After much consideration, I feel as though I understand the frustration of an atheist or skeptic. Monday I blogged about my response to Nic Rossi’s question/statement “@josephmcole on what foundation do you build your faith? there is no empirical evidence conducive to proving the fact that a deity exists.” Interestingly enough, I can’t seem to find him on the web anymore, and that’s why I haven’t made any links in this post to his site. Maybe I’ve been blocked from the excitement of his cyber world. He asked me “on what foundation do you build your faith?” and I can only imagine that he was disappointed with my answer. I’m sure he was searching for something, and he didn’t find it here. I now think I understand his angst. He was looking for something totally different in his search for answers. Perhaps this is because he was looking for facts and instead found a person.
Isn’t that the rub of it? We are all looking for the answers to happiness, peace, joy and contentment in this life, maybe even assurance of a good eternal life. Tirelessly, we flip through pages of books hunting for truth like turning over stones in search of the spare key to the apartment. There must be some formula, some methodology, some logical explanation for the way things are and how to change the way things are. We are looking for facts. Solid items of truth that we can wrap our minds around and use for our benefit. Instead we find a person.
How obscenely disappointing!
A person is hard to understand. A person is complex. A person doesn’t always make sense.
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. — John 14:6
We seek a way to make life work. We seek truth. We seek life. In this search–when one comes to Christianity–they found a person.
How frustrating. How profoundly agonizing. How refreshing.
Truth be told, I would much rather trust a person than facts. Facts must be interpreted; a person can define themselves. Facts can be misrepresented; a person can speak for themselves. Facts couldn’t care less about people; a person can love people.
So, I ask you. What are you looking for? Facts or a person? This alone will determine your level of satisfaction in these posts of mine.
“Truth be told, I would much rather trust a person than facts.”
This probably explains a lot.
When dealing with issues of the nature of reality, trusting facts over people is the only way to go. Otherwise, I would have to believe every religion, in addition to believing that a significant portion of people are abducted by aliens.
When talking about emotions and relationships, sure, I’ll trust other people. But reality requires dealing with facts.
Good point! It’s true. None of us with any amount of experience in life completely trust people. However, I believe that we learn to trust persons, certain persons who have gained our trust. Of course, we must make the distinction that there are some whose intentions can be trusted (He’s a nice guy.) but not their facts (He’s a little slow up there.). In my opinion, the claims of Christ are true because He gained my trust through his words and actions. He’s not just people; he’s a person who has gained my trust. Then again, I trust in him based on what a person told me through the pages of the Bible. lol To that I would venture to say that everyone puts their trust in a philosophy or religion based on what they’ve been told by a person, atheists included.
I think you’re being a bit simplistic.
You shouldn’t distrust someone only because you view them to be mentally inferior or to have a motive to lie. The simple fact is that people can be mistaken for any number of different reasons.
And so I could trust someone with my life. They could be the most trustworthy person I have ever encountered. But if they tell me that it started raining Cheerios over the greater NYC area for 5 days (for one extreme example), I would need more than their word on the matter. Based on what I know of the facts, my trust for this person is not enough. Perhaps the trust I have for this person tells me that they are not lying, just mistaken in some way. But beyond that, it is the facts one must rely on.
The problem I have with your comments is that you cannot demonstrate that the person who you say you trust exists with any good evidence.
“based on what they’ve been told by a person”
This I would debate.
While it is true to a point, the nature of something like science is that anyone can go and find out for themselves. There are experts, and a lot involves listening to what they have to say. But if you want to you can go and discover what they say by yourself, because the nature of science is that it is repeatable and reliable. Religion and philosophy don’t offer that repeatability or reliability.
morsecOde,
Trust but verify, right?
“you cannot demonstrate that the person who you say you trust exists with any good evidence.”
This I would debate, but I imagine you get enough of that on your blog. lol It would be hard for me to present anything here that you haven’t heard or read before concerning evidence of God’s existence. I’m sure you could make a better argument of God’s existence than I could, and I’m the one who believes in His existence! The fact is that the burden of proof is not on my shoulders when it comes to your belief. If God is, and is who I think He is, He has the ability to prove to you what He wills.
