Sort of contraducting yourself there. Hebrews 11-1 says;
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Corinthians says;
Cast down thoughts, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of our lord.
This certainly sounds as if faith is valued over evidence and reality.
When it comes to belief in God maybe, but not in all areas of life.
I am not sure what that means. The heart doesn't think, it pumps blood. The only organ in your body that believes anything is in your head. I hate to be blunt. But this is wishful thinking and poetic mumbo jumbo.
You are taking too literal.
Sure you do. If you do anything to attempt to spread your religion, you are peddling it. Don't be insulted. I have been in sales for 40 years.
no, I don't peddle my religious beliefs. No every attempt to spread one's religion is "peddling". Peddling makes it seem like I would be selling my religious beliefs like a dishonest salesman sells used cars. You don't know me and you don't know anything about how I have attempted to spread my religious beliefs.
You suppose? If you're a Christian you believe in something on faith that most of the planet does not believe. Most of the people throughout history and in other parts of the world believe or have believed in other gods and other religions. And like you they almost all universally rely on faith for their very different and contradictory beliefs. The fact is you cannot all be right. But you can all be wrong. Another example of how faith can be used to believe true things and false things.
You are correct. Of course not all religion can be correct, they contradict each other. Yes, all religions could be wrong, I don't believe that of course, but from a logical reasoning standpoint, it is possible.
(The new Testament is actually worse..but let's sidestep that for a moment.)
This is called historical fiction.
All I will say to that is a large percentage of the popular of the world would disagree with you that the Bible is 100% a word of historical fiction. You can believe it is if you wish, that is your choice.
You don't think people made stuff up and passed them off as facts when telling stories around the campfires?
I am sure that happened many times. But I do not believe that in regards to every single thing in the Bible.
No, I can't. I also cannot prove there is no Big Foot, Fairies, Leprechauns or Santa either.
Your thinking is all backwards. We and I'm including you, do not use that kind of epistemology on anything other than religious beliefs. Beliefs are not based on what cannot be disproved, but what can be proven. Why the exception for Gods?
I never said and never intended to say that we should conclude that God exists merely because it cannot be disproven. I believe God exists because of my faith, not because his existence can't be disproven. If you wish to go solely by logic, I agree you would no reason to believe God existed, merely that it was possible(since it can't be disproven)
That's four out of ten or actually 613. Have you read the other 609 Mitzvohs?
I have read the first 5 books of the Bible, if that is what you mean.
May not be? Moses is said to have to lived 950 years.
I don't think Moses lives for 950. Perhaps he lived 950 of some unit of time, but not years.
The story of Noah and the Ark is almost certainly a retold version of the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Maybe, I don't know.
Why is it that all these insane miracles took place before science?
I don't know.
Sure, some truth may have survived hundreds of thousands of retellings. But there is no epistemological method to know what might have. And therefore no reason to believe any of it.
Not logical, rational, scientific reason, I agree. I don't believe the Old Testament is 100% literally true.
Let me bring this logic to the New Testament and the Gospels. These are the most valued texts in the New Testament. They are relied on as eyewitness testimonies
Yet they are not. The earliest to have been written, probably Mark is estimated to have been written 3 decades after Jesus is reported to have been crucified. And the other two Synoptic Gospels Matthew and Luke are derived from Mark or all three derived from another source. John is wildly different.
Yes I know they were written after the events of Jesus's life. I know John is different from Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But John is not 100% incompatible with Matthew, Mark and Luke. It is believed by many that John is an eyewitness account and was written by John the disciple. No way to prove that, of course. For all I know it is possible, but for all I know it wasn't written by John the disciple.
All of these books were written 30 to 90 years after the life of the character Jesus. Even if a Jesus existed what are the odds that anything in these books written decades later are an accurate reflection of his words or an accurate account of his life? Seems to me that NONE of it can be thought of as reliable.
Faith isn't about measuring odds.
Again, I don't choose my beliefs. They are based on the available evidence and logical reasoning. Faith is not a reasonable foundation for establishing the truth of anything.
You chose to base all your believes on logic, reason, and science. You chose to only believe what it logic and rational to believe. You chose to believe only what can be scientifically proven.
I choose otherwise.
But this does not mean I think logic, reason, and science should be totally thrown out the window and are of no importance. I believe quite the opposite.I
When I evaluate abortion or any question, I examine the available evidence and make my conclusions accordingly. But my conclusions are not set in stone. I realize new information may come to light to change it.
Okay, so prove to me logically, rationally, and scientifically that the fetus/zygote/embryo that is developing into a human being, has or should have no right to live.
This is very different than your faith where you to take a stand to believe in the ridiculous and absurd over the weight of the massive amount of contradictory and scientific knowledge.
I agree, my faith is not science and maybe be seen as ridiculous and absurd to some. But for the I-don't-know-many-th time, I am not basing my believe that the fetus/zygote/embryo has rights on my religious faith.
