I envy people who have Faith

[BlueBloodedBlue]

I don't but it must be a real comfort to believe in a higher power and have something that gives a meaning to everything.

That's it really.

@Malie

The dictionary definition of faith is not a Christian definition of faith. I was trying to point it out to you but of course you’re so stuck with secular definitions that you won’t listen.

No, you said "you are of course wrong" when I shared the dictionary definition of 'faith'.

If you had said "that isn't how I define faith personally" or "that isn't how my church defines faith" then I would have had no issue with that. Those statements would be true.

You are either unwilling or unable to accept the difference between sharing a belief versus sharing a fact.

It's bizarre.

Clearly you don’t.

@Malie I am happy to admit that I might be wrong about there being a god. But I'm not a 'don't know', I'm an 'I believe there isn't a god'. Which makes me an atheist, not an agnostic, but at the same time not arrogant enough to believe that I am right. That lack of arrogance on my part is the difference between us.

And as @wellhelloitsme has said, you are free to believe in 'Christian faith'. But that does not alter the dictionary definition of faith one bit.

I do not understand your need to feel superior to atheists.

Sorry but your post comes across to me as ‘aggressive and unpleasant to deal with’ . I’m sorry you cannot have a ‘meaningful discussion without throwing personal accusations at me. But never mind. It doesn’t change anything. God bless! 😊

never mind! 😊

@pointythings

I am happy to admit that I might be wrong about there being a god. But I'm not a 'don't know', I'm an 'I believe there isn't a god'. Which makes me an atheist, not an agnostic, but at the same time not arrogant enough to believe that I am right. That lack of arrogance on my part is the difference between us.

Ditto, well said.

@Malie

Ah the passive aggressive 'God Bless' again.

Your attitude is so distinctly unchristian by Christian values.

Arrogant and passive aggressive posts galore.

Absolutely bizarre.

Sorry but when one puts a point of view based on knowledge in your view that is said to be ‘arrogance’. I know you expect people of faith to be wishy washy and not stand up for their faith, but when you meet someone who can then p,ease don’t take things personally. I’m not falling out with you - just stating what I believe. Idon’t call you arrogant although you have made some extremely dogmatic statements which cannot be proved. We are having a discussion. If you want to continue, fine but else let’s not be uncivilised

HERE is the Christian definition of faith;

Hebrews 11:1: “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.”

In other words, you are being asked to believe in things that you have not seen, that you do not have proof for.

Discuss.

P,ease! Stop the name calling!

@Malie

Here you go: www.gotquestions.org/definition-of-faith.html

'Your Questions, Biblical Answers' apparently.

Thankfully, the Bible contains a clear definition of faithh in Hebrews 11:11: “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” Simply put, the biblical definition of faith is “trusting in something you cannot explicitly prove.”

This definition of faith contains two aspects: intellectual assent and trust. Intellectual assent is believing something to be true. Trust is actually relying on the fact that the something is true. A chair is often used to help illustrate this. Intellectual assent is recognizing that a chair is a chair and agreeing that it is designed to support a person who sits on it. Trust is actually sitting in the chair.

Understanding these two aspects of faith is crucial. Many people believe certain facts about Jesus Christ. Many people will intellectually agree with the facts the Bible declares about Jesus. But knowing those facts to be true is not what the Bible means by “faith.” The biblical definition of faith requires intellectual assent to the facts and trust in the facts.

Sorry but when one puts a point of view based on knowledge in your view that is said to be ‘arrogance’.
But your point of view is not based on knowledge. It is solely based on belief.

I know you expect people of faith to be wishy washy and not stand up for their faith, but when you meet someone who can then p,ease don’t take things personally.
I don't. I take issue with your sense of superiority. Your belief is neither more nor less valid than mine, but you seem to believe that Christianity is rational but atheism is not. You also state that when Christians commit atrocities it's because they're human and fallible and Christianity is not to blame, but when atheists commit atrocities, it is solely because they are atheists. That isn't standing up for your faith, that's arrogant.

