Evidence for God from Science

I added an edit to the post above as I left something out.

The bottom line concept of Faith/Believing as it pertains to God and ourselves is this: placing yourself in the total care of God,by His act of grace displayed...

In other words, really trusting the Lord, what He says and did, placing yourself totally under his care and governorship. In the case for faith in God, we are to place ourselves totally in his hands. He proved himself worthy of such trust by the work of the cross and Resurrection of Christ. God adds to this kind of faith and removes our doubts leading us to trust him a bit more, day by day. He proves himself trustworthy and by that we begin to let go of what causes us to miss the mark of this high calling of God - total trust... Some call this sanctification and that comes by grace also working in us to - Trust Him more each day while what makes us not trust him - is progressively removed day by mortal day. This concept is largely ignored today in the modern western theological mind for a more philosophic idea of faith - merely believing - being thoroughly convinced - so trust can happen. Faith and Believing is far deeper that that. It is the kind of faith that challenges you to totally absolutely trust, depend, rely on God, all his works, promises, and not our own - a faith that refines us away from doubting that we can totally trust God alone through our mortal life experiences. In modern american slang terminology: It's all God's Grace - baby!

With that, I'll look into the Hebrews 11 definition of faith and when you read the word Faith, think of Total Trust in God alone...

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Heb 11:2 For by it the men of old gained approval.
Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks.
Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; AND HE WAS NOT FOUND BECAUSE GOD TOOK HIM UP; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.
Heb 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

Bible verses from the NASB

Look again with inserts...

Heb 11:1 Now faith (Total Trust in God alone) is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Heb 11:2 For by it the men of old gained approval.
Heb 11:3 By faith (Total Trust in God alone) we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
Heb 11:4 By faith (Total Trust in God alone) Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks.
Heb 11:5 By faith (Total Trust in God alone) Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; AND HE WAS NOT FOUND BECAUSE GOD TOOK HIM UP; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.
Heb 11:6 And without faith (Total Trust in God alone) it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.
-
-
-

Jac3510 wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Seraph wrote:There would still have been an element of faith involved that God would sustain the ark and not kill Noah and his family in the flood though, no?

Faith isn't just believe in something without evidence, it is also synonymous with trust.

I guess different people use the term different ways; I've always thought of it as to believe and trust without empirical evidence

Ken

And you've been informed that is not what the word means. The Greek word is pistis. The Hebrew is aman. Neither pistis nor aman mean "faith without empirical evidence." They both mean, as you have been told, "trust" (both have close connections to the idea of reliability and durability). That's the point 1/137 is making. However you are using the word, you are using it in a way that the biblical writers did not.

You might find this helpful:

http://cmmorrison.wordpress.com/2010/08/10/faith/

Here is how I see it; I believe faith is a belief/trust, but it is a specific type of belief or trust. If I injure myself and lose my fingernail, and the doctor tells me I will grow another fingernail back, I will believe/trust that what the doctor is telling me will happen, because this happens all the time thus what he is telling me is based upon empirical evidence. And by empirical evidence I mean evidence that can be measured, analyzed, and logically explained.

On the other hand, if I injure myself and I lose a finger; and I have someone pray for me to grow another finger back, yeah that is still a belief/ trust, but you can’t compare the type of belief required to believe you will grow a fingernail back to the type of belief required to believe you will grow a new finger. It’s easy to trust in the growth of a finger nail, the growth of another finger is a completely different story; that would be considered a miracle. And by miracle, I mean an event outside the laws of nature.

I believe a totally different word should be used to describe the two examples I provided. Would you agree? If not then we can agree to disagree and there is no need going any further. If you agree a different word should be used to believe a miracle vs empirical evidence; then I would ask you what word should be used to believe a miracle; or something that defies the laws of nature? I use the word “faith”; what do you use?

Ken

I believe a totally different word should be used to describe the two examples I provided. Would you agree? If not then we can agree to disagree and there is no need going any further. If you agree a different word should be used to believe a miracle vs empirical evidence; then I would ask you what word should be used to believe a miracle; or something that defies the laws of nature? I use the word “faith”; what do you use?

