Dear Sirs and Fair Ladies,
I do hope I did not cause offence by the opening to my previous instalment on this thread for none was intended.
It was pointed out to me that the style of my piece was not normal (i.e was too prepaired) for this medium. I can only ask you to bear with me while I get used to arguing in a way (i.e with many people at once over the internet) which I am not used to.
Thank you all for your interesting replies. There are so many points I should like to answer but I am a slow writer and shall therefore limit myself.
Firstly, to clarify what a Christian means by faith. I suppose Chirstians use faith in two senses. We may talk about faith towards God in the same sense as faith from a man to his wife; in this context we have (or show faith) by obedience motivated by love. The other sense in which faith is used, the sense in which I used it in my first letter, is that connected with belief. It is this sense which I shall now explain.
Faith, as derived from the bible and understood by most Christians, is most certainly not forcing oneself to believe something which one has no evidence for. God is the source of reason, and gave us that power so we could establish truth: He would be a perverse God if He then expected us to believe anything without sufficient evidence. No, faith is practised when one holds to a belief which one once accepted as fact (because sufficient evidence was available), and possibly still intellectually knows to be true, even though everything else seems to be indicating that one is wrong and when ones emotions and feelings are telling one to think the opposite. Faith is the triumph of knowledge and reason over mere feelings(which are often deceptive). When I was a child and learning to swim my father stood a couple of meters from me at the deep end of the pool and told me to swim towards him. At the time I remember feeling scared of drowning though I KNEW that I could trust him and that if I went under he would save me immediately and I would get nothing worse that a wet face. But still, the fact of the deep water and my incompetence in swimming loomed large in my mind and blocked out of my consideration the knowledge that my Father could help me. Had I listened to my head and swam towards him I would have showed faith in his ability to save me from drowning; my knowledge and reason would have prevailed over fear and emotion. There are many facts which are in a sense difficult to believe because they are refuted by the mass of our experience and emotions. I find it difficult to believe that one day I shall die and that the hand which writes this will rot or burn; all my feelings tell me that this will never hapen, yet I know it is a fact. Sometimes I have such joy that I almost believe (and in fact have believed) that it must last forever but my reason tells me that such moments are transient - in fact during such times I invariably ignore my reason. I know there is a God of love but there are times when, obeying God is a pain, everything around me seems bad, the world seems inhospitable, and even my reason is playing tricks on me, it is difficult to hold fast to my beliefe in His existence. At such times my reason tells me not to trust my feelings and stick to what I know, or at least to what I used to know - this is faith!
Faith is one of the supreme Christian virtues because oftentimes to stick to ones knowledege of the existence of God when one does not feel His presence and when one would rather there were not a God is very difficult but is also very vital if we are to remain loyal to Him. Mostly Christians lack faith by wilfully ignoring Him because they want to sin; they ignore what they know to be true because it is convinient.
I accept that many Christians have a confused idea about what faith in this sense means, but in my experience of Christians I have known and read this is not usually the case. Indeed the Bible says, 'Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool' Isaiah 1:18. The Bible never indicates that we must ever believe God without evidence. However it does indicate that me may have evidence in abundance and still be blinded to the truth - this I believe to be the case with possibly the majority of the population.
Now, with regard to the justification of our beliefs. I hold to what I said that we must never accept a thing as true unless we know it to be so. I would further add that our certainty of a proposition must be only as strong as our evidence for it. The Marquis sugested that most people do precisely that. I would disagree. I think the majority of a persons beliefs derive from a mixture of what one accepted without question when a child, the influence of strong personalities on ones thought, propaganda, things one wishes to be true, and plain faulty reasoning. Remember that the average man will rarely question any of his beliefs at all - this may be verified by noticing that he will hold to contradictions in his own thought which he may not even suspect exist, and if he does, is not too bothered about them.
In reality I don't think it is possible to sort out all of one's beliefs so that they are fully cogent and dependent only on evidence. Again, as the marquis pointed out, we may even be mistaken in the strength of the evidence we have. One must come to the conclusion that the majority of men really hold far too many beliefs much too strongly.
Operaider said "If you think that we don't believe in God because we simple don't want one, in my case you are wrong. I actually was Christian. I believed whole heartily in Jesus. Then one day someone pointed out that I haven't actually read the bible. I had spent years devoting my life to a book of commandments I'd never gotten around to reading. Once I read it I realized what a load of nonsense it was. There were multiple contradictions. Commandments damning ridiculously innocent acts with extremely harsh punishments.
