Evidence for God from Science

Can one, believer or not live without the presence of the mere word "faith", including its concept? Is this even plausible, or possible... for would we need it if every reason for anything can be reasoned with common sense and logic, if so do these two trump faith? Doesn't faith apply to an unbeliever even in the secular... ie: its a matter of the unknown, one cannot know that their wife will not cheat. Nor if their kids will one day betray them, but the hope is they wouldn't! And then faith isn't evidence not seen, but hope that they wouldn't! Has man created the concept of Faith in a deity as a default, and easy out to chalk it up to the divine? What purpose does faith serve, can we live without it which then begs what would be the point of living life with no hope of something greater than the observable, physical world?

Question on you: what people think faith is? What Christians think faith is?

Not sure what they think faith is... i guess belief without proof or evidence!

For me or Christians is seemingly the same... trust or hope of things not yet seen!

zacchaeus wrote:Not sure what they think faith is... i guess belief without proof or evidence!

For me or Christians is seemingly the same... trust or hope of things not yet seen!

Common misconception, thanks in no small part to Hollywood. Faith is not belief with proof. On the contrary, faith is giving assent to or depending/relying on an authority. One may, of course, give assent to that authority without evidence. Such a faith would be blind faith. But far more often we give our assent to or rely or dependent upon those whom have earned it. God is no different. He has given us ample reason to put our faith in Him. If God is capable of creating the universe, isn't He capable of taking care of you? In the Bible, Abram believed on God after (Gen. 15:6) after God had shown His faithfulness. Today, we are asked to put our faith in a resurrected Jesus. In short, God doesn't just demand faith (although His mere status as God would give Him basis for it). Rather, He demonstrates His faithfulness to us that we might place our faith in Him. All that is to say, we are called to an informed faith, not a blind one.

Blind faith is, of course, much better than no faith at all. An informed faith is all the better.

And when "faith" is understood as I have defined it, and how Christianity has traditionally defined it by the way, no one can live without faith because no one has the ability to learn everything about everything before they affirm anything. All of us ultimately place faith in the veracity of certain authorities for our knowledge. In some areas, we have less faith and more direct knowledge. In most, most of what we do is based on a lot of faith, some appropriately placed, some not so much.

Is faith without proof blind... aren't we all atheists that don't believe in other gods, say the hindu god, Islamic god, Greek gods, etc. Especially if a Christian, we don't believe in other gods so respectfully we too are atheist, just some take it one god further, and believe in no gods?

zacchaeus wrote:Is faith without proof blind... aren't we all atheists that don't believe in other gods, say the hindu god, Islamic god, Greek gods, etc. Especially if a Christian, we don't believe in other gods so respectfully we too are atheist, just some take it one god further, and believe in no gods?

I guess under that definition of atheism, technically you're correct. I'm an atheist as far as any god except God.

Atheist
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

zacchaeus wrote:Is faith without proof blind... aren't we all atheists that don't believe in other gods, say the hindu god, Islamic god, Greek gods, etc. Especially if a Christian, we don't believe in other gods so respectfully we too are atheist, just some take it one god further, and believe in no gods?

1. Faith without evidence is blind. I don't see what the rest of your comments have to do with that, though.
2. No, I'm not an atheist with respect the other "gods." I don't believe that Brahman or Allah exist, but the problem is that those proper names include a lot of false assertions about God. So it is the assertions that are wrong, not the claim of His existence. Put differently, the problem with saying, "Brahman exists" or "Allah exists" has to do with the nature of God, not with His existence. When I say, "Allah does not exist," I mean something along the lines of, "You are right that there is a God. We share that belief. The problem is that you have a very different view of the divine reality than I do. You hold that He is absolutely unitarian (so no Trinity) and that He called Mohammed to be His prophet, along with a range of other things. All of those assertions about Him are wrapped up in the name 'Allah.' Since I do not accept those assertions, I do not believe that 'Allah' exists in the sense you do. I hold that God is Trinitarian and that Jesus Christ is His Son. Those assertions are true and so I affirm them."

Put still differently, I say, "Yahweh is God" and "Allah is not God." The phrase, "Allah does not exist" is an easy way to say, "Allah is not God." But denying that Allah is God does not make me an atheist with respect to him. It is to say that I reject that particular understanding of God.

We can't go through life without faith, without belief in something.
ALL people have faith in something.

As far as the after thought, that's what it was... may not have been directly connected but still deals with faith.