No, I don't agree, and we can certainly agree to disagree on the meaning of the word. What we can't do is pretend that when you use the word "faith" according to your meaning that you are at all speaking of the biblical notion of faith, so any arguments you make for or against Christianity or any interpretation of Scripture that depend on your understanding of are invalid.

If, on the other hand, you want to talk about what we are talking about--and what Christians have always talked about--then it is up to you to use the word the way that we use it. You don't get to come into a group, take a word that they use a particular way, redefine it, and then tell them that they are wrong based on your new definition of the word. That would just be a good old fashioned straw man argument.

These verse speak of faith and in my opinion rather difficult to express into English form the Greek text...

Rom 12:3 Greek New Testament, Λέγω γὰρ διὰ τῆς χάριτος τῆς δοθείσης μοι παντὶ τῷ ὄντι ἐν ὑμῖν, μὴ ὑπερφρονεῖν παρ᾿ ὃ δεῖ φρονεῖν, ἀλλὰ φρονεῖν εἰς τὸ σωφρονεῖν, ἑκάστῳ ὡς ὁ Θεὸς ἐμέρισε μέτρον πίστεως.

Rom 12:3 NASB, For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith.

Rom 12:3 ESV, For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.

Maybe if Jac would like he could bring out a few pointers on the words translated - allotted/assigned, measure and faith in ... Θεὸς ἐμέρισε μέτρον πίστεως

Rather interesting... to the topic and for the question about faith assigned by non-Christian ideas....
-
-
-

Jac3510 wrote:

I believe a totally different word should be used to describe the two examples I provided. Would you agree? If not then we can agree to disagree and there is no need going any further. If you agree a different word should be used to believe a miracle vs empirical evidence; then I would ask you what word should be used to believe a miracle; or something that defies the laws of nature? I use the word “faith”; what do you use?

No, I don't agree, and we can certainly agree to disagree on the meaning of the word. What we can't do is pretend that when you use the word "faith" according to your meaning that you are at all speaking of the biblical notion of faith, so any arguments you make for or against Christianity or any interpretation of Scripture that depend on your understanding of are invalid.

If, on the other hand, you want to talk about what we are talking about--and what Christians have always talked about--then it is up to you to use the word the way that we use it. You don't get to come into a group, take a word that they use a particular way, redefine it, and then tell them that they are wrong based on your new definition of the word. That would just be a good old fashioned straw man argument.

I understand there are those who disagree with my meaning of the term faith, but you also need to realize there are Christians who disagree with your meaning of the word as well. To say it just means to believe or trust takes away from the meaning of the word. If you are going to claim it takes an act of faith to believe the Sun will shine in the morning, that your car will start when you get in it, or that your wife loves you, then the word becomes meaningless.
Anyway, it's been good conversation with you.

Peace
Ken

Kenny wrote:

Jac3510 wrote:

I believe a totally different word should be used to describe the two examples I provided. Would you agree? If not then we can agree to disagree and there is no need going any further. If you agree a different word should be used to believe a miracle vs empirical evidence; then I would ask you what word should be used to believe a miracle; or something that defies the laws of nature? I use the word “faith”; what do you use?

No, I don't agree, and we can certainly agree to disagree on the meaning of the word. What we can't do is pretend that when you use the word "faith" according to your meaning that you are at all speaking of the biblical notion of faith, so any arguments you make for or against Christianity or any interpretation of Scripture that depend on your understanding of are invalid.

If, on the other hand, you want to talk about what we are talking about--and what Christians have always talked about--then it is up to you to use the word the way that we use it. You don't get to come into a group, take a word that they use a particular way, redefine it, and then tell them that they are wrong based on your new definition of the word. That would just be a good old fashioned straw man argument.

I understand there are those who disagree with my meaning of the term faith, but you also need to realize there are Christians who disagree with your meaning of the word as well. To say it just means to believe or trust takes away from the meaning of the word. If you are going to claim it takes an act of faith to believe the Sun will shine in the morning, that your car will start when you get in it, or that your wife loves you, then the word becomes meaningless.
Anyway, it's been good conversation with you.

