Faith is belief without evidence?

[Tart]

I never understood this kind of thinking... That is, saying to believe in God is to base your beliefs on faith without evidence... Or to say that there is no evidence of God...

I believe in God because the evidence convinced me beyond doubt, so how does it make sense when someone says there is NO evidence? I believe BECAUSE of the evidence... It might make more sense if they say that the evidence I believe in is false, or something like that, but they dont say that.. They continue to say that there is NO evidence...

I also dont think the definition of Faith: as belief without evidence isnt an accurate use of the word in Christianity... If anyone can show me a verse or passage in the Bible that demonstrates this definition then we can say it is a Christian definition.. But Im not sure if Christianity uses the term "Faith" as to form beliefs without evidence... "Faith" in Christianity is a virtue, it is related to righteousness, and that makes sense... To live righteously is to live faithful in our actions... In fact I think righteousness can be summed up by living faithful, and that goes for everyone... To sin, or to do bad things, make it impossible to live faithfully...

"just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.�(Romans 1:17)

However, Faith is also defined in Hebrews 11:1... Where it says Faith is being assured in the evidence of things not seen... Specifically they use the Greek word "elegchos", which is literally translated as "exposing", and can also be translated as "conviction" or "evidence"..

Are they not saying that Faith is believing in the evidence of things not seen?

I read somewhere that the definition of "Faith: belief without evdience" was actually adopted in the 1950's... That is nearly 2000 years after Christianity has been using the word... Can anyone link "belief without evidence" to "faith" as used in the scripture?


Also, I want to share a quote from a man who is said to be one of the leading, world renown experts on "evidence".. Simon Greenleaf literally wrote the book on "evidence" (called "Treatise on the Law of Evidence"), he founded Harvard Law School, he is an expert on evidence and he was an atheist in this position. He didnt believe in Christianity, didnt believe in God, and thought Jesus's Resurrection was just a legend... So while in this position, Dr. Greenleaf was challenged by his students to investigate the evidence of Christianity, and being an expert on this subject of evidence, he knew what he had to do, namely explore the evidence before making up his mind...

Dr. Greenleaf explored the evidences of Christianity, and is later quoted saying (a quote I 100% agree with in my own beliefs)

"Of the Divine character of the Bible, I think, no man who deals honestly with his own mind and heart can entertain a reasonable doubt, For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study, the result has been a firm and increasing conviction of the authenticity and plenary inspiration of the Bible. It is indeed the Word of God."
~Simon Greenleaf

This is exactly what happen to me from my studying the evidences of Christianity... It convinced me beyond doubt....

So, (for atheists) how do you make sense of this, and say there is no evidence of God? Would it be better to say the evidence of Christianity is false, then to say it is nonexistent?

And (for Christians), do you think your beliefs are based on no evidence? How do you articulate this idea that "Faith" is "belief without evidence"? Do you agree with that or not?

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 114 by Tart]

I know Christianity is true because I can feel God in my life. So when Jesus says "Seek and you will find" that is truth..

And yet, we end up with people like myself, Clownboat and OnceConvinced who DID Seek...but did not find (or in Clownboat's case, believed he had actually found, but now believes he was mistaken, dunno about OC)

Most definitely. For 40 years I believed I had found. However when I began to lose my faith I desperately searched and cried out to God. No response. It was a time of real anguish and pain. For someone like Tart to try to flag that away as insincere is hugely insulting and shows me even more that Christianity is not true. If Tart truly had the holy spirit as any Christian will, she should have been able to discern that I'm not lying.

What does it mean when you say we were never Christians at all? We lived as Christians, we thought as Christians, we believed as Christians...but now that some years later we no longer do, this means that everything else we had done prior does not count?

