Christianity Is A FAITH And Not Based On Empiricism And Rationalism

[stiggy wiggy]

So the Aztecs, the Mayans, and the American Indians weren't people that were aware of each other in the first century?

Again, you show your ignorance of world history. The Aztecs were not even around in the first century, And I would imagine that there was very little interaction between the American Indians and the Mayans, separated as they were by thousands of miles of rugged terrain.

And why would god need a boat to reach so many generations of his creation

God didn't need a boat. People did. Are you suggesting they could walk from Jerusalem to America? Sheesh!

before they die in the sin of wrong belief and now await judgement not having known Jesus?

There is no such judgement of ignorance. See Acts 17:30. Looks like you are as ignorant about the Bible as you are about world history.

He squirted out a savior from a virgin.

So that's how you think human birth happens? Like a woman urinating? Didn't your Daddy ever tell you about the birds and the bees? That's even worse than your ignorance on world history.

 

[JAG]

From the OP:

Note: My Opening Post does NOT say that Christian Apologetics is not
useful and needed. Christian Apologetics IS useful and IS needed ---
but Christian Apologetics can NOT eliminate from Christianity the
necessity to exercise faith in God

However the opening Post does NOT advocate for Fideism.
The Opening Post makes one {1} main point --- that faith
cannot be eliminated from Christianity without destroying
Christianity.

"Strict Fideists assign no place to reason in discovering or
understanding fundamental tenets of religion. For them
blind faith is supreme as the way to certitude and
salvation."__off the web

Again . . .
I do not argue for Fideism. There are some evidences to support
the existence of God and the truth of Christianity, but these evidences
must be evaluated on the basis of Probability and Plausibility which
are subjective and are saturated with our human biases, prejudices,
and presuppositions. Nonetheless these kinds of arguments are valuable
to many people.

JAG

[]

 

[Tiburon]

JAG Writes:

Christianity Is A Faith And Not An Intellectual Philosophical System
Based Upon Rationalism And Empiricism.

Start quote.
"Henry Dodwell argues that matters of religious faith lie outside the
determination of reason. God could not possibly have intended that
reason should be the faculty to lead us to faith, for faith cannot
hang indefinitely is suspense while reason cautiously weighs and
reweighs arguments.

`The Scriptures teach, on the contrary, that the way to God is by
means of the heart, not by means of the intellect . . .What is the
basis of faith? Dodwell answers that it is the faith-producing work
of the Holy Spirit . . .

Now Alvin Plantinga . . .

Alvin Plantinga has launched a sustained attack on theological
rationalism. Plantinga maintains that belief in God and in the
central doctrines of Christianity is both rational and warranted
wholly apart from any evidential foundations for belief . . .

Then William Lane Craig says . . .

I think that Dodwell and Plantinga are correct that, fundamentally,
the way we know Christianity to be true is by the self-authenticating
witness of God's Holy Spirit."
End quote

Source:
Reasonable Faith
by William Lane Craig
pages 35, 39, 43

Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig are considered to be
Christendom's top Christian apologists.

____________


JAG Writes:
Christianity is a FAITH.

The word FAITH occurs hundreds and hundreds of times in the Bible
and is presented as being absolutely essential to sustaining
the Christian FAITH.

So?

So demonstrate with empiricism and logic that Christianity is true
at the certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4 and you then no longer have to
exercise FAITH in God.

It does NOT require any FAITH to believe that 2 + 2 = 4.

These 5 Bible verses below would no longer be needed and
would no longer be true.

■ "without faith it is impossible to please God"

■ "for by grace are you saved through faith"

■ "he that comes to God must believe that He
exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him"

■ "believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved"

■ God gave His only Son that whoever believes on Him shall
not perish but have eternal life

■ And the HUNDREDS of other Bible verses that demand faith
would no longer be needed or be true.

Demonstrate with empiricism that Christianity is true at the
certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4 and then you would have this:

He that comes to God need NOT exercise faith because we
now know, based upon empirical evidence that rises to the
certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4, that God exists. It is just as
certain as is the fact that New York City exists.

No faith is needed to believe that New York City exists.

So?

So . . .

Eliminate FAITH from Christianity and Christianity has just been
destroyed and wrecked.

■ "for by grace are you saved through faith" Ephesians 2:8

■ "without faith it is impossible to please God" Hebrews 11:6

■ "God gave His only Son that whoever believes on Him shall
not perish but have eternal life" John 3:16 --- Its impossible
to eliminate the need for Christendom's core Bible verse
John 3:16 without wrecking and destroying Christendom.


____________



Here are a couple of quotes that readers may find interesting:

(1) " . . . the role of rational argumentation in knowing Christianity to
be true is the role of a servant. A person knows Christianity is true
because the Holy Spirit tells him it is true, and while arguments and
evidence can be used to support this conclusion, they cannot
legitimately overrule it . . ." __William Lane Craig, Reasonable
Faith, page 51

(2) ". . .I'd say that with most people there's no need to use
apologetics at all . . . " __William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith,
page 57


_______________



Note: My Opening Post does NOT say that Christian Apologetics is not
useful and needed. Christian Apologetics IS useful and IS needed ---
but Christian Apologetics can NOT eliminate from Christianity the
necessity to exercise faith in God

However the opening Post does NOT advocate for Fideism.
The Opening Post makes one {1} main point --- that faith
cannot be eliminated from Christianity without destroying
Christianity.