I often receive post of lazy logic... ie: i am asked if i were in a wreck and survived i seemingly chalk it up to God sparing my life so to speak, as an atheist would tell me- as a Christian of course i would see the divine and would see that He isn't finished with me yet! While the atheist cannot say why i was spared, that it is illogical and lazy to assert that God intervene on my behalf, as to weight the merit of my life and or prayers over another, and that i have no prove other than that of an accident occurring... they say that's blind faith, and that i am seemingly okay acrediting God with no other proof then because i say so, and they take issue with that!

zacchaeus wrote:Can one, believer or not live without the presence of the mere word "faith", including its concept? Is this even plausible, or possible... for would we need it if every reason for anything can be reasoned with common sense and logic, if so do these two trump faith? Doesn't faith apply to an unbeliever even in the secular... ie: its a matter of the unknown, one cannot know that their wife will not cheat. Nor if their kids will one day betray them, but the hope is they wouldn't! And then faith isn't evidence not seen, but hope that they wouldn't! Has man created the concept of Faith in a deity as a default, and easy out to chalk it up to the divine? What purpose does faith serve, can we live without it which then begs what would be the point of living life with no hope of something greater than the observable, physical world?

I believe many people use the term “faith” out of context. I see a lot of people using the term faith as just another word for believing; which makes the term usless. I believe faith is a specific type of believing. The bible says “faith is the study of things hoped for evidence of things unseen” Most of what we believe is because we see evidence of it; but with faith it has to be blind, it has to be unseen as the bible puts it.
You can see the way your wife treats from her actions so it doesn’t require faith to believe she loves you.

Ken

Kenny wrote:

zacchaeus wrote:Can one, believer or not live without the presence of the mere word "faith", including its concept? Is this even plausible, or possible... for would we need it if every reason for anything can be reasoned with common sense and logic, if so do these two trump faith? Doesn't faith apply to an unbeliever even in the secular... ie: its a matter of the unknown, one cannot know that their wife will not cheat. Nor if their kids will one day betray them, but the hope is they wouldn't! And then faith isn't evidence not seen, but hope that they wouldn't! Has man created the concept of Faith in a deity as a default, and easy out to chalk it up to the divine? What purpose does faith serve, can we live without it which then begs what would be the point of living life with no hope of something greater than the observable, physical world?

I believe many people use the term “faith” out of context. I see a lot of people using the term faith as just another word for believing; which makes the term usless. I believe faith is a specific type of believing. The bible says “faith is the study of things hoped for evidence of things unseen” Most of what we believe is because we see evidence of it; but with faith it has to be blind, it has to be unseen as the bible puts it.
You can see the way your wife treats from her actions so it doesn’t require faith to believe she loves you.

Ken

Incorrect.

The word faith, biblically speaking, simply means "to declare something to be true or reliable" and by extension "to entrust one's self to." Faith does not have to be blind. Heb. 11:1 says that faith is that which stands under (Gk. hypostasis) what we hope for. This is describing the Christian life, not defining faith.

You seem to be confusing faith with hope. Rom. 8:24 says, "For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?" This is not to say that hope is blind either, but it is to say that once we have what we hope for, what we have is no longer hope for it but rather the thing itself. We have reasons to hope for something, but the hope for the thing is not the thing itself. Yet once we have something, though we no longer hope for it, we still have faith in it. So those who know God through faith in Christ have Him, though His presence (partially in this life and fully in the next) does not overthrow faith. On the contrary, when we finally see God, though we will no longer hope for Him, our faith in Him will be strengthened, for we will be even more able to declare Him trustworthy and thereby entrust ourselves more fully to Him.

Hebrews 11:1 says "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.
Not seen means blind. If it weren't blind, the term "unseen" would not have been used. To say faith simply means "hope" doesn't fairly discribe the word because just because we hope for something doesn't mean we believe it is going to happen. I have hope for world peace, even though I doubt the likelihood of it ever happening. Besides; we already have a word for wishing something happens weather or not we believe it will..... Hope. Why make up another term if it is gonna mean the same thing?

Ken

ok kenny

Kenny wrote:Hebrews 11:1 says "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.
Not seen means blind. If it weren't blind, the term "unseen" would not have been used. To say faith simply means "hope" doesn't fairly discribe the word because just because we hope for something doesn't mean we believe it is going to happen. I have hope for world peace, even though I doubt the likelihood of it ever happening. Besides; we already have a word for wishing something happens weather or not we believe it will..... Hope. Why make up another term if it is gonna mean the same thing?

Ken

Ken, try to at least read whole chapter Hebrews 11.

1over137 wrote:

Kenny wrote:Hebrews 11:1 says "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.
Not seen means blind. If it weren't blind, the term "unseen" would not have been used. To say faith simply means "hope" doesn't fairly discribe the word because just because we hope for something doesn't mean we believe it is going to happen. I have hope for world peace, even though I doubt the likelihood of it ever happening. Besides; we already have a word for wishing something happens weather or not we believe it will..... Hope. Why make up another term if it is gonna mean the same thing?

Ken

Ken, try to at least read whole chapter Hebrews 11.

What did I miss?

K