I don't know about other ex-Christians here but I considered myself "in a relationship with God." There are scriptures that promise that if we do certain things, then that makes us a true Christian. If what Tart is saying is true then here's another list of bible lies:

1 John 1:9
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
(I did this genuinely)

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son so that whosoever shall believe in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
(I truly believed! Heck I was a young kid when I gave my life to Christ. Jesus, himself, teaches that we should come as a child. As a completely gullible child you don't doubt. You have complete and utter faith. If belief and pure faith is not enough then this most famous scripture of all is a complete and utter lie)

Luke 11:13
If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"
(I was baptised in the holy spirit. I asked for it sincerely. If I didn't truly get it then that makes God a lousy father and this scripture a bare-faced lie)

Romans 10:13
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.�
(So all you have to do is call. I called for sure and I cried out to him to be saved time and time again as I lost my faith. What a lie this scripture has turned out to be!)

Acts 2:38
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
So all you have to do is repent. I did this sincerely and regularly asked for forgiveness when I failed. All sincerely.

I really think we're wasting our time trying to debate this with Tart though. Tart is convinced that scripture is true so therefore we must be lying. We of course know we're not.

What if, hypothetically speaking, you become an atheist ten years from now? Are you going to dismiss the you that is a Christian today? Say that 2018 tart was never a Christian at all, since 2028 tart is now an atheist?

That will prove that Tart was never a true Christian and only believed she was. It will show without a shadow of a doubt that her faith was built on very flimsy evidence.

[Tart]

My point is that you dismiss my genuine experience in Christianity as nothing more then my own personal experience... Certainly not evidence of God...

I dont understand how you guys are soo adamant about professing your personal experiences to give credit to Christianity being false, yet you would never accept a Christians personal experiences.... I have said this over and over, yet it makes no difference...

I just dont care about you telling me how genuine of a Christian you use to be... It makes no difference, If Jesus was really the Messiah, came and lived a life according to God's will, fulfilled the destiny of the Messiah, died for the forgiveness of our sins, and was resurrected, then God is true...

The only thing I would say to you, is that if you are really lying (which none of us could know, accept you and God), then I would encourage you to really re-evaluate your entire belief system... Dont bring lies to a discussion about truth...

Other then that, I reserve my right to dismiss your personal experience, as you dismiss mine.... My faith is biult upon the objective evidences of Jesus Christ, as him as the Messiah.

[OnceConvinced]

I certainly dont know other peoples hearts (like God does, at least)! I never claimed to!

Your statement: "This says that by your actions of leaving Christianity, this shows you never belonged to Christianity..."

No. No. THIS SAYS that certain ones in the first century left a group of believers and John judged THEM (the ones who left) to have never been a part of the group, not the person you directed the comment at.

How do you know that the Epistles of John are not about Christianity is general, but only about 1 certain group in the first century?

All one has to do is understand that the letter you were quoting from where it says "they were never part of us" was about a specific bunch of false teachers who had left. It can't possibly be about ex-Christians in general. That just makes no sense in the context of the entire chapter.

If it was meant to mean all ex-Christians, it would have made it quite clear that it was so. It wouldn't just be talking about a specific group of teachers. Not all ex-Christians were teachers are they? And not all ex-Christian-teachers are considered false teachers after they leave. I for one was a sunday school teacher for a number of years. I have also taught as a cell group leader, but no Christian I ever knew has ever claimed that I was a false teacher or an anti-Christ. They knew me... KNOW me better than that. I have even been back to the church since and been welcomed as a fellow Christian.

You also need to see the many other scriptures that show it's possible to be an ex-Christian. I quoted some and you seem to have just ignored them. I'll post them again amongst others:

I Corinthians 9:27
I strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

Heb 6:4-6
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace

This scripture shows us that an ex-Christian cannot be accepted back by God. They had the Holy Spirit in them. They tasted God. Definitely describing an ex-Christian here. This is not a backslider being described here, because we all know that a backslider can return (see story of the prodigal son). This is talking about a genuine ex-TRUE-Christian.

In this next scripture we see that God WILL erase names from the book of life because here he is describing a situation where he wouldn’t:

Rev 3:5
He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

Hebrews 2:1-3
"Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away

I Corinthians 10:11-12
Therefore, let him who thinks he stands, take heed lest he fall."
(A great warning for haughty Christians who believe they can't possibly lose their faith.

