The Moral Argument for God's Existence

@kellyjay said
Faith is what we all walk out daily.

No.

Faith is something that you believe without evidence. 'Scientific advancements' are evidence-based.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
No.

Faith is something that you believe without evidence. 'Scientific advancements' are evidence-based.

Duke you can walk across your yard in faith thinking it’s no big deal and discover a sinkhole some so deep you are toast. I discovered that reality when I was stationed in Alaska walking across tundra.

@dj2becker said
If it is possible for a jury to interpret the laws of a country in a fair (objective) manner why is it not possible to interpret the Bible in the same way?

Let's start at the beginning: If I were to interpret Genesis 1:1 to mean exactly what it says, how would my interpretation of Genesis 1:1 be VERY subjective?

No matter how many times you "start from the beginning". No matter how many times you talk around it. If you don't have an objective standard for interpretation of the Bible, then the Bible does not provide you an objective moral standard.

The Bible very widely open to interpretation. Over the centuries Christians have been on completely opposite sides as to topics such as slavery, capital punishment, race, women, LGBT, etc. The list goes on and on. People interpret the Bible based on their own subjective standard.

Your interpretation of the Bible is subjective. You have no objective standard for interpretation of the Bible, therefore the Bible does not provide you with an objective moral standard.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
No.

Faith is something that you believe without evidence. 'Scientific advancements' are evidence-based.

Up to a point yes. Doesn't science allow for a self correcting if new data becomes
available? This shows a couple of things, regardless of how good your math is on
any given topic to prove a point, new variables can change the whole equation.
It is no different where a variable in any equation if it is discovered to not carry the
value we thought it did.

Evidence to come to any conclusion also means that you have to confidence in
that you are actually interpreting all the data properly, not making bad
assumptions. This is nothing but faith, you can look at the evidence great so can I
that doesn't mean that it means what either of us think.

Did you look at that link I gave you?

@kellyjay said
Up to a point yes. Doesn't science allow for a self correcting if new data becomes
available? This shows a couple of things, regardless of how good your math is on
any given topic to prove a point, new variables can change the whole equation.
It is no different where a variable in any equation if it is discovered to not carry the
value we thought it did.

Evidence to c ...[text shortened]... I
that doesn't mean that it means what either of us think.

Did you look at that link I gave you?

This is all fine as long as you aren't pretending that all the things your faith tells you are "true" are objective facts or that any moral compass that you base on your faith is anything other than subjective.

@kellyjay said
If God is saving those around you and you are missing it, that is the reality you are
missing, because all you think it is going on is a difference of opinion.

Your assertion that it is "the reality [I am] missing" is purely subjective and your "difference of opinion" with me ~ ultimately ~ is meaningless to me with regard to what I see as "the reality" of my own fate. We are both being subjective.

@fmf said
This is all fine as long as you aren't pretending that all the things your faith tells you are "true" are objective facts or that any moral compass that you base on your faith is anything other than subjective.

It’s also a bad idea to avoid truth when it is presented through faith only.

@kellyjay said
It’s also a bad idea to avoid truth when it is presented through faith only.

I am not avoiding "truth". All these years here in Indonesia, and I haven't become a Muslim or a Hindu. I am not avoiding "truth" in those cases either. You attaching the word "truth" to your beliefs as if that is an argument in its favour - in and of itself - is mere rhetoric and purely subjective. But that's OK. It's OK to be subjective. That's all we can be when it comes to conjecture about supernatural things.

@kellyjay said
It’s also a bad idea to avoid truth when it is presented through faith only.

“Avoiding truth that is presented through faith”

I wonder how that can even happen.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

No.

Faith is something that you believe without evidence. 'Scientific advancements' are evidence-based.

The biblical definition of faith is that it is the substantiation of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen.

Now faith is the substantiation of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1)

Kelly was right that the Christian walks (or SHOULD walk) in faith each day.

Faith is one half of the equation. The other half is the God is faithful.
How these two operate together is mysterious to me.

What is the cause and what is the effect is often too mysterious to me.
But I know they work together.

Sometimes I consider it a miracle that I have faith. I am not sure how it got into me.
But I am glad I have it. And I want more.

I did not muster up faith by some will power of my own.
It is more like this faith was radiated into me by the word of God.
In fact in this mysterious matter the Bible says that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

So faith comes out of hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. (Rom. 10:17)

If you want faith, I advise you to go to the Bible to read that faith may be infused into you, the best place to start.

@sonship said
If you want faith, I advise you to go to the Bible to read that faith may be infused into you, the best place to start.

OT or NT?

@fmf said
I am not avoiding "truth". All these years here in Indonesia, and I haven't become a Muslim or a Hindu. I am not avoiding "truth" in those cases either. You attaching the word "truth" to your beliefs as if that is an argument in its favour - in and of itself - is mere rhetoric and purely subjective. But that's OK. It's OK to be subjective. That's all we can be when it comes to conjecture about supernatural things.

The truth stands apart from us all, meaning it doesn’t matter what I think or say about it. So if the truth seeks us out and we ignore it, then that is between you and God not me and you.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

OT or NT?

Stick to your guns.
What diff does it make?

Stay with your principles.

As a non-believer, the nuances of the different translations means very little to me. Sorry.

@kellyjay said
The truth stands apart from us all, meaning it doesn’t matter what I think or say about it. So if the truth seeks us out and we ignore it, then that is between you and God not me and you.

Your assertions about what is and isn't the "truth" when it comes to supernatural things are entirely subjective. The discussion of it is 100% between you and me. Your "God" isn't posting on this thread, so there is nothing going on between me and your "God" when it comes to your opinions and beliefs. We are both being subjective about this and about morality. And that's fine. There's nothing untoward about that.