DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Love God Only
HTML https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Philosophical Questions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3837--------------------------------------------------
What about 'Faith'?
By: Mike Date: February 22, 2013, 9:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry, correct me if I'm wrong (and others may pitch in) but in
your rational denunciation of Hitchens and his posting supporter
(
HTML http://lovegodonly.createaforum.com/16/caution!-controversial-post/msg3835/#msg3835)<br
/>you appear to me to leave no room for 'faith' that by its own
definition has no scientific, or logical proof.
Would you reject the "substance of things hoped for, the
evidence of things not seen" on the same grounds?
#Post#: 3838--------------------------------------------------
Re: What about 'Faith'?
By: Kerry Date: February 22, 2013, 10:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Mike link=topic=405.msg3837#msg3837
date=1361591459]
Kerry, correct me if I'm wrong (and others may pitch in) but in
your rational denunciation of Hitchens and his posting supporter
(
HTML http://lovegodonly.createaforum.com/16/caution!-controversial-post/msg3835/#msg3835)<br
/>you appear to me to leave no room for 'faith' that by its own
definition has no scientific, or logical proof.
Would you reject the "substance of things hoped for, the
evidence of things not seen" on the same grounds?
[/quote]I believe that once we have apprehended the goodness of
God, we should doubt anything malicious said about Him. Even
if we read the Bible and we think it must be saying something
about God that makes Him foolish, wicked or impotent, we should
pause and ask ourselves if our faith is in God or in our
interpretations of a book? What God do we have faith in? I
say, once someone has perceived the beginning truth about the
goodness of God, he should not doubt it based on flawed
arguments of men or even on books that are said to be holy
written by holy men.
Hitchens seems to have faith of a different sort. Not knowing,
he puts his faith in a God what demands wicked or foolish acts
from people.
I also say that once we latch onto faith and do not suspect God
of foolishness but are willing to look into how He might be
right, we are like children who realize our parents may know
more than we do. We don't doubt their benevolence when told
this or that, stomp our feet and scream, "You don't love me."
Yes, Hitchens reminds me of a brat who thinks God doesn't love
him because there are things he doesn't understand. I trust
that some of the things we don't understand now may someday
become clearer. If they are important for us to understand, I
believe God will teach us using one means or another. If they
aren't important for us to know, why get in a dither?
Faith for me is evidence of a sort. It's not scientific
evidence, but it's still evidence.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for,
the evidence of things not seen.
Let us go back to your days of singing with the Salvation Army.
I would say, if I had to analyze that situation, that you
received some evidence. You were not operating on "blind"
faith. Nor was it something devised solely in your own
imagination -- there were other people there also, experiencing
the same thing you were. Now since you received this evidence,
I would say you would be foolish ever to doubt it. It may
not be able to demonstrated scientifically, but you still know
it. Doubt whether books can err, doubt whether Jesus may have
erred, doubt anything else but do not doubt the Holy Spirit once
you know it.
Hitchens' mistake was adopting a point of view about God based
on a lack of evidence. He didn't understand circumcision and
lambasts God about it. That's the sign of a bigot to me. For
all he knows, there could be a God who didn't order circumcision
-- maybe people made that up -- so why accuse God? Why does he
assume that if there is a God, it has to be the way the Bible
has things? Until we know, we should not base our ideas
about God based on rumors and the accusations of men and on
things we don't understand.
#Post#: 3839--------------------------------------------------
Re: What about 'Faith'?
By: Runner Date: February 22, 2013, 10:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]quote Kerry..I believe that once we have apprehended the
goodness of God, we should doubt anything malicious said about
Him. Even if we read the Bible and we think it must be saying
something about God that makes Him foolish, wicked or impotent,
we should pause and ask ourselves if our faith is in God or in
'our' interpretations of a book? [/quote]
Excellent! Amen to that!!
#Post#: 4989--------------------------------------------------
Re: What about 'Faith'?
By: Leaf Date: May 24, 2013, 1:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
More about faith:
Hebrews 11:6
6 (a)But without faith it is impossible to please him: (b)for he
that cometh to God must believe that he is, (c)and that he is a
rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Seeking for God and His truth is futile if it is not first
believed that God is.
I heard a great statement the other day. I liked it so much I
wrote it down. It is: God does not respond to need. God responds
to faith.
Therefore, if we have faith that God is and that we diligently
seek Him, it is promised that we will be rewarded. What that
reward is, is left up to God to decide and surely it will be for
our best good whatever it is.
*****************************************************