Why are theists unable to accept the truth?

[Divine Insight]

Lately I've been hearing theists claim to have compelling facts and evidence to support that Christianity is true. We know this is a false claim and that no such compelling facts or evidence exists.

How do we know that no compelling facts or evidence exist?

I'll give three reasons.

Reason #1: Scientists love facts and evidence.

Science is entirely based on evidence and facts being presented to make the case for any proposed hypotheses. No other discipline gives more credence to facts and evidence than science.

If theists had any credible facts and evidence to demonstrate that their religion is true, all they would need to do is give these facts and evidence to the scientific community and the scientists would be more than happy to verify it.

Clearly no such facts and evidence exists for if it did exist science would have already reported it and verified it.

So we can know that any theists who claim to have facts and evidence for their religion are not being truthful. For if they had such evidence they could easily convince the scientific community. The scientific community has not been convinced of the truth of Christianity. Therefore we can safely conclude that no such facts and evidence exists.


Reason #2: Historians love facts and evidence.

History is entirely based on evidence and facts being presented to make the case for any proposed historical events. Few other disciplines gives more credence to facts and evidence than historians.

If theists had any credible facts and evidence to demonstrate that their religion is true, all they would need to do is give these facts and evidence to the historical community and the historians would be more than happy to verify it.

Clearly no such facts and evidence exists for if it did exist historians would have already reported it and verified it.

So we can know that any theists who claim to have facts and evidence for their religion are not being truthful. For if they had such evidence they could easily convince the historical community. The historical community has not been convinced of the truth of Christianity. Therefore we can safely conclude that no such facts and evidence exists.


Reason #3: Philosophers love logic and reason.

Philosophy is entirely based on logic and reasoning being presented to make the case for any proposed hypotheses. No other discipline gives more credence to logic and reason than philosophy save for perhaps mathematics.

If theists had any credible logic and reasoning to offer to show that their religion is true, all they would need to do is present this logic and reasoning to the philosophical community and the philosopher would be more than happy to verify the soundness of the logic and reasoning.

Clearly no such logic and reasoning exists for if it did exist philosophers would have already reported it and verified it.

So we can know that any theists who claim to have logic and reasoning for their religion are not being truthful. For if they had such logic and reasoning they could easily convince the philosophical community. The philosophical community has not been convinced of the truth of Christianity. Therefore we can safely conclude that no such logic and reasoning exists.

Conclusion:


Therefore theists who claim to have facts and evidence that proves their religion is true, or sound logic and reasoning that proves that their religion is true, are clearly making claims that are not true.

After all, if these things actually existed then Scientists, Historians, and Philosophies would all be proclaiming the truth of Christianity. Yet none of the disciplines have seen compelling evidence for this being the case.

So if any theist tells you that they have fact and evidence, or sound logic and reasons to conclude that their religion is true, you can rest assured that they are not telling you the truth.

Sure, it may be true that they have deluded themselves into believing that they personally have facts, evidence, logic and reasons to believe in their religion. But you can be certain that they are ultimately mistaken, for if such things existed the three communities mentioned above would be onboard with those same conclusions.

So any theists who believe they possess these things can only be deceiving themselves. It's crystal clear that no such facts, evidence, or even logic and reasoning, exists that compellingly support Christianity.

This is not a debate forum, but I ask the following question anyway:

Why are theists unable to accept the truth?

[William]

Divine Insight: Lately I've been hearing theists claim to have compelling facts and evidence to support that Christianity is true.

William: Can you provide examples of this please DI. Also, what exactly do you mean by 'theists' - and 'Christianity'?

Providing some context to the reader would go a long way in helping one decide whether the thread is worthwhile contributing to.

Thanks.

[Divine Insight]

Can you provide examples of this please DI.

I see no need to provide any examples. Either you claim to have facts and evidence to support Christianity or your don't. If you do, then why not take them to the communities mentioned in the OP since those communities are expert at evaluating facts and evidence. If you don't claim to have facts and evidence to support your favorite religion, then this thread should have no interest for you.

Also, what exactly do you mean by 'theists' - and 'Christianity'?

Christianity is a religion based on accepting that the Christian Bible speaks the truth about God and Jesus. Specifically the New Testament claims that Jesus is "The truth, the way, and the life", and that no one comes to the Father God but by Jesus.

Of course the Old Testament is also accepted by Christian Theist as also being a true description of God as well as his commandments, directives, and interactions with man, not the least of which was having created a Great Flood that drowned o out all but a handful of humans at one point in time. The story of Noah's Ark, is forever embedded in this religion.

So if you want to know about Christianity, just read the Christian Bible. Typically the King James version is the most popular. But there is much division within the religion so there will be off-shoots from mainstream orthodoxy as well.

None of this is important as whichever version you would like to back, would still require that you present facts and evidence. So which version you choose to support is your free choice.

Providing some context to the reader would go a long way in helping one decide whether the thread is worthwhile contributing to.

It's a pretty simple thread William. Either you claim to have facts and evidence to backup whatever version of Christianity you personally favor. In which case the question is:

Why are you not turning this over to the communities mentioned in the OP for their critical evaluation?

