And that is this biggest problem with religious types such as yourself. It is your unwillingness to ask the hard questions, such as does a given claim of a supernatural being meet it's burden of proof. If it does, is this being moral and ethical, and if not, would it be moral and ethical for me to follow it?
I don’t need proof if I have faith.
Thank you! This get right to the heart of the matter I think,at least for me. Some people have faith in a certain set of beliefs,in this instance Christianity, and some don't. The big question that I've been trying to figure out for a long time is if there is a choice to be made to have faith or not. So far I can't really see how there is. The trouble arises when those with faith try to convince those without using evidence, or those without try to convince those with faith that they have evidence to the contrary.
Invariably it seems one side finds the evidence convincing, the other doesn't. Again, I can't see a choice there, it just is what it is. How does one choose to believe what they find unbelievable? How can one stop believing something that they absolutely believe?
I don't really have good answers to these questions, but they are the reason I follow these topics.
Every one has faith. They exercise it by believing what they can't know. Some believe, by faith, God is. Others, by faith, believe He is not. At least one can point to information and say it can't happen with out Intelligence. The other uses blind faith and believes nothing made information.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