"Strict Fideists assign no place to reason in discovering or
understanding fundamental tenets of religion. For them
blind faith is supreme as the way to certitude and
salvation."__off the web

Again . . .
I do not argue for Fideism. There are some evidences to support
the existence of God and the truth of Christianity, but these evidences
must be evaluated on the basis of Probability and Plausibility which
are subjective and are saturated with our human biases, prejudices,
and presuppositions. Nonetheless these kinds of arguments are valuable
to many people.

Thoughts?


JAG

[]

What is faith? Simple mental assent to a proposition for no reason?

 

[The Pixie]

It is based on evidence.
That doesn't mean that faith is not a requirement.
...

Tell that to the OP.

By the way, I have deleted all the evidence that assumes the Bible is true. Hmm, looks like all of it ultimately depends on faith, nott evidence.

 

[Eightcrackers]

So does Islam.

And Islam's is six-hundred years more proximal.

 

[Eightcrackers]

True, except that WHEN a person becomes Born Again of the Spirit by FAITH, quite a Bit of "Empirical Evidence" will follow.

Giving evidence to people that don't need it; witholding it from those that do.

What a guy ? ? ?

 

[cjab]

JAG Writes:

Christianity Is A Faith And Not An Intellectual Philosophical System
Based Upon Rationalism And Empiricism.

This is wrong, as well as being badly worded, as mixing up disparate words and ideas and concepts that need to be considered and digested separately.

The "faith" aspect of Christianity principally relates to God's intention for future rewards and punishments. Although often worded as "faith in God" e.g. as in the creeds, this misses the point that it is "faith in what God will do according to his promises" as well as "faith in what God has done."

It is 100% based on rationalism, empiricism and history. It is also 100% based on knowledge, and obedience. Knowledge of God is through personal experience, and obedience to Christ is through knowledge of the gospel and of Christ's commands. It is also based on submitting to the Holy Spirit. Christ is a historical figure, as are the prophecies relating to him.

2Th 1:8 "He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus."

These matters are certainly "empirical" : based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

I would agree to exclude the word "philosophical" although there is a limited scope for philosophy (but much less than many theologians suppose).

 

[Eightcrackers]

2Th 1:8 "He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus."

This is certainly "empirical" : based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

What empirical observation/s support this?

 

[cjab]

What empirical observation/s support this?

The self-destruction of all the world's empires & evil cities, the fulfilment of Christ's own prophecies, the fulfilment by Christ of many antecedent prophecies, the blessings that come from faith in Christ (release from evil, freedom and from being bound by satan). Knowledge of God is empircally gained from obeying the diktats of the Holy Spirit, and from experiencing the evil consequences that flow from the Spirit being disobeyed etc,

 

[Eightcrackers]

The self-destruction of all the world's empires & evil cities

Does not in any way support the assertion that a god/s was responsible.

the fulfilment of Christ's own prophecies,

For which we have only the Bible's own word - "Bible makes prophecy; Bible reports prophecy fulfilled".

the blessings that come from faith in Christ (release from evil, freedom and from being bound by satan).

The faith alone may be responsible, and there is no empirical evidence that Satan exists, either.

Knowledge of God is empircally gained from obeying the diktats of the Holy Spirit,

Circular - assumes the existence of the thing we seek to prove.

 

[cjab]

Does not in any way support the assertion that a god/s was responsible.

If God is God then he must have been responsible. Your assertion is only true if a priori you deny that God is God (which is perverse). Christians don't believe in a feeble deist god.

For which we have only the Bible's own word - "Bible makes prophecy; Bible reports prophecy fulfilled".

No. It was prophesied long before Christ that the spiritual descendants of Abraham would be like stars in the sky. How many millions of Christians are there?

The faith alone may be responsible, and there is no empirical evidence that Satan exists, either.

Well you're in denial about the reality of evil, and that's your major sin. One could wish that you would experience the realities of evil first hand just to make you face reality. I suspect you have a grossly defective education.

Circular - assumes the existence of the thing we seek to prove.

It may seem so to you, but not to one who has the Spirit.

 

[Eightcrackers]

If God is God then he must have been responsible.

We are seeking empirical evidence of his existence, not tautologies.

Your assertion is only true if a priori you deny that God is God (which is perverse).

God can only be god, if he exists.
Empirical evidence of his existence, please.

No. It was prophesied long before Christ that the spiritual descendants of Abraham would be like stars in the sky. How many millions of Christians are there?

How many stars are there in the sky? Depending on how you count, there are either ~5000 (visible to the naked eye), or 10^24 (stars in existence). Either way, this "prophecy" (not that "one day, there will be lots of you" qualifies) is a laughable under- or over-estimate.

Well you're in denial about the reality of evil

Another claim, for which there is no empirical evidence.

It may seem so to you, but not to one who has the Spirit.

