simply format of 2 small sentences. (Post #10)

You hedged on providing these simple examples so that they might be examined in relation to the OPQ.

Now you continue to hedge, by going off on some tangent as to how you simple don't understand why people can't see plainly that 'there is evidence for Christianity' as if this were related to the OPQ. It is not.

If Christians could see plainly that 'there is evidence for Christianity', perhaps they too could except Christianity without any faith being required at all! Is that the 'type' of Christian you are Tart? One who requires no faith, 'because' ''there is evidence for Christianity"?

If so, then I suggest most respectfully that there is no reason for you to be involved in this thread at all, because the OP is specific to faith-based belief rather than evidence based belief.

On a related note;

It is a rare occurrence in my experience, where -given the opportunity - a Christian is unable to say what exactly they have faith in. Here on a Christian-based message board only one Christian has even bothered to attempt to respond to the OPQ at all!

It appears at this stage dear readers, that the cat may be well and truly out of the bag, that any belief accepted on faith is over and above the process of debate and examination through critical thinking and intelligent reasoning. Faith simply isn't about that at all, and is best regarded as that which is nonnegotiable and thus does not belong in a debate setting.

I am presently satisfied that the OPQ has been answered. Faith based beliefs are not debatable. This is helpful to know.

[Tart]

You know, i was thinking about it last night and you're right.. Why do i even bother giving an explanation that is evidence based? I dont even need to entertain that, because I have Faith in Jesus Christ, and it is as simple as that...

[William]

[Replying to post 17 by Tart]

You know, i was thinking about it last night and you're right.. Why do i even bother giving an explanation that is evidence based? I dont even need to entertain that, because I have Faith in Jesus Christ, and it is as simple as that...

Well this is helpful as it gives an example I was asking for, regarding faith.

You have faith in the idea that "Jesus is the Christ."

Do you think that your faith-based belief in that idea, is something which is debatable?

IOW - is your faith-based belief in the idea that Jesus is the Christ nonnegotiable.

[Tart]

[Replying to post 17 by Tart]

You know, i was thinking about it last night and you're right.. Why do i even bother giving an explanation that is evidence based? I dont even need to entertain that, because I have Faith in Jesus Christ, and it is as simple as that...

Well this is helpful as it gives an example I was asking for, regarding faith.

You have faith in the idea that "Jesus is the Christ."

Do you think that your faith-based belief in that idea, is something which is debatable?

IOW - is your faith-based belief in the idea that Jesus is the Christ nonnegotiable.

I debate about it all the time, but im starting to think "why do i even need to debate it?"... Its not negotiable, I have Faith in Jesus and that will remain that way..

[William]

[Replying to post 19 by Tart]

I debate about it all the time, but im starting to think "why do i even need to debate it?"... Its not negotiable, I have Faith in Jesus and that will remain that way..

Precisely.

Thank you for contemplating this and returning with an honest answer.

Faith Based Beliefs are NOT debatable. As such, they cannot belong in a debate setting and when they are placed in such a setting these can only be considered to be proselytizing, period.