A popular thread here is, if the resurrection is if it's fact or faith based. A lot of thinking and word play has gone into several dozen pages trying to prove it's factual (BTWs...it's not factual, just in case you're wonderin').
There's been a lot of mental gymnastics done trying to prove it is. In regards to critical thinking (the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment), there seems that YES, critical thinking skills are required. After all, it takes a lot of effort to believe it at all!
But, outside of trying to prove something is factual, does faith (complete trust or confidence in someone or something; strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof), itself, faith doesn't seem to require critical thinking skills.
It seems faith only requires a few of things:
people with the need (for various reasons) to believe;
something to believe in &
a method to pontificate said belief.
For discussion:
Why do people feel the need to prove their belief (aka faith) is factual at all? Why can't they just be content with accepting 'Yeah, I believe in this by faith and that's good enough!'
Why do people try to prove faith?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #21[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #19]
Now then:
Outside of the bible (as there's nothing in the bible that specifically say 'prove others what you believe is factual' that my decades of being a christian has shown) it's simply because you say?
1) dried figs has nothing to do with proving something thought of through faith as factual
2) it doesn't answer the reason why YOU think any way
Come on. Even for a dedicated bible reader as yourself, you surely can't suspect someone to think that. If so, then you're here only to stroke your own ego. Which is fine. Just expect people not to accept it and move on.
If you want people to accept a reason simply because you said it, when it make little to no sense, that's fine-n-dandy, of course. But you will get push back and disagreement. After all, as I'm sure you know, this is a debate forum, not a 'agree with everything someone says' forum.
In closing, you have answered the question - finally. Thank you for that. Have a great weekend!
Not 'something'. It's something specific, like proving something you believe by faith is true and factual - let's be clear.So you are asking why I have a particular desire to do something.
Now then:
So, are you saying, you can believe anything you want to believe, no matter how stupid it may or not be?If I have that desire because I believe I can see a Pink flamingo dansing the tango at the end of my garden every time I see a boiled egg
Yes, and your supplied text didn't not show that. Now then, if you want to contort your 'understanding' of the text, that's your choice, but expect push back when you're reading the text wrong.you simply asked WHY people feel the need to do something.
Outside of the bible (as there's nothing in the bible that specifically say 'prove others what you believe is factual' that my decades of being a christian has shown) it's simply because you say?
No for a couple of reasonsIf I had replied "because the bible mentions dried figs", has the question not still been answered?
1) dried figs has nothing to do with proving something thought of through faith as factual
2) it doesn't answer the reason why YOU think any way
So then, if I ask "why did jesus die on the cross', you can say "When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal." and everyone is just suppose to sit back and say "Hmm.... yeah... makes total sense!"?If YOU see no link between the reason and my desire, the question has STILL nevertheless been answered, so long as it is MY reason.
Come on. Even for a dedicated bible reader as yourself, you surely can't suspect someone to think that. If so, then you're here only to stroke your own ego. Which is fine. Just expect people not to accept it and move on.
Not at all. First, there no way to know you've been honest - one has to accept it. Second, I said your posted reasoning on the mis-read of the text was incorrect and not valid to the question - as the 'horse example' above is. It's really simple.I answered your question honestly, and yet, from what I can see ...no "thank you".
If you want people to accept a reason simply because you said it, when it make little to no sense, that's fine-n-dandy, of course. But you will get push back and disagreement. After all, as I'm sure you know, this is a debate forum, not a 'agree with everything someone says' forum.
In closing, you have answered the question - finally. Thank you for that. Have a great weekend!
Have a great, potentially godless, day!
- Difflugia
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3016
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 3246 times
- Been thanked: 1996 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #22Are you arguing that JehovahsWitness should read it differently than they do? Whether or not that's true, it doesn't challenge the validity of using that scripture as an answer to your question. Their interpretation of that passage isn't unique and it's often presented as the raison d'être of Christian apologetics, the bulk of which is dedicated to exactly what you're claiming your question was about. Whether or not you think it's a good answer or one that would personally appeal to you, I can't figure out why you keep insisting that it can't apply.nobspeople wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:08 amThe supplied quote says " always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have " There's nothing in that quote that says anything about proving a belief to be factual. It says defend the reason for the hope you have, not make a defense before everyone who demands of you a fact for the hope you have.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21073
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 790 times
- Been thanked: 1114 times
- Contact:
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #23Yes I did indeed answer your question, and I did so in my original post. Here it is again....
JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 2:10 pmI can only speak for myself as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, for me its because I believe it is my Christian responsibility to do so. In short, my reading (my understanding) of the scriptures compels me to do so.nobspeople wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 2:24 pm Why do people feel the need to prove their belief (aka faith) is factual at all?
