I read a science article recently that showed with MRI studies that people with strong religious beliefs use the same parts of their brain that interpret reality. What I mean is that their religion is as real to them as the sky is blue to any other observer. Most people when confronted with esoterica tend to contemplate and hold a debate within their mind on the merits of whatever it is they are exploring. So a person looking at something as nebulous as faith will juggle and spin and contemplate, but won’t really hold it in their minds as irrifutible truth. But people of strong faith will hold unproven or illogical belief AS irrifutible truth. That’s why when a “Bible Believer” tries to argue something from the point of view of the Bible and you point out that the Bible isn’t proven fact.. their response is usually “Well the Bible says” in some kind of crazy circular logic. Debate just doesn’t compute with this type of mind.
We who believe DO see the Bible as generally, "irrefutable Truth." But Steve is mistaken to refer to our beliefs as "illogical" or beyond debate. I'll debate. There is rationale to my faith. Granted, not all believers have questioned or examined their faith, but grads of Christian colleges take at least one required course on "the case for Christianity" and may still read C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity. This author of the Narnia series, Christian allegory for children, was an atheist and he explained his rationale for faith --his history of coming to faith --in a radio series on the BBC which became the book, Mere Christianity. I believe it is John Stott who also wrote a book we studied which was called "The Case for Christianity" on basic Christian beliefs and the rationale and history behind them. Today, there are many good Christian apologists who present a rationale for faith.
It is not unreasonable --when looking at a blue sky and marvelling that your eyes have the capacity to interpret colors and your spirit has the capacity to marvel and enjoy the sight --to conclude that somebody lovingly made our bodies --our eyes --and the colors for us to see. No accidents of evolution.
It is not unreasonable when contemplating the vast universe --and then our tiny earth with us tiny people on it --to conclude that there is a vast intelligence behind our existance --and to find it reasonable that this intelligence made --and would commune with-- humans --who are complex, creative, marvelous, intelligent beings.
It was not unreasonable for the disciples of Jesus to believe in Him enough to die for Him --after seeing Him and hearing Him AFTER the crucifixion --AFTER He had died --AFTER He was seen alive again!! Hallelujah!!!
Even the educated, brilliant persecutor of Christians named Saul, later St. Paul, believed in the resurrected Christ though He had not known Him in the flesh. He saw His miracles in his own life --Saul heard His VOICE identifying Himself as Jesus and was blinded by him for 3 days --and then became a foremost missionary of the Gospel. An irrational man? Hardly!
Yes, I'm using the Bible to reinforce my faith in Christ --because it is the Bible where the story is found. But there IS evidence beyond the book itself --it's found in the ongoing existance and good works of the Church of JEsus Christ which dates to the first disciples and the first century --and the presence of God we feel in our souls when we have truly repented and placed our trust in Him.
Yes, indeed, it HELPS to have such faith cultivated in our minds as children--but we have seen many adults --like St. Paul --become convinced and transformed as adults.
The changed life of a believer is a strong evidence to the presence of God in his life. Like my husband's grandfather who kicked a smoking habit in one day when he converted to Christianity as an adult.
Sometimes, the Holy Spirit touches you and you just can't deny the reality of the experience.
Jesus said, 13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
34 comments:
I think it is always interesting when people want Christians to be open minded, yet they won't do the very thing that supposedly annoys them. We are asked to believe in the possibility of no God, well then I would ask them to believe in the possibility of a God.
There you go again, Mudrake, showing your Germanic, Nazi-like roots --belittling those brilliant, gifted Jews who endure to this day.
BTW, Mudrake, DO you pass your unbelief unto your children and grandchildren --or do you live a double-life --re: church, etc.?
I believe in the Resurrection and the miracles because the NT people and writers did. Why would so many writers connive to make up such stories as those about Christ? He didn't write about Himself; THEY did --as eye witnesses and those fully convinced of their own experiences.
I believe their testimony; I find it credible. It reads like HISTORY --not fiction. It was not intended to be fiction.