Galatians 5:4
"You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace."
(how can someone fall from grace if they weren't a true Christian to begin with??)

2 Peter 2:20-21
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

Judas was the very first ex-Christian. (Acts 1:25) There's no way Jesus would have chosen him as a disciple if he were an anti-Christ.

[OnceConvinced]

My point is that you dismiss my genuine experience in Christianity as nothing more then my own personal experience... Certainly not evidence of God...

I don't think I personaly dismissed your experience, I have simply countered your experiences with mine. So far you haven't really described your experiences. We don't know your story. I however have given you a link to my story.

It's not so much about dismissing your experiences, it's about pointing out that testimonies of people is not very good evidence to build your faith on. It would be silly of me to base my faith on your testimony as there is no way I can confirm your testimony... not that you have given us your testimony as far as I can see.

What I can dismiss though is your preaching. I can counter that preaching with scriptures and also my own experiences. I can point out scriptures that are just clearly not true for me. If they are not true for me and only true for some people like yourself, then how can anyone put in any faith in those scriptures?

I dont understand how you guys are soo adamant about professing your personal experiences to give credit to Christianity being false, yet you would never accept a Christians personal experiences.... I have said this over and over, yet it makes no difference...

I took people's testimonies very seriously as a Christian... until I found out that people's testimonies are not good evidence. Christians are capable of lying, exaggerating and unwittingly passing on inaccurate information.

I just dont care about you telling me how genuine of a Christian you use to be...

Yes, we can see that. It shows a really rotten attitude (hardly a Christian one) and will not get your far on this site. It will not help you establish any respect or integrity when it comes to ex-Christians.

It makes no difference, If Jesus was really the Messiah, came and lived a life according to God's will, fulfilled the destiny of the Messiah, died for the forgiveness of our sins, and was resurrected, then God is true...

Don't you think it's very hypocritical to personally dismiss our experiences yet grumble and groan we are dismissing yours? I would expect more from someone who is supposedly a Christian.

Should we also apply the same logic as you? ie, It makes no difference, If Jesus was really the Messiah, came and lived a life according to God's will, fulfilled the destiny of the Messiah, died for the forgiveness of our sins, and was resurrected, then I would still be a Christian today. The fact that I'm not must mean that God is NOT true.

The only thing I would say to you, is that if you are really lying (which none of us could know, accept you and God),

And if God does exist then I am confident that he knows how genuine I am. Fortunately you are not god, so your opinion about us really doesn't matter.

then I would encourage you to really re-evaluate your entire belief system...

For one thing it was re-evaluating my entire belief system that caused me to become an ex-Christian in the first place. I have evaluated Christianity more than most Christians ever have.

I have also re-evaluated my belief system several times since becoming an ex-Christian and it led me further away from Christianity. I went from Christian to Deist to Agnostic to Atheist. How much more re-evaluation should I do?

Dont bring lies to a discussion about truth...

Who is bringing the lies? Oh my bad, I brought them as soon as I started to quote scriptures.

Other then that, I reserve my right to dismiss your personal experience, as you dismiss mine....

Great Christian attitude there. You are a credit to all Christians.

At least I myself have attempted to give you more information about my personal experiences than you have to us.

My faith is biult upon the objective evidences of Jesus Christ, as him as the Messiah.

So every Christian claims. So I also claimed as a Christian. Is there anything you have to say which isn't parroting other Christians?

[Tart]

I certainly dont know other peoples hearts (like God does, at least)! I never claimed to!

Your statement: "This says that by your actions of leaving Christianity, this shows you never belonged to Christianity..."

No. No. THIS SAYS that certain ones in the first century left a group of believers and John judged THEM (the ones who left) to have never been a part of the group, not the person you directed the comment at.

How do you know that the Epistles of John are not about Christianity is general, but only about 1 certain group in the first century?

All one has to do is understand that the letter you were quoting from where it says "they were never part of us" was about a specific bunch of false teachers who had left. It can't possibly be about ex-Christians in general. That just makes no sense in the context of the entire chapter.