I look forward to more of your posts. I enjoyed the “Merry Christmas!” one.
“This I would debate”
Just to be clear, I tried to be as specific with my wording as possible.
You can not, in fact, demonstrate whatever personal experiences you have had that confirm the existence of Jesus to another person. You can relate those experiences. You can swear to their accuracy. But you can’t give that experience to me.
In the same way, and forgive me for lumping you in together, that a UFO abductee can’t make me experience their abduction. Unless or until I am abducted myself, or they bring back something more than a personal anecdote, then the evidence just isn’t good enough. And the same applies to your deity.
And this, by the way, does not mean that your experience didn’t happen. For all I know they did. But unless I experience whatever evidence you claim to have experienced, it’s not believable.
Anyway, I just wanted to make sure I was clear.
So let me ask you this, Morsecode:
Let’s say Jesus Christ is on trial in a court of law & you were the only judge. He is being charged with being God Almighty. The prosecution calls 2 billion people who claim to worship Jesus Christ to come forward and give their testimony. Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?
Some are little old ladies, some scientist, some professors, some are tribal leaders, some are priest, some are pastors, some are high school kids, some are former atheist, etc. They come from all levels of education, all social and economical classes. They’re from all walks of life. Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?
They talk of life changing events. They talk of personal experiences that they’ve had with Jesus. Some may tell stories of miracles, others may only share a time when they were going through a difficult situation & Jesus gave them peace. Some may talk of supernatural things that they may have witnessed, and others may simply tell of how the Bible convicted of a flaw in their character. They may tell stories of when they prayed and Jesus answered, or when they worshiped Him at home in their living rooms and they felt Him near. Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?
To switch it up a little bit: If your best friend was being convicted of murder and you knew that he didn’t do it because you was with him the night the murder took place.
All other evidence is against him. The only thing standing between him and life in prison with a possible death sentence is your testimony—would you, sir, want your testimony thrown out as evidence?
You can’t make the people in the jury experience being their with your friend like you was. You can’t make them physically see the movie that you was watching or hear the conversation that took place between the two of you. All you can do is relate to them the experience that took place.
Your friend’s life is on the line here. There’s a judge. There’s a jury. All evidence physical and scientific evidence is against you & your friend. His life hangs in the balance. Should your testimony be thrown out?
You said, “Unless or until I am abducted myself, or they bring back something more than a personal anecdote, then the evidence just isn’t good enough….But unless I experience whatever evidence you claim to have experienced, it’s not believable.”
I would feel lead to believe, based upon your responses in this blog, that you would have someone’s testimony thrown out because it could not be personally experienced by the jury.
Wow. Could you imagine what the justice system would look like here in America if people couldn’t give their testimony in a court case? haha!!
I’m sorry, Morsecode, but there’s no justice in your logic.
“Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?”
I would find it very questionable that despite the fact so many people testify to this being’s existence, none of them can provide any good physical evidence.
I would then ask each of the 2 billion to describe this person ‘Jesus’. And after getting thousands, if not millions of differing and even contradictory descriptions, I would question whether they even meant the same person.
Personal anecdotes are the absolute worse form of evidence. Science recognizes this. The justice system has yet to catch up.
“Should your testimony be thrown out?”
I can, conceivably, prove using evidence of my claims in that scenario. No one has yet to do so regarding religious claims.
“Could you imagine what the justice system would look like here in America if people couldn’t give their testimony in a court case?”
First of all, I’d like you to point to where I said that people shouldn’t be allowed to give testimony. Of course they should be allowed.
However, personal anecdotes should be looked at for what they are…the absolutely worse type of evidence there is. If more people realized that fact, I imagine far less innocent people would be in prison.
“but there’s no justice in your logic.”
I think your conception of justice is wrong.
“I would find it very questionable that despite the fact so many people testify to this being’s existence, none of them can provide any good physical evidence.” <— We're talking about the testimony of someone as being evidence, itself. We're not talking about physical evidence. Besides, I thought it was the prosecution's job to gather & present the physical evidence in court, not the witness?