"By the way, I have some very nice land in Florida that is ½ off this week. Contact me if you want to buy it, but I can't show you where it is or what it is near, or what is growing on it, or how the drainage works, or what is built next to it, but it's a 'heavenly spot,' trust me."
This only proves that believing in God takes a great deal of faith, which I already know. Thanks for your patience in waiting for a response.
I don't have to go back thousands of years to see evidence for a loving God. Just last month I was in Costa Rica and saw many miracles and healings as my team ministered on the streets of San Miguel.
The gospel was not meant to be preached apart from signs and miracles. The reason why most American's have a hard time believing in God is they have never seen a true manifestation of his power. Get outside the country Muddy and experience something no blog can show you.
Here is a crusade my friend Stephen attended last year in Lagos...
Lagos Crusade
God loves you very much, and if you humble yourself before him, even now as you read the words, he can heal your heart, touch your body, and bless your life.
Always a pleasure reasoning with you, although reasoning is the language of the mind. I like to speak the language of the heart (faith, hope, and love)....
Hi everyone, been busy this week.
Mud_Rake,
if Christians were to "prove" our faith by observable standards (i.e. the scientific method), it would prove that faith in the supernatural is *materially based*...which is to say, it would be proof that Christianity is wrong. Why would any of us want to prove we're wrong? Obviously we have a different standard for truth than you do, which is the very nature of the debate...so let's consider, is Mud_Rake reasoning in a circular fashion?
You assume there is cause and effect...that there are laws of nature...that when you stub your toe on Tuesday, doing the same thing on Friday will still hurt.
How do you justify those sorts of beliefs? How do you demonstrate that the future will always be like the past? You do it through the scientific method...the scientific method rests on the notion that nature is uniform and acts in predictable ways...to "prove" that, you can only appeal to the very thing you're supposed to be proving.
(which, btw, is circular reasoning)
You can't take a single instance of experience and universalize it unless you've already assumed a network of beliefs which include an un-observable standard of uniformity.
Mud_Rake,
you've been to my blog, harassed me...and then left due to your inability to grapple with philosophical arguments.
Atheists love to talk about "logic" and "science", but once anyone begins pointing out inherent circularity to it, the atheist runs away like a 3 year old.
What I've pointed out was noted, not by Christians, but by David Hume.
What fellowship can light have with darkness?
We try out of Christian love to reach out.
I know it's none of my business and makes it a little more time-consuming, but why don't you enable comment moderation so you can delete Mudrake's calls for attention that he puts out every day?
Just a thought.
Just because you choose something to be right or a perceived good, doesn't mean that it is right or good.
It is almost a given that when we think of the concepts of hope and faith that those words carry a certain moral resonance and have a connotation of virtue. But is hope and faith really a virtue?
I remember a few years ago, My wife and I went on vacation in Washington D.C. and we visited the holocaust museum. As you tour through the holocaust museum you are invited to watch clips of interviews with holocaust survivors. One of the things I remember most about this visit was watching two back to back video interviews of different people who had escaped the death camps. The first clip was from an elderly gentleman who had survived, but he had survived with a palpable bitterness. He was bitter at the concepts of hope and faith of all things; and his anger resonated. He went on that hope and faith are enemies of the mind because they lull you into a sense of inaction. Many Jews held out hope that somehow, someway, something would intervene on their behalf. And they carried that hope with them into the gas chambers and their hope was buried with them in the seas of unmarked graves. This gentleman reasoned that if the Jews had recognized the hopelessness of their plight and saw reality for what it was, maybe they as a collective group could have taken action, either to escape, or to put up a fight. The next survivor interviewed was another man, a very devout Jew who said that the only reason he survived the death camp was BECAUSE of his very strong faith and in his hope for the future. What this says to me is that hope and faith on an individual level are powerful motivators of human will, and enable humans to endure almost anything. But on a collective level, hope and faith can be a hindrance to progressive action and a roadblock to achieving the common good.
