is showing faith admitting that you dont know 100% that god exists? if so, then arent you agnostic deep down inside?
2007-03-03 14:43:08 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
oops, its supposed to be "knowing that >god< exists and faith", oh well...
2007-03-03 14:47:41 · update #1
monica : i'll be honest with you, ive proven to myself that god doesnt exsist. i even try to convince you guys, but obviously, as you are still christians, you just didnt really listen.
2007-03-03 14:52:48 · update #2
sunman : "betting" 100% that god exists? betting with who? is there some kinda afterlife lotto? you have to bet >against< someone, and thats not what faith is, i assure you.
2007-03-03 14:55:17 · update #3
In those terms, faith, if understood and utilized correctly, is betting 100% that god exists.
-----By 'betting', I mean that all of life is a gamble and there are no guarantees. We're not betting AGAINST someone in these matters.(at least I'm not) We're decidng to believe in a greater reality and identity. Agnostics
haven't decided where to place their bets yet.
2007-03-03 14:48:40 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Agnostic is not too bad. It's a much more flexible, and I think, honest position than trying desperately to convince oneself.
There is no conclusive proof of the existence or non-existence of God. While there may be people who find it necessary to declare their belief in one or the other of these positions, it is much more sensible to keep an open mind.
I have come to the conclusion, after much thought and study, that we cannot know the infinite. The infinite is too much for us to think of, and as such, frightens us. I think that out of that fear, many religions try to define the infinite. Given that we cannot comprehend the infinite, our attempts to define the infinite end by limiting, containing, enclosing the infinite.
We invent a set of rules by which "God" must behave, and thus make "God" comfortable to us. We suspect, I think, that what we have invented is insufficient to hold "God" and when someone presents us with an alternate point of view, we cling to our narrow definitions and attack the other point of view as "heresy."
I think it's time for a new idea, as our world gets smaller. I think we need to let "God" out of the little boxes we've built for him and learn to see our fellow human beings as ourselves.
2007-03-03 15:02:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
knowing does not exist independent of all things, but is known through the capacity of a knower.
Personally, I think that faith is knowing that God exists but being unable to prove that he exists. So the faith fills in that little spot of unintelligence that is required to prove God exists. And to be fair, I don't think that believers are unintelligent, some of them are intelligent and smart, it's just that humans have only a certain amount of reasoning that can reach the limits of immortal intelligence. So for me, I could sit and prove to you all day long why I think God exists or doesn't exist, but sometimes its just easier to say I have faith he exists so I don't have to constantly prove to myself the various logical necessities, choices, decisions, experiences, feelings and convictions that make me see life as a generally good thing.
2007-03-03 14:51:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, if you admit that you don't KNOW whether or not a god exists but you completely BELIEVE that one does, i would say you're not agnostic.
I think more people identify as agnostic if they're not completely sure if they believe in a god as opposed to if they know they can't prove that one exists.
But I totally see where you're coming from, because belief is at least partly based on thought process and thought process would lead one to see there IS no "proof" for a god.
2007-03-03 14:50:01 · answer #4 · answered by kiwikiwi_bird@sbcglobal.net 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When you look at a building how do you know that there was a builder?
If you didn't see the builder. the workers or the plans, how do you know that there was a building?
Is not the building evidence of the builder?
What about a painting?
How do you know that there was a painter?
The building and the painting are the evidence of both the builder and the painter.
Creation does equal Creator. Did Ihave to be there to see it created to believe that there is a creator? No, the fact that creation is there proves a creator just like the building proves that there was a builder and the painting proves that there was a painter.
2007-03-03 15:00:17 · answer #5 · answered by Dead Man Walking 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It suggests tendencies in that direction. But you need to come to understand that faith is not a good thing -- it is, in fact, the ultimate evil: it means to deliberately abjure the use of reason applied to evidence to figure out how things work, and the ability to do that is the defining characteristic of our species. Give up reason, and you're nothing but an animal.
2007-03-03 14:50:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Faith is important to the decision. God doesn't want robots. He wants humans to give something back.
2007-03-03 15:07:39 · answer #7 · answered by Marg 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Faith is believing without seeing
2007-03-03 14:49:05 · answer #8 · answered by DeAnna B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is it with atheists continously harassing Christians on this site when they understand NOTHING about Christianity?!??
If God is an ultimately perfect INFINITE being. And our minds are FINITE. Isn't it logical to say that FINITE minds can never comprehend something INFINITE?
2007-03-03 14:56:00 · answer #9 · answered by 0 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ouch. My brain hurts.
2007-03-03 14:47:56 · answer #10 · answered by Voodoid 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