If it was meant to mean all ex-Christians, it would have made it quite clear that it was so. It wouldn't just be talking about a specific group of teachers. Not all ex-Christians were teachers are they? And not all ex-Christian-teachers are considered false teachers after they leave. I for one was a sunday school teacher for a number of years. I have also taught as a cell group leader, but no Christian I ever knew has ever claimed that I was a false teacher or an anti-Christ. They knew me... KNOW me better than that. I have even been back to the church since and been welcomed as a fellow Christian.

You also need to see the many other scriptures that show it's possible to be an ex-Christian. I quoted some and you seem to have just ignored them. I'll post them again amongst others:

I Corinthians 9:27
I strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

Heb 6:4-6
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace

This scripture shows us that an ex-Christian cannot be accepted back by God. They had the Holy Spirit in them. They tasted God. Definitely describing an ex-Christian here. This is not a backslider being described here, because we all know that a backslider can return (see story of the prodigal son). This is talking about a genuine ex-TRUE-Christian.

In this next scripture we see that God WILL erase names from the book of life because here he is describing a situation where he wouldn’t:

Rev 3:5
He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

Hebrews 2:1-3
"Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away

I Corinthians 10:11-12
Therefore, let him who thinks he stands, take heed lest he fall."
(A great warning for haughty Christians who believe they can't possibly lose their faith.

Galatians 5:4
"You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace."
(how can someone fall from grace if they weren't a true Christian to begin with??)

2 Peter 2:20-21
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

Judas was the very first ex-Christian. (Acts 1:25) There's no way Jesus would have chosen him as a disciple if he were an anti-Christ.

Well, if your objective was to convince me that a true christian can fall away from the faith, you have succeeded... In fact, this explains your entire story OC... This is saying true Christians can fall away from the truth, like you... Right?

That explains that...


Also if you read 1 John 2 (verses 18-27), then it is clear they ARE talking about Christianity in general, as many verse make general blanket statements about who has the Son and who doesn't have them... Just like verse 19, which is the verse in question...

[OnceConvinced]

Well, if your objective was to convince me that a true christian can fall away from the faith, you have succeeded... In fact, this explains your entire story OC... This is saying true Christians can fall away from the truth, like you... Right?

Clearly I haven't successed, based on what you said next...

Also if you read 1 John 2 (verses 18-27), then it is clear they ARE talking about Christianity in general,

Non Sequitur

I don't see why that would in anyway change the fact that 1 John is referring to a bunch of false teachers, guys who were never Christians to begin with. It's talking about people who were clearly anti-Christ to begin with. No former Christian was ever anti-Christ while they were Christians.

Did Jesus ever claim that Judas was never a true disciple to begin with? Did he ever say Judas was never one of us? No, even the first Christians still considered him one of the 12 disciples. When scriptures were later written, they were never referred to as the 11 disciples and Judas were they?

Why are you still trying to insist that we ex-Christians were still false Christians to begin with? (Never part of us) Was your first statement you made in this post a blatant lie?

Christianity in general, as many verse make general blanket statements about who has the Son and who doesn't have them... ..

Yeah and you need to take those scriptures in context.

Just like verse 19, which is the verse in question...

There's no way that's a blanket statement about ex-Christians. Anyone should be able to see that if they read the entire chapter. So much for your claim that I convinced you that a true Christian can fall from the faith.

You continue to use that scripture which you have blatantly taken out of context while ignoring the other scriptures I quoted. Why are you doing that?

[Tart]

Well, if your objective was to convince me that a true christian can fall away from the faith, you have succeeded... In fact, this explains your entire story OC... This is saying true Christians can fall away from the truth, like you... Right?

Clearly I haven't successed, based on what you said next...

Also if you read 1 John 2 (verses 18-27), then it is clear they ARE talking about Christianity in general,

Non Sequitur

I don't see why that would in anyway change the fact that 1 John is referring to a bunch of false teachers, guys who were never Christians to begin with. It's talking about people who were clearly anti-Christ to begin with. No former Christian was ever anti-Christ while they were Christians.