I don't believe in God because I have seen no purpose for God. All that I've witnessed does not require a God to exist. If you have some evidence of God that I missed, please present it. Because I for one, would actually like for there to be a God. But we don’t all get what we want"
I reply: I have no way of knowing why you disbelieve in God - I don't say it is necessarily because you don't wan't him - but you do sound very hostile to the Christian God (or your idea of Him). It may be that in the past you merely believed a certain pick-and-mix of Chistian doctrine but were never actually born again - in which case if you desire to know the truth God and seek God He will prove to you His existence. One last thing: you rather hastily dimiss the Bible as nonsense and full of contradictions; remember you are talking about by far the most influential book ever written - our countries would not exist if it were not for this book, it is a book which has been scrutinized by the greatest minds in the world and declared great, it is easily without parallel. Greater minds than ours have examined the Holy Bible and far from finding contradictions find unity, beauty, simplicity (of expression), profoundity of thought. To a Christian it gives strength, and speaks with authority. Why is it that you believe there to be contradictions in the Bible but (for instance) Augustine didn't? Do you knoe the Bible better than him or are you just smarter?
Diogenes asked 'As a believer, what do you find compelling about your belief, that you feel others should find compelling also?'
I reply: The things I find most compelling are so varied and, by their very nature, could not be accepeted by an unbeliever (at least without the expense of much time). I think the historical evidence when examined with an open mind by an unbeliever ought to be compelling enough by itself. I think the lives of commited Christians (historical and those one knows personally) is also very strong evidence. Also, I would say that the best immediate evidence for the existence of a God (not necessarily Christian) is that of the authority of the mass of the population throughout history - at almost every period and location in history (except our own period and our own location) the mass of people (rich & poor, intelligent & simple, good & bad) have believed is some sort of deity. Authority is our major sorce of knowledge and is a thoroughly valid one so long as one believes ones authority to be reliable and substanciated. When I mention authority people complain that they must see things and prove them themselves, but they ought to realise that authority taken and accepted correctly is a most scientific and reliable source.
To Plindboe who asked how I know God exists: If you like I will be happy to give you a full justification for one of the reasons I believe God exists, to do so on all would take too much time over the internet. I would advise you, however, to go to a better source that me for Christian apologetics - if you seriously want to
discover truth read the best writers available - some of the greatest minds ever could give you better evidence than I. If you want dialogue I shall be happy to oblige.
I didn't really want this thread to be about the arguments suporting Christianity, rather I wish to persuade readers that their atheism is perhaps not so well founded as they thought and encourage them to very seriously read and enquire
into the possible truth of Christian doctrine. I am not the best person to obtain Christian truth from but I am ready to be grilled on any issue you choose, so long as your motive is a desire to know the truth, to help me know the truth, or to understand more fully what Christians believe.
Someone asked me what I thought of 1-in-christ. I have not been reading him for long, but from the little I have read he seems reasonably sound in doctrine. I really do not know enough to say anything more about him.
Yours,
Jamie Lowrie
P.P.S. To Ceinwyn: I registered in May but had no time to get down to reading or writing anything until now.
I do hope I did not cause offence by the opening to my previous instalment on this thread for none was intended.
It was pointed out to me that the style of my piece was not normal (i.e was too prepaired) for this medium. I can only ask you to bear with me while I get used to arguing in a way (i.e with many people at once over the internet) which I am not used to.
Thank you all for your interesting replies. There are so many points I should like to answer but I am a slow writer and shall therefore limit myself.
Firstly, to clarify what a Christian means by faith. I suppose Chirstians use faith in two senses. We may talk about faith towards God in the same sense as faith from a man to his wife; in this context we have (or show faith) by obedience motivated by love. The other sense in which faith is used, the sense in which I used it in my first letter, is that connected with belief. It is this sense which I shall now explain.
Faith, as derived from the bible and understood by most Christians, is most certainly not forcing oneself to believe something which one has no evidence for. God is the source of reason, and gave us that power so we could establish truth: He would be a perverse God if He then expected us to believe anything without sufficient evidence. No, faith is practised when one holds to a belief which one once accepted as fact (because sufficient evidence was available), and possibly still intellectually knows to be true, even though everything else seems to be indicating that one is wrong and when ones emotions and feelings are telling one to think the opposite. Faith is the triumph of knowledge and reason over mere feelings(which are often deceptive). When I was a child and learning to swim my father stood a couple of meters from me at the deep end of the pool and told me to swim towards him. At the time I remember feeling scared of drowning though I KNEW that I could trust him and that if I went under he would save me immediately and I would get nothing worse that a wet face. But still, the fact of the deep water and my incompetence in swimming loomed large in my mind and blocked out of my consideration the knowledge that my Father could help me. Had I listened to my head and swam towards him I would have showed faith in his ability to save me from drowning; my knowledge and reason would have prevailed over fear and emotion. There are many facts which are in a sense difficult to believe because they are refuted by the mass of our experience and emotions. I find it difficult to believe that one day I shall die and that the hand which writes this will rot or burn; all my feelings tell me that this will never hapen, yet I know it is a fact. Sometimes I have such joy that I almost believe (and in fact have believed) that it must last forever but my reason tells me that such moments are transient - in fact during such times I invariably ignore my reason. I know there is a God of love but there are times when, obeying God is a pain, everything around me seems bad, the world seems inhospitable, and even my reason is playing tricks on me, it is difficult to hold fast to my beliefe in His existence. At such times my reason tells me not to trust my feelings and stick to what I know, or at least to what I used to know - this is faith!