>>Continued>>
So as I watch the video of the sea of impoverished Nigerians exercising all their hope and faith I couldn't help but wonder about their return to their squalor and poverty after the revival. The tents are dropped, the wealthy evangelist hops on his jet and goes home. But the Nigerians are left earning their few dollars a day writing scam email in Internet kiosks and not being able to feed their families. They've been lulled into inaction by hope and faith. Could you imagine that army, that sea of people rising up against their corrupt government, the government that robs them of all the aid money funneled into their country, all the oil money ect... OK, so I'm being a Barabas and seeing "things of this world". But this is the world we live in, a world of reality, of cause and effect.
So far nobody has contradicted my view that there is no logical foundation to faith, and that to try to prove faith by relying on a faith based book.. is circular logic. And the only reason I brought that up on Mudrakes blog is that it has been scientifically shown that people with strong faith view their faith as fact. The point that I was trying to make is that I would have a very hard time trying to convince somebody that the sky was green.. I would have an equally hard time with trying to convince a person of strong faith that their faith might be false, or might contain errors. It's not going to happen. (so why am I wasting my time writing this novel when I should be studying?)
I agree with Craig, that faith should not be presented as logic, or held to any kind of observable standard, that would be contrary to the virtues of faith.
The difference between faith and science as far as I am concerned is that faith is always satisfied with the answer, always accepting of whatever concepts presented by whatever the particular faith -at face value. The doctrines are never questioned. The moralities and ethics presented by the faith never questioned. It's all just accepted as proven truth in a matter of fact way. Just trust in Jesus.. and then the next thing you know you are viewing the genocidal slaughter of the various tribes of Caanan by the wandering tribes of Israel as a virtue. You even begin to almost palpably hate those Hittites, and Amorites, and Philistines, even though you don't have the foggiest of idea of who or what they actually were. They killed every man, woman, and child.. and it was good. And God relished in the smoting. That has always just bugged the crap out of me.. I don't think I can ever get over that. And the whole blood sacrifice? I could go on and on.. It all just seems insane to me. I guess "unreasonable" is the word that comes to mind.
>>continued>>
Science on the other hand is never accepting of the status quo and is always searching for a better answer. Science is constantly evaluating itself as new discoveries present themselves and is in a constant state of revision. Faith constantly stands in the way of progress and reason only to be proven wrong again and again. Take evolution for example. Faith is constantly railing against evolution, but science has moved beyond that debate and is USING and harnessing the power of evolution as a tool in making better drugs, better biologic systems. Science is busy harnessing the very essence of life and is on the verge of creating artificial life, artificial neuro networks ect.. and faith just stands by dumbfounded at what is happening. At least the catholic church has recognized that you cannot stand in the way of reason very long without getting run over. They are still licking their wounds from the whole Galileo and Copernicus black eye. So the Catholic church has embraced evolution and is much more flexible in dealing with the exponentially quickening pace of scientific discovery.
Personally I'm not an atheist. I believe that there is an intelligence to the universe and that all things that I know about the universe, about life, about science has led me to believe in this overriding synchronicity of existence. For me, all the impossible statistics and all the flood of diversity and order and clockwork amongst chaos point in the direction of an intelligent creator. But I'm humble enough to say that I don't know.. I don't know if there is a creator, I suspect there is; I'd like there to be, but I just don't know. I think we as humans get tied up in our beliefs and those beliefs become a part of our self esteem. We want others to believe like we do because then that gives credibility to our beliefs. Believers the world over go thru varying degrees of animosity toward one another because belief, or lack of belief on another's part is uncomfortable, it's threatening; it brings on doubts. It makes us wonder and think- It highlights our mortality and makes us unsure of the unknown. It's hard for us to stomach differing beliefs. So humans lash out at the others.. from nasty blog posts to exploding vests. Belief / religion, apart from spirituality, has become an evil in this world in my opinion. Fear of the other.. it's tribal.. it's evolutionary.
