Do you believe; and why?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-15-2019, 08:27 PM)Lucidus Wrote: When you say it's a "personal relationship" - may I ask in what ways? For example has God ever interacted with you in way that are actually demonstrable, or is it an intuition on your part? The reason I ask is because the personal aspect of the God - believer relationship seems to rather different than what we mean when talking about any other personal relationship in our lives. 


As I started in the OP; I rather enjoy exploring the "why" of things, and moreover, I find the conversations to be interesting and thought provoking on many occasions. This thread has gone very well in my opinion. People have shared opinion, exchanged ideas and asked questions -- and all in a very civil and respectful manner. I think it has been, and continues to be, an intriguing discussion. I'm not sure what your objection is to inquiry, as it is a most useful toll in all exchanges or dialogue.

If I ask someone why they believe and the answer is "faith" -- I feel obliged to follow up and delve into why that is and how they came to that reasoning. The same holds true when someone asked me why I don't believe and I answer that I currently see no good reason to do so. It would be perfectly acceptable for that person to wonder why that is the case and what led me to that decision. 

If conversations simply ended at initial "why" and "because" -- without any further dialogue, what deeper understanding would we ever gain about each other?


Thank you for the response. 

I agree that there is no empirical evidence, and I find that to be a huge problem for such audacious and extraordinary claims. I simply cannot place stock in testimony that is anecdotal and/or emotional in nature. It's simply too subjective (as you alluded to) and can be easily mistaken. I simply can't rationalize a belief in something for which there is no reliable or verifiable proof.

The "faith" thing has always been somewhat of a curiosity to me, as it pertains to religious context, not faith in the colloquial sense. I see it as the suspension of rationality in order to justify the wish / hope that it's true. 

My position has never been to declare that there is no God; only that I see no evidence to think it's the case or justify belief in it. For me personally, I see no reason to believe that a God exists until it can be demonstrated to be the case. Personally, if it can't be demonstrated, I feel non-belief in such a proposition is the justifiable default. 

And there it is. Before you asked for evidence you knew there wasn't evidence. Which is why I asked you why you're asking for something you know you're not going to get? You're smart enough to know the answer so what is your purpose? You're also smart enough to know Christianity is a faith based religion obviously in the religious context, not the colloquial context. Therefore the answer to why believers believe can be answered with a single word: faith. You're smart enough to know that. If you only believe in the demonstrable then you miss the entire point of faith. You're smart enough to know that, also. So I'm curious where you're going with this and why?

Furthermore, I haven't objected to anything. I rather enjoy the "why" of things, also. Which is why I'm inquiring into your inquiry especially after you demonstrated you already know the answer to your inquiries for evidence.

Lastly, can you demonstrate your non-belief to me so it is believable? I wanna believe that you don't believe, but how am I supposed to believe that? You could tell me you don't believe (again), but how do I know you don't secretly believe? So I think I'll have to default to non-belief in your non-belief since you can't demonstrate it.