Originally posted by Suzianne
Yes, much clearer. Not sure I see a connection between this and anything else, but yes, what you just said is very clear.
So tell me again how this affects my faith? Especially since the lack of any empirical evidence doesn't affect my faith in the slightest. It wouldn't be faith otherwise.
I appreciate that.
However there are people, even on these forums, who seem to believe that having
faith in something, that believing something really really hard, IS evidence.
A nonsense that you don't subscribe to (although you have your own nonsense which I will get to)
but that many people apparently do.
Also there are plenty of theists who claim to have presented (or be presenting) evidence that
god exists (or some other of their claims is true) when what they are presenting is not evidence
for their claims in the slightest.
RJHinds with his claims about the "Shroud of Turin" or the "Empty Tomb" or even claims that the bible
is evidence of god all fall into the category.
And so it's a reasonable discussion to talk about what evidence actually is/means.
Now I know that you believe that you believe based on pure faith and that you are not supposed to have
evidence for the existence of god because if you did have evidence for god you wouldn't be believing based
on pure faith... Which is kind of circular but lets press on...
You feel that we are supposed to believe in god based on faith alone and that only by doing this (and anything
else god requires) can we show ourselves worthy (or some such)...
You don't think you need evidence.
However this is nonsense.
If you have no evidence that a god or gods exists of any kind, then any possible god or gods could exist (or not).
There are in fact an infinite number of possible gods, including there actually being an FSM.
Without any evidence to pick one (or one set) out of the infinite pack your odds of picking the one that actually exists,
and this is making the rather large and unwarranted presumption that one/some DO actually exist, your chances of guessing
correctly are zero (makes mathematicians wince... sniggers).
And that's just for working out which god exists... we haven't even got to what they might want us to do.
Now of course you didn't pick the god of the bible at random.
There is a bible for starters, and lots of other people who believe (or think they believe) in the god described in it.
You live in a country dominated by people who believe in this god. (in one guise or another)
If you lived in another country (or even just community) dominated by another religion you would probably believe just
as wholeheartedly in that god, or those gods.
If you lived a couple of millennia in the past you would have believed in different gods yet again. (and they had lots to choose
from back then)
Now it's perfectly understandable that you have chosen to believe the religion of your society/family/country/ect...
But it's not rational, and that is no reason to suppose that it's actually true.
The bible is not evidence for god, neither is lots of people believing that it is or in the god described in it.
In fact with all it's flaws and traceable history it's actually evidence against the existence of your god being real as it's highly implausible
that a god with the powers and knowledge ascribed to the bible god in the bible would ever actually author the bible, or do the things
described in it.
So without any valid reason to pick Christianity, without any evidence, with just faith, you have effectively zero chance of being right.
it is thus irrational, and foolish, to believe that you are right.
And no amount of faith can ever change that... Only evidence can.
And I would note again that no god worthy of being worshipped would ever want to be worshipped let alone require it.
And no god worthy of worship would punish finite crimes with infinite punishment.
And no god worthy of worship would require belief without any evidence.