1 PETER 3:15
But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have ...What I tell you in the darkness, tell in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim on the housetops - JESUS CHRIST
RELATED POSTS
How does proof differ from evidence?
viewtopic.php?p=950455#p950455
PROOF
evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
And my answer has not changed one iota in the course of our exchange.
You are most welcome!
I will and please, have a most excellent weekend yourself.
JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:41 am, edited 4 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #24I don't much care how JW reads it - simply said it's wrong based on the verbatim quote it provided, as it pertains to my specific question.Difflugia wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:30 amAre you arguing that JehovahsWitness should read it differently than they do? Whether or not that's true, it doesn't challenge the validity of using that scripture as an answer to your question. Their interpretation of that passage isn't unique and it's often presented as the raison d'être of Christian apologetics, the bulk of which is dedicated to exactly what you're claiming your question was about. Whether or not you think it's a good answer or one that would personally appeal to you, I can't figure out why you keep insisting that it can't apply.nobspeople wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:08 amThe supplied quote says " always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have " There's nothing in that quote that says anything about proving a belief to be factual. It says defend the reason for the hope you have, not make a defense before everyone who demands of you a fact for the hope you have.
I've already answered your concern a couple of times:
the provided quote is speaking to one's faith, not proving something, believed in through faith, is factual. Which is the exact question.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!
-
- Savant
- Posts: 7952
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 931 times
- Been thanked: 3484 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #25It's a common response from Christian apologists. Initially debates are on presenting the evidence that supports what they believe, then when that is shown not to do so they try to fiddle it so it does. Remember 'Bible apologetics of the Third Kind'?
Evidence
fiddle the evidence
Faith
The final phase is not about convincing anyone else but is about rejecting the evidence that might cause them to doubt and question and That's what is now vital to them.
This can be done in three ways
Fingers in the ears
Start a fight
Flounce.
P.s 'fiddle the evidence' is where all the Fun Stuff happens. That's where we get quotemining (like we recently has a quote from Paul about being good people supposed to imply that good non -Christians get to heaven, but ignoring Paul's insistence that Faith in Jesus is what does it, not being good), inverted logic, like 'skeptics laughed at powered flight' (but it turned out to be true, so don't laugh at claims that volcanoes huffed the koalas from Ararat to Australia as that could turn out to be true, too' (the rebuttal being 'they disbelieved cold fusion too, and they turned out to be right (1), making stuff up like 'The Jews had a plan to kill Paul by handing his over to the Nabatean army' in order to reconcile Paul's account of why he fled Damascus with that in Acts (from my previous forum) and 'Maybe the Marys split up' (for no good reason) just to explain why Matthew says 'they' saw Jesus and Luke says 'they' didn't, which is one we saw here, and the so tiresomely recurring 'the Bile doesn't actually say what it seems to say' (they wrote differently back then, translation -shopping and the 'ghost Bible' (2). We get the 'one shot win', shifting the goalposts, appeal to Authority (that's a Good One ) appeal to bias, 'the great atrocity count' and all sort of fun stuff they call 'philosophy' and we atheists call 'polemical acrobatics'. Arguments like Chrusch traditions of martyred disciples proves that they would not die for a lie. So a Church claim is support for another church claim. 'Epistemology' (how do we know what we know?), science -skepticism, appeal to unknowns (Gap for god) - all sorts of fun stuff.
Then in 'we must agree to differ' (trying to scrape a draw) is getting onto Bible apologetics of the Third Kind 'running away shouting 'I win! 'No use talking to the closed -minded', 'even if God himself came down, Secularists would still doubt' and the good old parthian shot.. 'When Jesus comes with Pow'r, you'll wish you'd listened to me..."
(1) the point goes deeper. they also reserved belief about feathered dinosaurs, black holes and relativity until the evidence piled up and it was accepted as fact. Thus (given that books with apparent historical details should not be dismissed without good reason) the Eden and Ark - scenario (once geology and palaeontology called those into question) should not be believed until validated by evidence. And the evidence has no done so. The Bible -apologist argument that it is true until totally disproven (never mind they reject the disproof anyway) is not the way logic works and is the Faith - based special pleading fallacy.
(2) the Ghost Bible is fascinating, and I wish we could get copies online, but of course we can't because the Ghost Bible exists only in the head of the Bible Apologist and says (or at least Means) what they want it to say rather than what it actually does say. We get an Inkling in quotemining out of context when a Bible passage is cited that seems to support what the Believe it says. But usually, looked at in context, it doesn't. And that leads onto the whole 'prophecy' thing. But there endeth This lesson and not before time.