I’m not falling out with you - just stating what I believe. Idon’t call you arrogant although you have made some extremely dogmatic statements which cannot be proved. We are having a discussion. If you want to continue, fine but else let’s not be uncivilised
Where have I been uncivilised? I have disagreed with you, is all. As for dogmatic statements - pot, kettle. At least I have admitted that what I believe is just that - belief. I have not claimed it as fact, unlike you.

Or as another translation of the Greek has it: “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.”

Of course but faith becomes reality. That is the point of Hebrews

You are saying I said a lot of things I didn’t say. You need to read what I actually said before you start making things up

25 pages in, and this thread confirms that people like @malie use religion to feel superior to others, and to spread dogma while dismissing other people's views (dogma that is destructive when we look at religious wars, persecution of homosexuals, etc). Its a tale as old as time.

Ultimately, noone needs the Bible or any religion on earth to know that we should all be kind and caring to each other, and accepting of each of our differences. Normal human beings have an inbuilt moral compass that means we are already working to those assumptions. And as we've seen from this thread, religion causes nasty arguments when someone demands that everyone effectively sit at their feet and agree that their view is the only one that matters. Its ugly.

I'm not an atheist (I'm agnostic) but I've never met an atheist (or agnostic) who would start a war over their belief. I have met several religious people who have become quite vicious in pushing their beliefs, though. And that, ultimately, is the difference.

(Not criticising anyone who is religious by the way, we are all entitled to our very different beliefs-as long as we do so while respecting each other).

@Softplayhooray agreed. I have no issue with people having faith. We all have the need to believe something to get us through the day. It's when we start saying that our beliefs are 'proven' and other beliefs are 'irrational' that things go wrong.

And of course there are atheists who go on about 'sky fairies' - that's unacceptable. But so is saying that atheism is illogical but belief is not. Sadly in my experience there is more disrespect from believers towards non-believers than the other way round.

@Malie

Or as another translation of the Greek has it: “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.”

Well... exactly, this explanation is literally saying that faith is believing what we hope is true and feeling certain of what we cannot see.

Therefore based on beliefs, not facts.

Believing in the absence of proof.

You're agreeing with the dictionary definition...

Why are you so defensive about the fact that faith requires belief in the absence of proof?

I've never heard a Christian say that before, in fact I've heard many (and was taught at school and church) that to love 'God' is to believe in his word and teachings and trust in them completely even if they are difficult for you. That to love 'God' is to believe he has a divine plan that you trust in even though you yourself cannot see the future etc.

Normal human beings have an inbuilt moral compass that means we are already working to those assumptions.

@Softplayhooray Where do you believe this originates from?

@Vincitveritas I see it as a survival instinct. Human society would not survive if everyone were fully selfish and only out to protect their own interests. Altruism serves the survival of the species.

Getting back to Henry VIII, he stole an estimated 1.3 million pounds (equivalent to over 421 million today) in the disillusion of the monasteries. Most of this money was frittered away waging foreign wars and building elaborate palaces. He was not driven by Christian faith but rather greed, blood lust and a desire to be remembered as a mighty warrior King. Imagine how much good he could have done with that sum had he actually been following Jesus' teachings. Jesus plainy says, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God" and "You cannot serve God and money".

That means exactly the same thing! You said that your faith is based on facts, but this is saying that you don’t need the facts or proof you just have to have belief, to have faith.

So which one is it? What are the facts? And for a fact to be true it, it’s existence needs to have been proven. And you can’t interpret “facts”!.

And what about the Catholic Church and Vatican that has acquired immeasurable wealth, over centuries? Even today its total wealth can to be calculated because there’s so much of it. What Henry did was peanuts in comparison!

@Vincitveritas Henry VIII certainly made the most of his decision to get himself a divorce by any means - he got the divorce and a shedload of money. Win-win. And yes, he frittered it away very like the UK frittered away its Marshall Aid money on clinging to a doomed Empire. Imagine if in 1945 the UK had spent its aid on infrastructure - sewerage, roads, railway lines, housing (a bit like Germany and the Netherlands did). We'd be in much better nick.

Sorry, that should have said dissolution!

@SnoozyLucy7 I agree with you, let's just say I'm not a massive fan of the Catholic Church.

@pointythings Yes, you certainly would.