Peace
Ken

Christians may disagree but that is not the point, it's what God has said it is as described in the Bible.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:I understand there are those who disagree with my meaning of the term faith, but you also need to realize there are Christians who disagree with your meaning of the word as well.

So you posit an ad populum fallacy to justify your own irrationality? Because some Christians are irrational you are allowed to be?

Good show, mate!

There are Christians who believe a lot of things. Those who take your view are wrong (1/137 has demonstrated that quite nicely--though I suppose you could argue that you understand both the Greek language and the Christian idea of faith better than the writer of Hebrews! Silly author . . . if only you had been around, you could have corrected his faulty theology . . .), and, again, when you waste our time arguing against a weak, incoherent view, you aren't to be taken seriously. But this is what I and FL tried to tell you earlier. If you were at all self-aware, you would be embarrassed at yourself.

To say it just means to believe or trust takes away from the meaning of the word.

Ah, baseless assertions. If that's all we have to do to make an argument, then this would be much easier. Alas, quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur.

If you are going to claim it takes an act of faith to believe the Sun will shine in the morning, that your car will start when you get in it, or that your wife loves you, then the word becomes meaningless.

I don't make that claim, and if you bothered reading what has been said, you would know that. But I doubt you are actually reading what is being said. You certainly aren't reading for any level of comprehension. You already think you know what you are talking about, and you very much don't. Not that you'll see that, of course, given your naivete, but I say this because others certainly do and will see it. If anyone has followed the thread or goes back and reads this, they will see your error quite clearly, and they will learn from it. So while you seem rather content in your confusion, I suspect some good will come out of this back and forth (I would hate to call it a "conversation") yet.

All the best to you.

Jac I didn't say that.

don't you love typos

edit: leaving it for posterity

Jac3510 wrote:So you posit an ad populum fallacy to justify your own irrationality? Because some Christians are irrational you are allowed to be?

What exactly is irrational about what I said?

Jac3510 Good show, mate!

There are Christians who believe a lot of things. Those who take your view are wrong

Ken I could easily say the same thing about you. One thing about the bible is that people who read and study it often disagree because it is written in a way that not everybody agrees. Just because someone doesn’t agree with your POV doesn’t mean they are being irrational, or positing some type of fallacy; it just means they see things differently than you.

Jac3510 yawn: Ah, baseless assertions. If that's all we have to do to make an argument, then this would be much easier. Alas, quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur.

Ken No it is not a baseless assertion; the more definitions attached to a word, the less meaning it has.

Jac3510 don't make that claim, and if you bothered reading what has been said, you would know that. But I doubt you are actually reading what is being said. You certainly aren't reading for any level of comprehension.

Ken Wait a minute! I made the claim that faith is not based upon empirical evidence, and you said you disagree! So when I listed some examples of empirical evidence, now you are saying you don’t make such claims of faith! So give me some examples of faith that you employ that can be proven empirically


Jac3510 You already think you know what you are talking about, and you very much don't. Not that you'll see that, of course, given your naivete, but I say this because others certainly do and will see it. If anyone has followed the thread or goes back and reads this, they will see your error quite clearly, and they will learn from it. So while you seem rather content in your confusion, I suspect some good will come out of this back and forth (I would hate to call it a "conversation") yet.

All the best to you.


Ken Dude! What’s up with all this hostility? Are you actually getting offended because someone disagrees with you? C’mon you’re better than that! Aren’t you???

Ken

Jac is not offended. Am sure about it.

1over137 wrote:Jac is not offended. Am sure about it.

So what is it? Just plain ole' rudeness?

Ken

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:Jac is not offended. Am sure about it.

So what is it? Just plain ole' rudeness?

Ken

No comment

Kenny,

It seems to me you have prejudices toward Jac. Please, do not have. Instead, try to get to know people.

Cheers.

Ken,

Try to read and comprehend what Jac is saying. Put aside the tone you're reading into his posts. Focus on what he's actually saying.