I understand that an atheist needs proof to believe in God. That makes sense for them. But why in questioning a believer's faith do they need proof to understand why a believer believes. Isn't it obvious the faith requires no proof? We understand they do not have faith. Why would they require a believer to prove why he has faith?
sort by best latest
This empty curse of needing seeing to believe is a failure. There is a disconnect between what is and what must be proven. Science is wonderful but for someone to think it is the only is sad.
I agree, Eric, for I do not believe because anything my parents taught me, but because I know Him, as I am in an intimate and personal relationship with Him. So, no proof is needed for me, because He is there for me and always has been there for me
Interesting concept to link faith with feelings. Some truth there but only a partial one. Experience is a little more than feelings.Simply by stating "I believe" I prove that part of the equation. Why? Because I do. Is it a feeling. Maybe.
Makes very good sense.
Me thinks it is more than a "slight" similarity. It is the crux. Many see our mind as an obstacle to enlightenment. Perhaps it is so.
Can one defend faith? Seems impossible. Besides, what is the point. Belief and faith are not contingent on proof.
However like I mentioned, if someone wants to bring their beliefs/faith into the realm of facts, proof then becomes mandatory. You cant back out and say you don't need to prove yourself once assertions are made.
Hi Link and Eric,
Well, Link, I guess I am one of those who does not "need" proof because I have faith, as a result of my intimate and personal relationship with the Lord. I just know without a doubt, and need no so-called "proof" ...
So you have faith due to your relationship with your lord.
Umm...isnt that your own "proof", Reaper? You make it sound like you didn't have faith prior to experiencing whatever current relationship you have, and afterwards you did.
That is an interesting notion Link. Perhaps a personal relationship is a kind of proof to a believer. Never looked at it that way. Kind of a highly personal acceptance of a fact. A little different than how we normally look at proofs as universal.