Or, if you don't claim to have facts and evidence to support the religion of your choice, then the questions in this thread have nothing to do with you.

~~~~~

By the way, the points made in the OP are actually applicable to any religion at all. It's not limited to just Christianity. The reason I focused on Christianity is because there are quite a few Christians who like to claim that they have facts and evidence that demonstrate that Christianity is true.

So the point of the OP is simply to say that if their claims are true, then what are they waiting for? Just take the facts and evidence to the above communities for evaluation.

The point of the OP is that the communities that specialize in examining facts and evidence do not support that ANY religions have been demonstrated to be factual and true.

So the final truth is that those who claim to have facts and evidence that support the truth of their religion are clearly not reflecting the truth of the situation. For if they had such compelling logical facts and evidence this would be recognized by the communities that specialize in examining facts and evidence.

Currently none of those communities are pointing to any religions as having been verified to be true based on facts and evidence.

That's the point William.

[William]

[Replying to post 3 by ]

Divine Insight: I see no need to provide any examples.

William: It would be helpful for you to provide examples of what you claim you have been 'hearing theists claim' , in order that these can be discussed in context.

[Divine Insight]

It would be helpful for you to provide examples of what you claim you have been 'hearing theists claim' , in order that these can be discussed in context.

That's neither the topic nor the question of this thread.

The truth is obvious. The scientific, historical, and philosophical communities have never been convinced by facts and evidence of the truth of any religion.

If you are a theist who accepts that there are no facts and evidence to back up your favorite religion, then you aren't among the theists referenced in the title of this thread. So there's nothing here for you to be concerned with. No one is accusing you of being a theist who claims to have facts and evidence that shows your theology is true.

[William]

[Replying to post 5 by ]

Divine Insight: If you are a theist who accepts that there are no facts and evidence to back up your favorite religion...

William: Okay. So what you are asking is "Why are certain types of theists unable to accept the truth" and by 'theists' you mean 'those who have a 'favorite religion'.

Thanks for clarifying.

[Divine Insight]

Okay. So what you are asking is "Why are certain types of theists unable to accept the truth" and by 'theists' you mean 'those who have a 'favorite religion'.

Thanks for clarifying.

Sorry, you've jumped to wrong conclusions. I have no interest in trying to define what "theists" mean. I'll leave that up to them.

You were concerned with examples. Perhaps you would like to step forward and become the first example?

It's easy. First all you need to do is claim to be a "theist'. What you mean by that term doesn't really matter much. That's your business.

Then, after claiming to be a theist, you can take one of the following two positions:

Position #1:

You can say that you accept the truth that there are no compelling facts and evidence to back up the theology you believe in, and that you believe on pure faith without compelling facts and evidence.

By doing this you can become a shinning example of a theist who accepts the truth of the OP. There will be no need to question your theology.

Or if you prefer you can take Position #2 and become the example you were asking for:


Position #2:

You can claim that there are compelling facts and evidence to back up the theology you believe in, and that this is why you are certain of your beliefs.

By doing this you can become our first example of a theist who refuses to accept the truth of the OP.

I have no interest in arguing with how you might define the term "theist". You can use that word to mean anything you so desire. Typically a theist is a person who believes in a particular theology. Although I suppose you could consider yourself to be a theist while not being convinced of any particular theology. In that case, you'd probably fit the description of Position #1.

Relative to the topic of the OP there really are no other positions available. Claiming to believe on facts and evidence that is not recognized by the scientific, historic, or philosophic communities places you in Position #2 automatically , even if you are convinced that you have evidence that those institutions reject.

What you might mean by "Theist' is irrelevant. You'd need to take that up with people who publish dictionaries.

Here's a typical definition given on the Internet in case you aren't sure what the term means:

Theist - a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe.

If you argue that you don't fit this definition, then I would argue that you shouldn't be calling yourself a theist.

Perhaps look into some other terms that might better reflect your position.

[William]

DI: You were concerned with examples. Perhaps you would like to step forward and become the first example?

William: As I wrote. I am looking for you to provide something in the way of examples, which would make my contributing to this thread worth the time.

You haven't.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 8 by William]

If you don't want to post in this thread don't do it. No one is twisting your arm.

I've already clarified the two possible positions you could take on the question. I even looked up the word "theist" for you as you seemed to be uncertain of what it means. If you're still having difficulty understanding the question at this point then you probably wouldn't be able to give a meaningful answer anyway. So I agree that your time would be better spent elsewhere.

Have a great day!

[Menotu]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

Why are theists unable to accept the truth?

Most, if not all, are more than capable, with caveats:
1) they accept what they want as the truth they want (and ignoring the truths they don't want)
2) they change the definition of the word 'truth' (which Christians absolutely love to do - well that and make up terms specific for them)
3) they institute the old fall back 'what's true to you isn't true to me'

Facts, logic, common sense....none of that matters when you have to have faith.
Which is why, IMO, so many religious people shun independent learning, thought and questioning.