In the video - like I mentioned, the mega rich evangelist is going back home to his lap of luxury, while those million plus Nigerians are going back to their corrugated shanty... Doesn't something seem kind of crass and exploitative in that? The evangelist in the video is Reinard Bonnke, whose annual income is over THIRTEEN MILLION DOLLARS.
According to this Fact Sheet:
http://www.prettygoodnews.com/salary_peer_reviews/Jan_2008_salary_study_final.pdf
and ministry watch doesn't take a very positive view of him as well.
Just because you choose something to be right or a perceived good, doesn't mean that it is right or good.
Of course. But if the Bible says something is right or good, is it not? Barring those differences between eye for an eye justice and mercy --we know from Christ that mercy is for us to give --but that there will be justice for unrepented sin in the judgment. So while we ARE to turn the other cheek personally, we are also to fight for the right, I believe, when force is needed to squelch the bully.
It is almost a given that when we think of the concepts of hope and faith that those words carry a certain moral resonance and have a connotation of virtue. But is hope and faith really a virtue?
Depends on where we place our hope and faith, obviously! Hope in ourselves as the masters of our fate --that is sin --insofar that such hope exceeds the virtue of self-reliance with the help of God.
I believe there is a time to put faith and hope to action. That's why I personally am not a pacifist. I think there is a time for just war and armies who rise up --not for Hitler's nationalistic, racist, power-seeking reasons --but to set free captives, to take down tyrants, to establish liberty, to stop evil movements in the world, to establish religious freedom for the spread of the Gospel truth about Christ --led by God, with God's aid.
I think I like Law and Order, the tv show, because the bad guys get their just desserts usually --and get stopped.
So far nobody has contradicted my view that there is no logical foundation to faith, and that to try to prove faith by relying on a faith based book.. is circular logic.
Perhaps, if the world lasts another 2000 years, and if our historical documents suffer from wars and natural disasters, perhaps there will be those who doubt that the nation America ever existed as the prosperous beacon of liberty that it has been --perhaps they will think Abe Lincoln's story and assassination were myths.
I just don't think the Gospel of Christ would have gotten off the ground under Roman control if there were not eye witnesses to the Crucifixion and miracles who convinced their own generation --who convinced the next --and the next -and the next --for just 21 centuries -- the lifetimes of 21 men who were centenarians born every 100 years since Christ. I don't know why these first century men who obviously really did establish Christianity would risk being put to death after Christ if they hadn't seen and heard Christ after His resurrection. They might have promoted his teachings --a love-based Christianity --but why risk dying for a claim that you saw the risen Christ 3 days after His death??? if it didn't happen? Why be so convinced that there is life after death through this resurrected man if you never saw Him? Why die to proclaim that message? Why so many writers involved in telling the story and teaching the first believers? Not just one man claiming an angelic inspiration like Mohammad and Joseph smith.
We understand that people die for Mohammad today --but why did the first Muslims convert? Because they listened to one man who had NOT resurrected --who debunked Jesus as a mere prophet who ascended into Heaven from a rooftop without dying --and many converted because of the threat of the sword. They had inherited hatred of Jews but shared their history. They converted because of the message: Convert or die. His angelic inspiration started with the Abrahamic history and then took a turn away from the New Testament account of Christ's death and resurrection--and you can see what the result is in every Muslim country.
Whereas Christians converted in spite of the fear of the sword, not because of it. And their result historically and internationally has been to bring enlightenment and freedom, values of life and equality and humaneness.
I agree with Craig, that faith should not be presented as logic, or held to any kind of observable standard, that would be contrary to the virtues of faith.
But the writings of Christian apologists have helped some come to faith --because there is a rationale for faith. Of course, we don't all think we would've come up with God's plan of salvation, the atonement for sin by one man--or the possibility that we could sin and thus become mortal as Adam and Eve did. We might create a different world story and plan if we were God --but we aren't. Our logic is irrelevant to the supposed facts.