"I would then ask each of the 2 billion to describe this person ‘Jesus’. And after getting thousands, if not millions of differing and even contradictory descriptions, I would question whether they even meant the same person." <— Would you question or would you conclude that they meant a different Jesus? And how would you judge which Jesus they meant?
The thing is if you were to ask each of the 2 billion to what they BELIEVE about Jesus, I would have to agree with you that there would be thousands, if not millions of differing and contradictory answers and that would be anecdotal evidence.
But if you were to ask these 2 billion people "Who is Jesus Christ?" I think you will find that an overwhelming majority of them will say that He is God, which is what He's on trail for in our scenario. If you were to ask these 2 billion people "Is Jesus real?" likewise, you would find an overwhelming majority say "Yes, He is." If then you were to ask them "How do you know that He's real?" I'm sure, then, that's when things would start getting interesting. I'm sure that there would be all sorts of different answers. Some coming from personal experience, some coming from theological studies, some coming from actual scientific studies. (The Bible does say that God reveals Himself in nature. Nature can be studied!!)
The thing is even though the answers start to become different and start to become unique, you'll find that they can still be corroborated, thus making it reliable testimony in a court of law–not just anecdotal evidence!!
"Personal anecdotes are the absolute worse form of evidence. Science recognizes this. The justice system has yet to catch up." <— Yet, is it not still considered evidence none-the-less? Besides, we're talking not talking anecdotal evidence, we're talking witness testimony that can be corroborated even before it gets to a court of law.
"I can, conceivably, prove using evidence of my claims in that scenario. No one has yet to do so regarding religious claims." <— That's in no way, shape, or form a direct answer to my question. I asked, "The only thing standing between him and life in prison with a possible death sentence is your testimony—would you, sir, want your testimony thrown out as evidence?" Your testimony is the evidence, itself, and it's the only thing you have to save his life. But since it's just your word against all the scientific and forensic evidence, I would guess that means that all you have to save your friends life would be anecdotal evidence.
"First of all, I’d like you to point to where I said that people shouldn’t be allowed to give testimony. Of course they should be allowed. However, personal anecdotes…." <— Yes. I understand that there's a difference between witness testimony and anecdotal evidence.
But when the question is asked, "Is God real?" you cannot write off the testimony of 2 billion witnesses who can testify to His reality in their lives as "anecdotal." Not when there's that many people who's testimony can be corroborated.
Let me ask you one more question, if I may. How many people out of the 2 billion people walking the face of the earth who claim to be Christian have you personally interviewed/questioned? I'm not talking about debating. I'm talking about doing an actual investigation to see how many of their testimonies can be corroborated.
The reason I ask this is because I find it terribly insulting that you automatically discount my testimony as being an personal anecdote when 1.) you've never interviewed me, so you don't even know my testimony 2.) you haven't investigate to see if my testimony lines up with others that you've heard.
I challenge you to do this. Leave religion out of it. Simply ask 100 people who claim to be Christian these questions:
– Is Jesus Christ God?
– Is Jesus Christ real?
– How do you know Jesus Christ is real?
– What has Jesus Christ done for you?
– How has Jesus Christ changed your life?
After personally interviewing 100 people tell me how many of their testimonies corroborated with each other. Tell me how many of them were truly anecdotal. Tell me what percentage you find to be reliable witness as determined by law.
