Belief is Evidence

[Ooberman]

Is belief in something, evidence for that thing?


Christians claim their belief is evidence of Jesus - that the 'Witness of the Holy Spirit" is evidence for their belief. William Lane Craig, the greatest Christian every born, claims this to be true: That any information against the existence of Jesus is trumped by the "self-authenticating nature of the Holy Spirit" (which tells him Jesus rose from the dead).

However, we are repeatedly told that we are to choose to Believe - then we will get the "evidence".


Can a Christian - a smart and thoughtful one, please - explain how this makes sense?


If I chose to Believe in Krishna, and then believed in Krishna, is that evidence of Krishna?


It doesn't seem right to me. What am I missing?

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 1 by Ooberman]
Surely WLC isn't saying belief is evidence, he is saying he believe to such a degree that he no longer needs evidence.

[Ooberman]

[Replying to post 1 by Ooberman]
Surely WLC isn't saying belief is evidence, he is saying he believe to such a degree that he no longer needs evidence.

Based on:

1. His choice to believe
2. The resulting "witness of the Holy Spirit"

That is, he chose to believe Jesus rose from the dead. Then, the Holy Spirit arrived and confirmed his belief.



Yet, I am told that the "experience of God" is considered evidence.


I'm not saying this is a complicated thing - I'm just confused. I'm hopping someone can clear it up.


So, you are saying: WLC (or some believer) believes so much that they no longer require evidence.

But, their belief was created by accepting some evidence (WLC attributes it to "the words of Jesus in the Bible seemed authoritative") - and choosing to believe via Faith.

To me, there seems to be a vicious circle here.

[Heterodoxus]

According to Dictionary.com:

1: be·lieve ... verb ... "to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof"

2: be·lief ... noun

• a) "something believed; an opinion or conviction;
  b) "confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof"

[jmiller61193]

Simple answer: belief is not evidence of something.

Just because some guy said it was so doesn't make it true.

Someone already gave this type of example but,
If I believe really really strongly that the world is, let's say, a giant turtle. That is not evidence the world is a giant turtle. Simple as that.

[Ooberman]

Simple answer: belief is not evidence of something.

Just because some guy said it was so doesn't make it true.

Someone already gave this type of example but,
If I believe really really strongly that the world is, let's say, a giant turtle. That is not evidence the world is a giant turtle. Simple as that.

That's how I see it. I'm trying to understand, then, why some major Christian Apologists use their belief as evidence?

I don't want to be dismissive, but it seems to me, we are fully justified in dismissing their Faith, Beliefs and Religion if it is built on such viciously circular reasoning.

[ttruscott]

Is belief in something, evidence for that thing?

I think not. But a lack of evidence to support a claim cannot be take as proof the claim is false, either. That is, evidence may still appear in the future.

Christians claim their belief is evidence of Jesus - that the 'Witness of the Holy Spirit" is evidence for their belief.

William Lane Craig, the greatest Christian every born, claims this to be true: That any information against the existence of Jesus is trumped by the "self-authenticating nature of the Holy Spirit" (which tells him Jesus rose from the dead).

Who is Craig? Never heard of him. He does not speak for me. And the "self-authenticating nature of the Holy Spirit" is Christian gobblety-gook...Yes, the the Holy Spirt makes HIS presence known to believers and speaks to us of the truth of Jesus as the divine Christ but "self-authenticating nature"??? Pfftt.

However, we are repeatedly told that we are to choose to Believe - then we will get the "evidence".

This is a change of topic from the title: Belief AS evidence...Belief will provide evidence. Belief is not evidence but yes, in the Christian system, it is promised that belief will provide evidence.

But unlike someone (unnamed so as not to provide further embarrassment to him) who thinks you can suddenly start to believe in what you think is a fantasy because you want to without any new evidence, The Christian system uses belief not in the sense of knowing and accept the reality of something like the sun rising (which is a false belief in a false reality but accepted by ordinary society...another topic) belief means to have faith in a person or promise, as a hope that is not yet proven but hoped it soon will be.

It may not be so hard to accept on hope a promise you have always rejected as to suddenly believe as a fact what has never been proven...

The belief you speak of is the faith variety - Christ says: have faith in me, hope without proof I am telling the truth and can and will do what I promise and I will bring that promise to fruition and you will be my living proof of it all. It is Christ who makes our faith prove out, not the fact of our faith...or: faith is not magic but the promised result is only applied to those who choose to put their faith in Christ, not elsewhere.

Belief does NOT mean to suddenly accept the reality of Christ as Divine on the order of knowing everything else you know to be real and true by personal experience, but without evidence.

In other words, it is possible to change your mind about a promise and make an effort to accept it as applying to you personally which is a different order of things from being asked to believe without further evidence in a non-evident fact.

Can a Christian - a smart and thoughtful one, please - explain how this makes sense?
If I chose to Believe in Krishna, and then believed in Krishna, is that evidence of Krishna?
It doesn't seem right to me. What am I missing?

Ok, back to the topic...I agree with you, it makes no sense to me either and yet I believe I have established my credentials as a (logically) thinking believer... If belief in Krishna establishes or gives evidence to his divine reality, then the Christian system is wrong because it denies that reality no matter how many people believe in it with perfect faith.

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

...

So, you are saying: WLC (or some believer) believes so much that they no longer require evidence.

...

Ok, this as a new way to look on what you ask...

Faith is hope. Choosing faith / hope in Christ opens a person to a whole new experience which is spiritually discerned. One personal feeling of this new experience is reportedly that once one has a hope it grows stronger, that is, as the hope is realized and some of the promises are fulfilled in their experience, hope becomes a conviction, and that conviction grows into a sense of proven reality as real as the oxygen we breathe but cannot discern without an involved study.

Do I need daily evidence I breath oxygen or that it is there without my proof or belief? Not at all nor do I anymore need daily proof as the spiritual reality that I accept GOD has proven to me enough so I can now take it for granted and live my life without any care about it - the Spiritual world is real and I have a place in it.

Faith leads to conviction leads to accepted proof: yes.
Faith = conviction = proof: not so much.

Peace, Ted

[jmiller61193]

[Replying to post 8 by ttruscott]

Every time I see someone say that all you need is faith and hope in Christ, something inside me dies a little bit.

I mean having hope is okay, but you should be aware that it is bogus and half the time you are disappointed with reality because you had high hopes. It's like praying. It doesn't do anything. You have about a 50/50 chance of getting what you want, regardless of hope or praying.

And if you are going to have hope in something, why Jesus? He was just some Jew from 30 AD Palestine. He thought the world was going to end in his life time and told his disciples to give up their whole life to follow him. Basically the equivalent of our modern day rapture fanatics.

How does your faith in Jesus lead you to proof? Seems like some hocus pocus to me.

[ttruscott]

According to Dictionary.com:

1: be·lieve ... verb ... "to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof"

2: be·lief ... noun

• a) "something believed; an opinion or conviction;
  b) "confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof"

To understand Christianity one must use Christian definitions:

FAITH: Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

While we share an overlap with the secular idea that faith / belief is without proof or 'not seen,' secular definitions do not usually contain the idea that faith is hope,

which is the essence of the exhortation to faith in Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe [hope] that he is, and [hope] that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. which is again supported in: Romans 8:24 For in this hope [of our resurrection] we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? in which faith can be switched for hope in every place.

This adds a nuance of the meaning of belief that the secular surface definitions miss.

Peace, Ted