As for God's dealings with the ancestors of the Canaanites vs. the Jews. Watch the Smithsonian programs on WWII --and see the inhumanity to man that the Japanese, the Germans, and Mussolini's armies perpetrated on the world --man to man, nation to nation. Just 70 years ago. Faith and Hope did take action to stop the horrors of that war. And they were horrors. That is the kind of world --the kind of nations --that God had no hope for Himself when He told the Jews to clear their path to their Promised Land.
It is a story --and God writes His half --and humans write the other as they either sin or do God's will.
I'm not sure that the picture of God's nature is clear in the OT --there are some perplexities in the Jewish scriptures. If it were clear, Christ would not have been the clearer image of God that He claimed to be and was --and Paul says that even yet, we see through a glass darkly, but some day shall know God face to face.
Faith and Reason, if they are to be useful in any way, must be used together. Using one in exclusion of the other leads to disaster or futility. Descartes demonstrated long ago that the only thing a man can know using reason alone is that he exists. Trusting our senses in any way is an act of faith. It is not necessarily humility to say 'I dont know'. It is the paralyzing fear that comes from the loss of faith. You are unable to venture out into the darkness that lies beyond what you already know and are familiar with. There is beauty and majesty out there which cannot be explained to another. You have to experience them for yourself, and you can only get there if you are willing to use more than mere reason.
It is faith that the scientist uses when he comes up with a hypothesis to explain a strange set of facts.
It is reason that the theologian uses when he searches the Holy Scriptures for Truth.
They are Yin and Yang, man and woman. Neither are complete without the other.
"So far nobody has contradicted my view that there is no logical foundation to faith, and that to try to prove faith by relying on a faith based book.. is circular logic."
Some (i.e. me)consider faith to be prior to logic.
I encourage you to work out your belief that logic is foundational...can you justify logic without using logic? If you CAN, logic isn't foundational (thereby making it self-refuting)...if you CAN'T justify logic apart from using logic, then your reasoning is itself, circular...by your standard, that would make reason illogical.
I'm not sure that what you are saying is an accurate representation of logic. To me, logic is mathematical - and is true the entire universe over: you can not divide by zero; E=MC2; A carbon atom has 4 electrons. These representations of the world are foundational and observable. I can look at the sky and know that it is blue.. that is the foundation of my logic concerning the sky.. I can then use math to understand that the sky is blue because the oxygen in the atmosphere absorbs and filters certain wavelengths of light. I don't have to jump to any conclusions, or go out on any limbs, or create phantoms in my mind to have a foundational and logical understanding of the workings of the universe. As the tools in my scientific tool box grow larger as research progresses.. I can refine my logic and my understanding of why the sky is blue.. but the foundation remains.. the sky is blue. Faith lacks this foundational logic that is present in the observable universe. Just because Joseph Smith found some stones and somehow these stones told him that Jesus visited the United States and he is now a latter day saint.. Doesn't make it true.
Thanks very much for making me think about this, LOL.. I especially appreciated Christian Apologists poetic look at faith and reason -> good stuff.
Steve,
whether you think logic is mathematical or not, it makes no difference. In order to justify logic, you must *use* logic...which is popularly known as "begging the question" or "circular logic".
When logic becomes ultimate, it ceases to be logical. To use your words: "People of strong faith will hold to their unproven notion of Logic as irrefutable truth...these people then try to argue for their notion of Logic by pointing back to logic and say 'well logic says' in some kind of crazy circular fashion. Debate just doesn't compute with this type of mind."
Most Christians, CA, would not say their faith is logically irrefutable --we can't prove the resurrection of Jesus or His deity --or that the Bible is truly the inspired Word of the Creator/Master of the Universe --but there is a good RATIONALE for faith in these tenets of Judeo-Christianity. And the faith becomes certainty in the mind of the believer --through the ministry of the Holy Spirit to our souls. "God's Spirit bears witness with ours." "I know who I have believed, and am persuaded..."
I meant CF -not CA.