To answer your question, although I’m not an atheist, is both. There are plenty of facts in the bible if you are willing to look. It amazes me when I read Isaiah, for example, how his predictions about wars came true. We can then assume, if you are looking for facts, that the predicted Messiah’s birth was accurate because everything else that was predicted came to pass. That said, there are bountiful things that have happened in my life that can’t be explained with facts. Sometimes it involves faith. I am a bit confused on your “person” comment. If you are talking about the person of Jesus Christ, this is completely different than talking about a person like me. Jesus was fully man, yet fully divine. We can’t group Him together with the human race because He is perfect. We however are fallen and full of sin. Jesus is the same today, yesterday and forever. We are unpredictable and change with the wind. I personally do not trust people. But Jesus is not people. Jesus is God. I trust Him because I seen the things He has done in my life and how His hand has protected me and guided me to truth and lifted the blinders from my eyes. No person can do that. Only God. As for science, to me…science is subjective. Look at dinosaurs for instance. My kids got these dinosaur toys that roared which were made by the Discovery Channel. How do they know what that dinosaur sounded like? Really?? It was a guess on their part. Dinosaurs were not around for us to know what they sounded like, yet “science” takes liberties and tells us “well we think the tyrannosaurus rex sounded like this, so it must be so” and then they state it as fact. If you are dumb, you will sit by and idly believe everything these people say, but truthfully, we don’t know. We don’t know if they really ate meat. I’ve heard 2 sides to the dinosaur theory and one was that they didn’t eat meat. So there you go. Science is subjective. And I think if you’d look into science for yourself, you’d find much more reason to worship the Creator.
When it comes to the foundation of my faith, then the person of whom I speak is Jesus. I would like to say, though, that it was what I was told by people in my life that led me to put my trust in Jesus. If I had not heard the message, I would have been hard to make a decision to follow Christ. Perhaps I’m taking you out of context, but I feel that it is good to trust certain people–trustworthy people. If you ever hope to change or galvanize anyone’s opinion or belief through your writings, someone will have to trust you.
Balance. That’s what’s required here. Balance.
Relationships with people are built, and likewise the trust between two people are built. The level of trust depends on the level of relationship.
For instance 9 years ago when I first met my wife I didn’t trust her as much as I trusted my Mom & Dad, whom I knew my whole entire life. But as my relationship with Crystal grew, so did the level of trust. Today, I trust her over anyone single person in my life. I have to!! We share the same life, now!!…lol
The other side of the coin is fact. Fact, likewise, faces some serious hurdles. The first hurdle is experience. In order for something to become fact, it first has to be experienced. This is one of the reasons why atheism opposes the very idea of the existence of a god. A god cannot be tested scientifically in a lab.
Science says that in order for something to be fact, it first has to be tested and studied in lab. There has to be some experience between the scientist and the thing which the scientist is testing/studying. He then presents his experience with the subject to a group of peers, then likewise they research his work, repeat every step the scientist makes, and see if they, likewise, have the same experience. If they do, then they all should come to the same conclusion and have the same results.
The second hurdle that fact has to overcome is that facts are subject to interpretation. No other place in life is this more evident than Christianity!! Seriously, we’ll tell every atheist in the world that the Bible is factual, but then the atheist looks at Christianity and sees so many different schools of thought. The bottom line: We can take the same truths/facts and interpret them differently.
Yet, likewise, we can look at science and also see how science is divided on the issue of evolution. Some believe it, some partially believe it, others reject it. Some believe bits and pieces of it. If evolution was a religion, I’m sure that it could be broken down into denominations as well.
The other hurdle that fact has to make it over is trust. This brings it back to relationship. In order to accept the fact as fact, you have to first trust the source of the information, and that comes by relationship, no matter if it’s a person or if it’s a group of people, or even if it’s a written publication. You have to spend some time with it/them, investigating it before you can trust it/them as a reliable source.
Then finally, this is where the final component comes in, which this discussion has yet to bring up. This final component is really both sides of this debate have in common: FAITH.
The Bible says that FAITH is a substance (Hebrews 11:1). Now, I can believe the Bible to be factual because of experience. I’ve spent time testing God in my own lab of life. I’ve got experience with Him to know that He is who He says He is, and that He does what He says He does. Because of that experience with Him, I guess you could say that I have a relationship with Him. I’ve walked with God, and I’ve walked away from God. I’ve been walking with Him now for 7 years, and I know that I can trust Him. He’s never lied to me, He’s never cheated me. He’s followed through on every promise that He’s ever made to me. As a source for this debate, there’s none better than Him as far as I’m concerned. He’s a trustworthy source.
So when God says that FAITH is a substance, I believe Him. When God says that He’s given every man a measure of faith—I believe Him!! This is a fact.
