Justification for belief

Originally posted by Suzianne
Justification is a funny word. I'm going to assume you do not mean the definition of justify in a theological sense, meaning "to declare innocent or guiltless; absolve or acquit", but rather the usual definition of "to show (an act, claim, statement, etc.) to be just or right" or "to defend or uphold as warranted or well-grounded".

If LJ indeed ...[text shortened]... racle of a life lived more abundantly. Our faith is simply justified by His love for us.

Since you have reminded us of this early post, I will ask about your "Christian obedience, devoid of threat and rooted in love, is what God truly wants."

What do you make of the emphasis on threats of eternal suffering that so many people emphasize? Do you think it is harmful and unhealthy?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Do you have a point? Why do you keep on repeating over and over, page after page, that people think differently? It doesn't negate anything I have said, nor does it change the fact that you are deluded.
That people are convinced that God exists, is obvious. That doesn't mean they have good justification for their convictions. It is notable that not one s ...[text shortened]... nd most of your time asking silly questions to which you don't appear to listen to the responses

The point is you may be the one who is deluded yet you think you are not. Sorry to break it to you dude but you are hardly an authority on what constitutes good justifications for belief.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
The point is you may be the one who is deluded yet you think you are not.

I am well aware of that possibility. But I have good justification for thinking I am not, whereas you have no justification for thinking you are not.

Sorry to break it to you dude but you are hardly an authority on what constitutes good justifications for belief.
I have never claimed to be an authority on it. But I clearly know more about it than you.
More importantly, I have justifications whereas you do not.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am well aware of that possibility. But I have good justification for thinking I am not, whereas you have no justification for thinking you are not.

[b]Sorry to break it to you dude but you are hardly an authority on what constitutes good justifications for belief.
I have never claimed to be an authority on it. But I clearly know more about it than you.
More importantly, I have justifications whereas you do not.[/b]

People who are deluded may also think that they have good justification for thinking they are not deluded. You think I don't have justifications for my beliefs you can't know that.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
People who are deluded may also think that they have good justification for thinking they are not deluded. You think I don't have justifications for my beliefs you can't know that.

I do know that. People who are deluded may think that I can't know that.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I do know that. People who are deluded may think that I can't know that.

People that are deluded also think they know things which they don't.

If you really know it then it should be quite easy to prove.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
People that are deluded also think they know things which they don't.

If you really know it then it should be quite easy to prove.

If you really have justifications, it should be quite easy to prove.

Originally posted by twhitehead
If you really have justifications, it should be quite easy to prove.

So you can't prove something that you just claimed to know?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
So you can't prove something that you just claimed to know?

I just did.

Originally posted by JS357
Since you have reminded us of this early post, I will ask about your "Christian obedience, devoid of threat and rooted in love, is what God truly wants."

What do you make of the emphasis on threats of eternal suffering that so many people emphasize? Do you think it is harmful and unhealthy?

Is it harmful?

Well, it doesn't help. We lose sight of the Christian message of love when we threaten people.

Is it unhealthy?

For whom? The religion in general? Perhaps. To the people making the threats? Probably not. Any damage to their psyche is done already.

Originally posted by twhitehead
If you really have justifications, it should be quite easy to prove.

Justification is often personal, because nothing one can say will always justify it for someone else. Therefore, one cannot always "prove" justification.

Originally posted by twhitehead
For those who believe lies, being honest comes hard. Why can't you come out and say what you want to say? Why the vagueness?

I'm "vague" because you don't get it? Well, again, that's not my problem.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And in my response to that post, you will note, I pointed out that you were using 'faith' in a very different way from the intention of the OP.

You did not attempt to justify your belief. You attempted to justify, given existing belief, having faith.

[b]That you don't believe it doesn't really make it not a justification.
It is not that ...[text shortened]... meaning that LJ had used for 'justification' then went right ahead and used a different meaning.[/b]

No, sorry. My justification is not "proof". Any justification need not be proof. If something is "proved" it doesn't need "justification". I do not need proof to believe in God. I do have faith, and this is my justification. I'm really sorry if you need proof, but my belief is not hamstrung in this manner. Again, my belief is not proved, but it IS justified.

Originally posted by twhitehead
For those who believe lies, being honest comes hard. Why can't you come out and say what you want to say? Why the vagueness?

But I do not believe lies. You believe that I believe lies. And I do not need to justify any of it to you. My world revolves quite well (and I suspect that yours does, too) whether you believe what I believe, or not.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I submitted my justification for my belief in the second post in this thread and reiterated it later down the page.

That you don't believe it doesn't really make it not a justification.

Rather than [b]justification, what you mean is convince me.

Sorry, that's not my job, or my concern. If you don't buy it, it's pretty much your problem, not mine.[/b]

I went back and had a look at what you said, I'll copy and paste the last paragraph to here for our convenience:

When we respond to the gospel and live as children of God, He changes our hearts and makes us want to obey out of love. God is a being of love, and His plan for us is rooted in love. And this is all the justification my faith needs, His love for me and the changes He has brought to my life. Belief in Him is not grounded in a hereafter, but in the miracle of a life lived more abundantly. Our faith is simply justified by His love for us.

Suzianne, second post page 1 of this thread.

The difficulty with this is that it is post hoc. Basically, you've said that you feel God's love because of your faith and have faith because of God's love for you, which is somewhat circular. I'm not arguing with this at the level of your own personal belief system particularly, it's clearly sufficient for you, but the post hoc nature means that it isn't going to be accessible to an atheist which twhitehead has said he is (as I recall). What I'm edging towards is the question of how you would justify the Christian faith to someone who doesn't have any strong beliefs of their own but is open to discussion. I'm not asking you for a justification that can withstand the kind of skepticism I approach these questions with, that's probably not possible, but one that does not require that one believes in it all in the first place.