Barb: "Most Christians, CF, would not say their faith is logically irrefutable"
Me: I agree, most Christians would not say that.
Barb: "we can't prove the resurrection of Jesus or His deity"
Me: Sure we can. The Bible.
Barb: "or that the Bible is truly the inspired Word of the Creator/Master of the Universe"
Me: We have the Holy Spirit.
Barb: "And the faith becomes certainty in the mind of the believer --through the ministry of the Holy Spirit to our souls."
Me: Absolutely agreed. 1 John 5:6b-7
"And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one."
No other witness is needed when God is His own witness. There is no other standard.
Yes, we agree --but
while the Bible is truth to you and me -- it is logical that we should believe the Truth.
But it has to be taken by faith that the Bible is true --just as we take it by faith that the written history of the Civil War and Abe Lincoln's assassination are true --happening over 100 years ago.
It is perfectly rational that we should believe the Bible --just as we believe most of our American history books. So many testified to the resurrection of Christ --what could have been the rationale for these writers to make it up as a lie, knowing it would likely get them crucified, too?
"But it has to be taken by faith that the Bible is true"
Precisely.
"just as we take it by faith that the written history of the Civil War and Abe Lincoln's assassination are true"
Not really...that would make the Bible no different than a history book, and our claim is that it is the unique written Word of God.
It seems we disagree over the role of reason to the faith. I say we reason by faith. I'm thinking we'll simply disagree on what this looks like or means :)
Believing in the truth of the bible is more reason than faith. For one it testifies for itself that it is the word of God. In an American court of law, personal testimony is considered true unless it can be shown that the character of the witness is flawed. Furthermore the Bible makes predictions about the results of obedience to what it says. I have found that when applied it turns out that these predictions are consistently true if properly obeyed. This is the standard scientific method for verification of an hypothesis.
Reasoning requires faith, Aaron. You cannot observe a relationship between your obedience and the word of God. I agree that there is a relationship, I simply defer to the authority of God.
God does confirm His Word in many ways, however, when He made covenant with Abraham He confirmed His Word by swearing by Himself...any other confirmation is good, but is secondary. We are saved by grace througb faith...faith which is rooted in secondary evidence will eventually die unless it is ultimately rooted in God.
Is the Bible secondary evidence? I think you would say not, CF.
Our faith is in the written Word first? --and thus in the Living Word revealed therein. Or is it in the Living Word evidenced by His creation.
Either way, "Faith is the Victory! that overcomes the world."
It is logical to believe that book --even though people can have a rationale for unbelief.
I really don't see much disagreement here --and think Jesus might say we were straining at gnats over the words logic, reason, faith, truth, etc.
When we all basically agree.
And on to a most important subject of agreement:
HE IS RISEN!!
Barb,
I do think you're correct:
We'd be straining gnats by going on about it.
I do want Steve to see that his criticism re: circular reasoning comes back to bite him...he reasons by a certain set of beliefs, beliefs that cannot be verified by the standard he thinks is foundational lest he succumb to the very error he criticizes Christians over.
Reasoning requires faith, Aaron.
I totally agree which is what I have already stated above.
You cannot observe a relationship between your obedience and the word of God.
Patently untrue. I can and I have. You may deny my evidences due to their subjective nature but the fact is that God has confirmed his faithfullness in my life in many ways.
I agree that there is a relationship, I simply defer to the authority of God.
God does confirm His Word in many ways, however, when He made covenant with Abraham He confirmed His Word by swearing by Himself...any other confirmation is good, but is secondary. We are saved by grace througb faith...faith which is rooted in secondary evidence will eventually die unless it is ultimately rooted in God.
I John 4:12-16
No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.
We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.
True faith in God brings with it assurances from the Holy Spirit that we are his children and that he abides with us. This is not secondary evidence but primary.
However, it is subjective evidence in that we can't make other people experience what we have experienced by merely telling them about it. They have to knock, seek, and ask for themselves to experience the faith that is a Gift from God. And it then becomes evidence for all who believe.
Post a Comment