I really feel as if the burden of proof is on the atheist. Every debate I’ve seen between a Christian and an Atheist, the Atheist demands that a Christan prove the existence of God.
I say this: Let the atheist prove that God doesn’t exist! The only way, really, for the atheist to do that is to first be able to prove that faith doesn’t exist. It can’t be done.
Everyman has been given a measure of faith. Even an atheist has faith, even if it’s faith in nothing, it’s still there.
Eric, there are these things called “blogs.” You should have one! lol This was a post in itself. Thanks for reading and responding!
So let me ask you this, Morsecode:
Let’s say Jesus Christ is on trial in a court of law & you were the only judge. He is being charged with being God Almighty. The prosecution calls 2 billion people who claim to worship Jesus Christ to come forward and give their testimony. Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?
Some are little old ladies, some scientist, some professors, some are tribal leaders, some are priest, some are pastors, some are high school kids, some are former atheist, etc. They come from all levels of education, all social and economical classes. They’re from all walks of life. Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?
They talk of life changing events. They talk of personal experiences that they’ve had with Jesus. Some may tell stories of miracles, others may only share a time when they were going through a difficult situation & Jesus gave them peace. Some may talk of supernatural things that they may have witnessed, and others may simply tell of how the Bible convicted of a flaw in their character. They may tell stories of when they prayed and Jesus answered, or when they worshiped Him at home in their living rooms and they felt Him near. Would you throw out their testimonies as evidence?
To switch it up a little bit: If your best friend was being convicted of murder and you knew that he didn’t do it because you was with him the night the murder took place.
All other evidence is against him. The only thing standing between him and life in prison with a possible death sentence is your testimony—would you, sir, want your testimony thrown out as evidence?
You can’t make the people in the jury experience being their with your friend like you was. You can’t make them physically see the movie that you was watching or hear the conversation that took place between the two of you. All you can do is relate to them the experience that took place.
Your friend’s life is on the line here. There’s a judge. There’s a jury. All evidence physical and scientific evidence is against you & your friend. His life hangs in the balance. Should your testimony be thrown out?
You said, “Unless or until I am abducted myself, or they bring back something more than a personal anecdote, then the evidence just isn’t good enough….But unless I experience whatever evidence you claim to have experienced, it’s not believable.”
I would feel lead to believe, based upon your responses in this blog, that you would have someone’s testimony thrown out because it could not be personally experienced by the jury.
Wow. Could you imagine what the justice system would look like here in America if people couldn’t give their testimony in a court case? haha!!
I’m sorry, Morsecode, but there’s no justice in your logic.
“But when the question is asked, “Is God real?” you cannot write off the testimony of 2 billion witnesses”
Sure you can.
Belief does not indicate reality.
Every single person on the planet could believe in the exact same god…it still wouldn’t be good evidence for the existence of that god. Look up argumentum ad populum…it’s a logical fallacy, and you’re using it.
“Tell me how many of them were truly anecdotal. ”
All of them.
I agree. Belief does not indicate reality. We’re not talking about religious belief, but we’re talking about the reality of a relationship that just so happns a majority of us claim to have with God. I’m talking about the difference between religion and relationship—which is obvious something that your “logic” can’t wrap it’s head around.
I gave you 5 questions to ask 100 Christians. Only 2 of those questions dealt with belief, and that was the first two. The other 3 dealt with their personal experience with Jesus Christ.
You cannot have a personal experience with someone or something that is not real. But in order to investigate if something/someone is real you first have to be willing to hear the testimonies of those who have had the experiences. I’m lead to believe that you’re not at all interested in doing this.
Funny. Anecdotal & witness testimony are both legal terms used exclusively in court of law leading up to almost every trial where witnesses are involved. Ask my 5 questions to 100 Christians and you’ll have yourself and interesting trial in court. But you wouldn’t want to take this to court so you throw Argumentum ad populum out there. In this case Jesus is the one on trial, not me.
Let me throw this one out at you: Ignoratio elenchi
You’re using it.