Did Jesus ever claim that Judas was never a true disciple to begin with? Did he ever say Judas was never one of us? No, even the first Christians still considered him one of the 12 disciples. When scriptures were later written, they were never referred to as the 11 disciples and Judas were they?

Why are you still trying to insist that we ex-Christians were still false Christians to begin with? (Never part of us) Was your first statement you made in this post a blatant lie?

Christianity in general, as many verse make general blanket statements about who has the Son and who doesn't have them... ..

Yeah and you need to take those scriptures in context.

Just like verse 19, which is the verse in question...

There's no way that's a blanket statement about ex-Christians. Anyone should be able to see that if they read the entire chapter. So much for your claim that I convinced you that a true Christian can fall from the faith.

You continue to use that scripture which you have blatantly taken out of context while ignoring the other scriptures I quoted. Why are you doing that?

Hey OC, I don't claim to have a perfect understanding and interpretation of Christianity... That is what these discussions are for...

That said... Can a true Christian fall away? Based on the scripture you gave, it seems to be that that may be the case... Kind of sad really...

But getting to the 1 John 2:18-27, It seems to me that this passage is making general statements about Christianity.

"22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father"


This is explaining someone who is the spirit of the "antichrist", which is what it looks like verse 19 is talking about, as even verse 18 uses the term. The same term that verse 22 makes as a general statement for all of Christianity, opposed to some certain group like you are asserting...


See I am willing to redefine my belief, because I believe the Bible is true. and worthy of correcting false beliefs...

That said, I see no reason to believe 1 John 2:19 is about a specific group, and more-so I see reason to believe this is a general prophecy about non-Christian/false teachers, or those of the spirit of the antichrist...

What makes you neglect the rest of the passage's general statements of those of the Faith of Christianity, and come to the conclusion that this is a specific group? Even when it is talking about people of the antichrist, which is a general statement for those who deny Christ?? How can you say this is of a specific group, it seems pretty clearly not to be the case.

[Tart]

[Replying to post 126 by OnceConvinced]

Should we also apply the same logic as you? ie, It makes no difference, If Jesus was really the Messiah, came and lived a life according to God's will, fulfilled the destiny of the Messiah, died for the forgiveness of our sins, and was resurrected, then I would still be a Christian today. The fact that I'm not must mean that God is NOT true.

You can certainly take my words, and "apply the same logic" making them yours, although i would suggest being genuine in what you say...

So you dont believe Jesus was the Messiah? Crucified for our sins, and resurrected by God?

What led you to come to that conclusion?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 128 by Tart]

Hmmm. Would the Romans really crucify someone for our sins?

Lets review the story.
Let's see, claims of healing the sick, raising the dead, etc., with no verification.

I can see how that would irritate sincerely religious people.

People who shouldn't give two figs about him conspiring against him, kind of like Flo and the "name your own price tool" commercial.

People who shouldn't defer to him asking what they should do with an adulterer, and him telling them to violate the punishment prescribed by God.
Yeah, why would anybody ask a virtual vagabond how to punish someone? Do we ask Billy Graham about whom to imprison? Weird.
But, since he abrogated the punishment, I can see how that would irritate law-giving priests.
I mean, now they had to kill the adulterer against popular opinion.
Then, there is the bit about paying the God Caesar his tithes (coins with the graven images of the Goddess Pax), before they give to the God God. I can see how that would irritate. I think that is violation of three kinds of Commandments.

So they killed him for being an unlawful judge and encouraging blasphemy.
I see nothing in the story about him dying for our sins...

Perhaps you can show us where Jesus said, "I'm going out to die for your sins now, I'll be back in about three days."

[Tart]

[Replying to Willum]

Hmmm... So you think the Bible is reliable testimony about Jesus? At least to the extent of what confirms your own beliefs?

At what point does it go from being reliable testimony about Jesus, to false testimony? According to you?