Originally posted by Coletti
Anyone who claims there is no evidence to warrant faith is fool. A fool does not understand the meaning of evidence or faith. The evidence is there, and even the fool acknowledges the existence of the evidence. But he has confused the evidence for the object of faith that the evidence might point too.
For instance, the atheist may claim the evidence d ...[text shortened]... hat does the evidence point too?
2) Is there enough evidence to believe what it points too?
I have tried to make a distinction between evidence and good, or compelling, evidence. You may choose to claim any number of nebulous things as evidence for your god, but it doesn't necessarily advance your case one bit. You claim that:
Now evidence of God is all around us, and within us. It is all things nature, all perceived facts. From within, it is the rational mind of man. Man’s capacity to analyze the evidence, is itself evidence that we are made in the image of God.
This is a statement of faith, not evidence that could be used to establish the existence of your god. It would be a simple matter to discredit this so called "evidence" by introducing perfectly natural explanations for them all that do not rely on a reference to a god. In order for you to use "nature" as evidence for your god, you have to demonstrate that it could have come around by no other means than by the hand of god. Of course you can't do so.
In order for something to count as good, or compelling, evidence, it has to convince a broad spectrum of people. If your evidence only convinces other christians (who are already pre-disposed to believe it) then it is worthless.
Your definition of faith is also worthless. The intellectual assent to understand propositions? I don't think so. The definition of faith is:
1a: allegiance or duty to a person: loyalty
1b: fidelity to one's promises
2a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to god
2a (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of religion
2b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof
2b (2): complete confidence
3: something that is believed esp. with strong conviction; esp. a system of religious beliefs
People do not have a strong belief that the brakes on their car will not fail. They simply think that the chances of it happening are very low, hence they proceed with the assumption that they will not fail. Assigning a negligible probability to something is not the same as having faith in the opposite.
You say we all believe in something. That is true. But it does not in any way mean that we have faith. I believe that the sun will rise tomorrow because there is a super abundance of evidence to indicate that it will do so. I cannot prove that the sun will rise tomorrow, but I can believe it with a very high degree of confidence. It requires no faith on my part at all. I will assign a degree of belief to any number of things based on the evidence that supports them. Faith is believing something very strongly in spite of the fact that there is no good evidence to do so. Faith is not at all the same as believing something for which there is good or strong evidence.