Never got anyone to address this part of my last question.?

Question

If believers are said to have faith, and many call this blind faith regardless of the believers response being grounded in what he/she deems to be the evidence they have to justify their belief, isn't it the same thing in regards to unbelievers having faith that there is no God, and this being blind faith as well since we are all in agreement that God cannot be proven or disproven? Doesn't it largely depend on what someone may be predisposed to believe?
If I want there to be a God< I will see the evidence in support of His existence. If I don't want there to be a God then I will see the evidence in that support.

The Bible tells us to be ready to give an answer to those who ask for the hope that is within you. It also tells us to search the scriptures. The Apostle Paul reasoned with Felix concerning his faith. In several places in scripture Jesus reasoned with people. In Romans we are told that everyone is without excuse. This would be a meaningless statement if it were true that we have no evidence to support the claims of Christianity. It just seems as if so many take a position of blind belief if there are deep questions concerning their faith that they are not yet able to find an answer for. And the unbelievers discount the evidence of subjective experience which cannot be passed on to them in a way that they can understand unless they are open to subjecting themselves to the same experience.

The Bible tells us to be ready to give an answer to those who ask for the hope that is within you. It also tells us to search the scriptures. The Apostle Paul reasoned with Felix concerning his faith. In several places in scripture Jesus reasoned with people. In Romans we are told that everyone is without excuse. This would be a meaningless statement if it were true that we have no evidence to support the claims of Christianity. It just seems as if so many take a position of blind belief if there are deep questions concerning their faith that they are not yet able to find an answer for. And the unbelievers discount the evidence of subjective experience which cannot be passed on to them in a way that they can understand unless they are open to subjecting themselves to the same experience.

Oops ...sorry about the double entry.
There are alot of well thought out answers here on both sides of the question. Thank you all for the lack of derogatory responses. I am a Christian and was hoping to open an interesting and fruitful debate.
Yours in Christ..........Roy

Answer 1

A good question!

I totally respect your agnostic (and critical) point of view. You're in luck, in that God wants us to "be discerning".

Faith is a tricky subject, especially to us modern people who are well versed in the ways of science and critical thinking.

The way I learned it is this; faith is a gift. Faith is an opportunity to show devotion to God (making Him #1 in your life, I mean) without Him constantly showing Himself as a pillar of fire in the sky or whatever. If He did, wouldn't that be "certainty" instead of "faith"? He doesn't want cowering, obedient followers. He wants us to come to Him of our own choice.

It's an opportunity. It is something that exists wholly apart from this world, which according to Jesus "lies in the power of the wicked one".

Anyway, here's a book if you want a good read, "The Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel. He's a legal investigator who set out to disprove the existence of Christ, and wound up a Christian. He asks the tough questions of the best scholars in the world:

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Faith-Investigates-Objections-Christianity/dp/0310234697/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b/002-5138636-9664861?ie=UTF8

Send me an email or IM me if you want to talk further. Good luck. You're asking the right questions, imho.

Answer 2

So if I believe in the man on the moon, I will see proof of his existence?? If that is the case, then if I really believe in something, I can make it happen. Predisposed huh? So since my mother and father and grandparents are non christians, I should be a non christian.

You would have to say that living things can be created out of non living things. Out of a great implosion, life was borne. Not many different kinds of life, one kind, that became many different species of animal and man. All from one single little amoeba. The universe, where did it come from, an amoeba too? Maybe the same amoeba. Can I ask you a question? How did the bee learn to go to the flowers and take pollen? Were hundreds of bees starving and one bee said that flower looks so pretty, I think I will eat it. How did river clams know that only one specie of fish could carry its young clams.

I guess I could never say anything to get you to believe in God, everything written could never make you believe. I guess you will have to wait until you die to find out the truth. But then it will be too late. The Bible tells us that when judgment day comes, every knee will bow, I hope you recognize the Savior before that day.

Answer 3

You use the word evidence-in the case of Christianity evidence doesn't enter the equation because it is founded on a divine revelation based on faith in holy scripture. Disbelief i.e. weak atheism is the default position because it is correct to disbelieve in any given proposition when there is no compelling proof that it is true, so no, disbelievers are not the same as believers because disbelief is a philosophically sound position to take whereas belief relies on proofs which are usually unsound from a philosophical viewpoint.

Answer 4

I wouldn't use the word predisposed to believe. Believing in and having faith in God is a choice. Some people say that having faith in God gives them hope. It is better to have hope than feel hopeless. When people do big research projects they can swing the evidence one way or another depending on what they are striving to do, or what their goal is. People can look at a glass of water -- one person says the glass is half empty and the other says it's half full. Each person is able to substantiate their response. A believer and a non-believer can substantiate their choice.

Answer 5

yes its true, blind faith is blind faith. Regardless of what your faith is. As far as predisposition, not necessarily. This can be disproven by children largely. A lot of children coming from atheist or non religious homes have had visions of God or msgrs. Children are the easiest example of course. I as a child had an experience of that type, yet I still lived my life as a non believer until I was in my early 20's. When my faith (not blindly however) was renewed. So some of your argument does have merit, it can be disproven. Nothing in life is Absolute, even death and taxes!! lol .

Answer 6

You got an answer... you just didn't understand it.

Knowledge is an accumulation of evidence, in the form of facts. Knowledge is understood to be provisional... it may change as additional facts are accumulated... however, until those new facts are in evidence, it would be perverse to withhold conditional approval. It has absolutely nothing to do with 'belief'.

'Belief' is a SUBSTITUTE for knowledge. It is not supported by FACTS, or EVIDENCE... it is supported by wishful, magical thinking... i.e., 'FAITH'. Belief, then, is the unsubstantiated certainty that your ideations map to reality. Lets analyze that:

faith + belief ---> willful ignorance and self-delusion

Rational people rely on evidence - facts - knowledge... provisional acceptance of facts. Rational people reject 'belief'... belief is stupid and irrelevant. What is, IS... whether you believe it or not. Belief is an insidious mind-killer... it cuts one off from the open-minded (willing to consider alternative possibilities) and intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own assumptions) consideration and evaluation of alternative possibilities.

To think that 'faith' (wishful, magical thinking) is an element in a rational person's rejection of belief in some deity, for which there are no verifiable facts in evidence, is BEYOND preposterous. It is downright stupid

Answer 7

I've heard it said that faith is "the substance of things hoped for." or "the evidence of things unseen." Blind faith is kind of saying the same thing twice. I do feel that it is the same thing no matter if people believe in God or not. It's what backs up your belief. Evidence or no evidence.

Answer 8

But that's the thing with every faith or believe....you have to devote and feel that yes there is a god or diety.....to truly belive you feel or hope for a god.

My grandfater was a priest and he was in the faith. One day he read this book (I only wish I knew what it was ) and he expressed ideas that were in the book and he belived to his followers and he was kicked out of the church by the patrions.... and now he don't belive enough ever to go back to religion and my grandmother and her family attened or is still attending church..... so take your pick my friend.... in the end it's just what a person belives....

Answer 9

Yes, being athiest requires faith that there is no God, just as believing requires faith that there is. There is no proof either way.

There IS however a difference in the type of faith. Followers believe in statements made having no idea (or ignoring) their origins. They've listened to what can really only be described as rumor.

Athiests often base their disbeleif on their disapproval of people's willingness to believe rumor. They want investigation, they want evidence...and will not believe until more effort has been taken by those who believe, and more evidence is turned up.

Think of it as a revolt against the idea, "Believe because we say so"

Answer 10

To the last two sentences, Yes. I just disagree that non believers have faith because faith requires believing in something, and unbelievers have nothing to believe in. My opinion.