Faith is one of the supreme Christian virtues because oftentimes to stick to ones knowledege of the existence of God when one does not feel His presence and when one would rather there were not a God is very difficult but is also very vital if we are to remain loyal to Him. Mostly Christians lack faith by wilfully ignoring Him because they want to sin; they ignore what they know to be true because it is convinient.
I accept that many Christians have a confused idea about what faith in this sense means, but in my experience of Christians I have known and read this is not usually the case. Indeed the Bible says, 'Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool' Isaiah 1:18. The Bible never indicates that we must ever believe God without evidence. However it does indicate that me may have evidence in abundance and still be blinded to the truth - this I believe to be the case with possibly the majority of the population.
Now, with regard to the justification of our beliefs. I hold to what I said that we must never accept a thing as true unless we know it to be so. I would further add that our certainty of a proposition must be only as strong as our evidence for it. The Marquis sugested that most people do precisely that. I would disagree. I think the majority of a persons beliefs derive from a mixture of what one accepted without question when a child, the influence of strong personalities on ones thought, propaganda, things one wishes to be true, and plain faulty reasoning. Remember that the average man will rarely question any of his beliefs at all - this may be verified by noticing that he will hold to contradictions in his own thought which he may not even suspect exist, and if he does, is not too bothered about them.
In reality I don't think it is possible to sort out all of one's beliefs so that they are fully cogent and dependent only on evidence. Again, as the marquis pointed out, we may even be mistaken in the strength of the evidence we have. One must come to the conclusion that the majority of men really hold far too many beliefs much too strongly.
Operaider said "If you think that we don't believe in God because we simple don't want one, in my case you are wrong. I actually was Christian. I believed whole heartily in Jesus. Then one day someone pointed out that I haven't actually read the bible. I had spent years devoting my life to a book of commandments I'd never gotten around to reading. Once I read it I realized what a load of nonsense it was. There were multiple contradictions. Commandments damning ridiculously innocent acts with extremely harsh punishments.
I don't believe in God because I have seen no purpose for God. All that I've witnessed does not require a God to exist. If you have some evidence of God that I missed, please present it. Because I for one, would actually like for there to be a God. But we don’t all get what we want"
I reply: I have no way of knowing why you disbelieve in God - I don't say it is necessarily because you don't wan't him - but you do sound very hostile to the Christian God (or your idea of Him). It may be that in the past you merely believed a certain pick-and-mix of Chistian doctrine but were never actually born again - in which case if you desire to know the truth God and seek God He will prove to you His existence. One last thing: you rather hastily dimiss the Bible as nonsense and full of contradictions; remember you are talking about by far the most influential book ever written - our countries would not exist if it were not for this book, it is a book which has been scrutinized by the greatest minds in the world and declared great, it is easily without parallel. Greater minds than ours have examined the Holy Bible and far from finding contradictions find unity, beauty, simplicity (of expression), profoundity of thought. To a Christian it gives strength, and speaks with authority. Why is it that you believe there to be contradictions in the Bible but (for instance) Augustine didn't? Do you knoe the Bible better than him or are you just smarter?
Diogenes asked 'As a believer, what do you find compelling about your belief, that you feel others should find compelling also?'
I reply: The things I find most compelling are so varied and, by their very nature, could not be accepeted by an unbeliever (at least without the expense of much time). I think the historical evidence when examined with an open mind by an unbeliever ought to be compelling enough by itself. I think the lives of commited Christians (historical and those one knows personally) is also very strong evidence. Also, I would say that the best immediate evidence for the existence of a God (not necessarily Christian) is that of the authority of the mass of the population throughout history - at almost every period and location in history (except our own period and our own location) the mass of people (rich & poor, intelligent & simple, good & bad) have believed is some sort of deity. Authority is our major sorce of knowledge and is a thoroughly valid one so long as one believes ones authority to be reliable and substanciated. When I mention authority people complain that they must see things and prove them themselves, but they ought to realise that authority taken and accepted correctly is a most scientific and reliable source.
To Plindboe who asked how I know God exists: If you like I will be happy to give you a full justification for one of the reasons I believe God exists, to do so on all would take too much time over the internet. I would advise you, however, to go to a better source that me for Christian apologetics - if you seriously want to
discover truth read the best writers available - some of the greatest minds ever could give you better evidence than I. If you want dialogue I shall be happy to oblige.
I didn't really want this thread to be about the arguments suporting Christianity, rather I wish to persuade readers that their atheism is perhaps not so well founded as they thought and encourage them to very seriously read and enquire
into the possible truth of Christian doctrine. I am not the best person to obtain Christian truth from but I am ready to be grilled on any issue you choose, so long as your motive is a desire to know the truth, to help me know the truth, or to understand more fully what Christians believe.
Someone asked me what I thought of 1-in-christ. I have not been reading him for long, but from the little I have read he seems reasonably sound in doctrine. I really do not know enough to say anything more about him.
Yours,
Jamie Lowrie
P.P.S. To Ceinwyn: I registered in May but had no time to get down to reading or writing anything until now.
.