Evidence
fiddle the evidence
Faith
The final phase is not about convincing anyone else but is about rejecting the evidence that might cause them to doubt and question and That's what is now vital to them.
This can be done in three ways
Fingers in the ears
Start a fight
Flounce.
P.s 'fiddle the evidence' is where all the Fun Stuff happens. That's where we get quotemining (like we recently has a quote from Paul about being good people supposed to imply that good non -Christians get to heaven, but ignoring Paul's insistence that Faith in Jesus is what does it, not being good), inverted logic, like 'skeptics laughed at powered flight' (but it turned out to be true, so don't laugh at claims that volcanoes huffed the koalas from Ararat to Australia as that could turn out to be true, too' (the rebuttal being 'they disbelieved cold fusion too, and they turned out to be right (1), making stuff up like 'The Jews had a plan to kill Paul by handing his over to the Nabatean army' in order to reconcile Paul's account of why he fled Damascus with that in Acts (from my previous forum) and 'Maybe the Marys split up' (for no good reason) just to explain why Matthew says 'they' saw Jesus and Luke says 'they' didn't, which is one we saw here, and the so tiresomely recurring 'the Bile doesn't actually say what it seems to say' (they wrote differently back then, translation -shopping and the 'ghost Bible' (2). We get the 'one shot win', shifting the goalposts, appeal to Authority (that's a Good One ) appeal to bias, 'the great atrocity count' and all sort of fun stuff they call 'philosophy' and we atheists call 'polemical acrobatics'. Arguments like Chrusch traditions of martyred disciples proves that they would not die for a lie. So a Church claim is support for another church claim. 'Epistemology' (how do we know what we know?), science -skepticism, appeal to unknowns (Gap for god) - all sorts of fun stuff.
Then in 'we must agree to differ' (trying to scrape a draw) is getting onto Bible apologetics of the Third Kind 'running away shouting 'I win! 'No use talking to the closed -minded', 'even if God himself came down, Secularists would still doubt' and the good old parthian shot.. 'When Jesus comes with Pow'r, you'll wish you'd listened to me..."
(1) the point goes deeper. they also reserved belief about feathered dinosaurs, black holes and relativity until the evidence piled up and it was accepted as fact. Thus (given that books with apparent historical details should not be dismissed without good reason) the Eden and Ark - scenario (once geology and palaeontology called those into question) should not be believed until validated by evidence. And the evidence has no done so. The Bible -apologist argument that it is true until totally disproven (never mind they reject the disproof anyway) is not the way logic works and is the Faith - based special pleading fallacy.
(2) the Ghost Bible is fascinating, and I wish we could get copies online, but of course we can't because the Ghost Bible exists only in the head of the Bible Apologist and says (or at least Means) what they want it to say rather than what it actually does say. We get an Inkling in quotemining out of context when a Bible passage is cited that seems to support what the Believe it says. But usually, looked at in context, it doesn't. And that leads onto the whole 'prophecy' thing. But there endeth This lesson and not before time.
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14000
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 906 times
- Been thanked: 1629 times
- Contact:
-
- Savant
- Posts: 7952
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 931 times
- Been thanked: 3484 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #27It is the reply to whatever you like. It is a valid observation, whichever. To which I'd add as a general response, proving faith (which really means validating Faith) is necessary because God -belief is Faith -based, even though some believers bay have been convinced that the evidence (scientific, philosophical or historical) supports it, which misinformation we seek to correct here. So, sooner or later, the fall back on Faith as a reason to believe in a god and therefore has to be validated. Though in fact Faith has no valid validation in logical or evidential terms, though it can be a mighty motivator.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2690
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 484 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #28If you can prove that whatever you believe is fact, you can delegitimize every competing belief.Why do people feel the need to prove their belief (aka faith) is factual at all?
But how do Christians justify trying to prove the Christian faith as fact if it's impossible to please God without faith (Hebrews 11:6)?
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 5993
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6607 times
- Been thanked: 3209 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #29Now that sounds a lot like Catch 22. Responses should be interesting, if any are forthcoming.Athetotheist wrote: ↑Sat Dec 11, 2021 3:36 pm But how do Christians justify trying to prove the Christian faith as fact if it's impossible to please God without faith (Hebrews 11:6)?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: Why do people try to prove faith?
Post #30Contradictions never stopped believers before, so.....Athetotheist wrote: ↑Sat Dec 11, 2021 3:36 pmIf you can prove that whatever you believe is fact, you can delegitimize every competing belief.Why do people feel the need to prove their belief (aka faith) is factual at all?
But how do Christians justify trying to prove the Christian faith as fact if it's impossible to please God without faith (Hebrews 11:6)?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!