Believing that your beliefs render circular arguments, non-circular, is also circular.

 

[cjab]

We are seeking empirical evidence of his existence, not tautologies.

God can only be god, if he exists.
Empirical evidence of his existence, please.

You exist.

How many stars are there in the sky? Depending on how you count, there are either ~5000 (visible to the naked eye), or 10^24 (stars in existence). Either way, this "prophecy" (not that "one day, there will be lots of you" qualifies) is a laughable under- or over-estimate.

Actually there were two comparators used in the prophecy, also including sand on the sea shore. These were common metaphors for "very large number". I also suggest the idea is of an uncountable number.

Another claim, for which there is no empirical evidence.

Believing that your beliefs render circular arguments, non-circular, is also circular.

Waste of time debating with you as you refuse to acknowledge evil or the causes or reality of it.

 

[Eightcrackers]

You exist.

Agreed.
Provide empirical proof that my existence entails his existence, please.

Actually there were two comparators used in the prophecy, also including sand on the sea shore. These were common metaphors for "very large number". I also suggest the idea is of an uncountable number.

You think "there will be a very large number of you" counts as a prophecy?!

Waste of time debating with you as you refuse to acknowledge evil or the causes or reality of it.

I acknowledge the reality of evil.
I am seeking empirical evidence that the cause of evil is what you think it is.

Stomping off in a huff because I won't grant your central premise, is childish.

 

[cjab]

Agreed.
Provide empirical proof that my existence entails his existence, please.

The chances of you being created by chance from a planet with no biological life are so small they can be discounted as zero.

You think "there will be a very large number of you" counts as a prophecy?!

Certainly. Consider how small the nation of the Jews is, and how large Christianity is, which sprang from Abraham, whose religion was by faith in the promises of God.

I acknowledge the reality of evil.
I am seeking empirical evidence that the cause of evil is what you think it is.

Since you are unable to give any other cause, then who are you to contradict me? But actually there is another cause: the decision of man to rebel against God in the first place. Demon possession is what keeps a man doing evil and prevents him from repenting. It's why many criminals are serial criminals.

Stomping off in a huff because I won't grant your central premise, is childish.

 

[Eightcrackers]

The chances of you being created by chance from a planet with no biological life are so small they can be discounted as zero.

I don't believe in chance, and I reject your characterization of evolution by natural selection as chance.
Next?

Certainly. Consider how small the nation of the Jews is, and how large Christianity is, which sprang from Abraham, whose religion was by faith in the promises of God.

Then your standards for prophecy are comically low.
I hereby prophesy that one day, the Soviet Union will be reborn.

Since you are unable to give any other cause,

An argument from ignorance fallacy - "you have no answer, so I win".

then who are you to contradict me?

Demanding justification of your assertions is not "contradicting you".

"Prove it" is not the same as "you are wrong".

 

[cjab]

I don't believe in chance, and I reject your characterization of evolution by natural selection as chance.
Next?

Evading the issue. Natural selection is altogether different from organic-based life itself arising by chance.

Then your standards for prophecy are comically low.
I hereby prophesy that one day, the Soviet Union will be reborn.

You obviously don't undersand the prophecy.

An argument from ignorance fallacy - "you have no answer, so I win".

You should at least give an explanation of why people appear to be born "bad."

Demanding justification of your assertions is not "contradicting you".

"Prove it" is not the same as "you are wrong".

Ultimately I believe the words of Christ, and what he said as to the reality of evil being supported by the activities of malign spiritual entities.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Evading the issue. Natural selection is altogether different from organic-based life itself arising by chance.

Indeed - what's your point?

"If it's a A or B, and the chances of A are 0.00001%, then B is almost certain"

works only if A and B are the only two possibilities.
You have not shown that your god, and chance, are the only two possibilities.

You obviously don't undersand the prophecy.

Mine was no less a prophecy than was yours - "in the future, X will happen".

Ultimately I believe the words of Christ

You said that there was empirical proof for the rest of us - where is it?

 

[5wize]

God didn't need a boat. People did. Are you suggesting they could walk from Jerusalem to America? Sheesh!



There is no such judgement of ignorance. See Acts 17:30. Looks like you are as ignorant about the Bible as you are about world history.

You need to back the verses up starting at :24 to see how silly your answer of "the church" was:

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[b] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[c]

29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

When you are wrong about something... you are epically wrong, like now.

 

[SteveB]

Tell that to the OP.

I don't need to.
He has the same bible as I have.

By the way, I have deleted all the evidence that assumes the Bible is true. Hmm, looks like all of it ultimately depends on faith, nott evidence.

I noticed that.
Just because you deleted the content of my post that challenges your thinking on the topic doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or exist.

What it does show is that you don't want to know anything that challenges your beliefs.

Each person, and people group described, believed that YHVH would do exactly what he had previously promised to do, and YHVH followed through on his end, and fulfilled his terms to them. Thus, giving us evidence:
1- he is real
2- he is knowable
3- he will do for us what he promises
4- he cannot lie
And many other such things.

Your excuses and justifications for your unbelief are like dust in the wind. A decent breeze blows them away, uncovering your self-delusions.