Christianity Is A FAITH And Not Based On Empiricism And Rationalism

[JAG]

JAG Writes:

Christianity Is A Faith And Not An Intellectual Philosophical System
Based Upon Rationalism And Empiricism.

Start quote.
"Henry Dodwell argues that matters of religious faith lie outside the
determination of reason. God could not possibly have intended that
reason should be the faculty to lead us to faith, for faith cannot
hang indefinitely is suspense while reason cautiously weighs and
reweighs arguments.

`The Scriptures teach, on the contrary, that the way to God is by
means of the heart, not by means of the intellect . . .What is the
basis of faith? Dodwell answers that it is the faith-producing work
of the Holy Spirit . . .

Now Alvin Plantinga . . .

Alvin Plantinga has launched a sustained attack on theological
rationalism. Plantinga maintains that belief in God and in the
central doctrines of Christianity is both rational and warranted
wholly apart from any evidential foundations for belief . . .

Then William Lane Craig says . . .

I think that Dodwell and Plantinga are correct that, fundamentally,
the way we know Christianity to be true is by the self-authenticating
witness of God's Holy Spirit."
End quote

Source:
Reasonable Faith
by William Lane Craig
pages 35, 39, 43

Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig are considered to be
Christendom's top Christian apologists.

____________


JAG Writes:
Christianity is a FAITH.

The word FAITH occurs hundreds and hundreds of times in the Bible
and is presented as being absolutely essential to sustaining
the Christian FAITH.

So?

So demonstrate with empiricism and logic that Christianity is true
at the certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4 and you then no longer have to
exercise FAITH in God.

It does NOT require any FAITH to believe that 2 + 2 = 4.

These 5 Bible verses below would no longer be needed and
would no longer be true.

■ "without faith it is impossible to please God"

■ "for by grace are you saved through faith"

■ "he that comes to God must believe that He
exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him"

■ "believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved"

■ God gave His only Son that whoever believes on Him shall
not perish but have eternal life

■ And the HUNDREDS of other Bible verses that demand faith
would no longer be needed or be true.

Demonstrate with empiricism that Christianity is true at the
certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4 and then you would have this:

He that comes to God need NOT exercise faith because we
now know, based upon empirical evidence that rises to the
certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4, that God exists. It is just as
certain as is the fact that New York City exists.

No faith is needed to believe that New York City exists.

So?

So . . .

Eliminate FAITH from Christianity and Christianity has just been
destroyed and wrecked.

■ "for by grace are you saved through faith" Ephesians 2:8

■ "without faith it is impossible to please God" Hebrews 11:6

■ "God gave His only Son that whoever believes on Him shall
not perish but have eternal life" John 3:16 --- Its impossible
to eliminate the need for Christendom's core Bible verse
John 3:16 without wrecking and destroying Christendom.


____________



Here are a couple of quotes that readers may find interesting:

(1) " . . . the role of rational argumentation in knowing Christianity to
be true is the role of a servant. A person knows Christianity is true
because the Holy Spirit tells him it is true, and while arguments and
evidence can be used to support this conclusion, they cannot
legitimately overrule it . . ." __William Lane Craig, Reasonable
Faith, page 51

(2) ". . .I'd say that with most people there's no need to use
apologetics at all . . . " __William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith,
page 57


_______________



Note: My Opening Post does NOT say that Christian Apologetics is not
useful and needed. Christian Apologetics IS useful and IS needed ---
but Christian Apologetics can NOT eliminate from Christianity the
necessity to exercise faith in God

However the opening Post does NOT advocate for Fideism.
The Opening Post makes one {1} main point --- that faith
cannot be eliminated from Christianity without destroying
Christianity.

"Strict Fideists assign no place to reason in discovering or
understanding fundamental tenets of religion. For them
blind faith is supreme as the way to certitude and
salvation."__off the web

Again . . .
I do not argue for Fideism. There are some evidences to support
the existence of God and the truth of Christianity, but these evidences
must be evaluated on the basis of Probability and Plausibility which
are subjective and are saturated with our human biases, prejudices,
and presuppositions. Nonetheless these kinds of arguments are valuable
to many people.

"Come let us reason together says the Lord"__Isaiah 1:18 KJV


________


I post all the above as "food for thought" --- each reader can
draw his own conclusions regarding how much importance
he puts upon rational argumentation to support Christianity.

For those inclined to rational argumentation:
Here are Peter Kreeft's 20 Arguments for The Existence Of God.
http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-mo...-existence.htm


JAG

[Lummy]

Why do you suppose it's called "Faith"?

[Mister D]

Alvin Plantinga has launched a sustained attack on theological
rationalism. Plantinga maintains that belief in God and in the
central doctrines of Christianity is both rational and warranted
wholly apart from any evidential foundations for belief . . .

Plantinga is a joy to read.

I was going to say earlier on one of your other threads that I don't have faith per se in God. God seems likely to me. I have faith in the Gospel. The way Plantinga uses the term (albeit the correct way) is not what some people here typically mean by faith. For them, it's something blind and ultimately irrational.

[Chris]

I'm probably the one in the other thread said faith in God. But I'm just an agnostic atheist. The point there was it's faith not reason and especially not science that matters.

Plantinga sounds interesting--he's written a lot, where to start?

[Mister D]

I'm probably the one in the other thread said faith in God. But I'm just an agnostic atheist. The point there was it's faith not reason and especially not science that matters.

Plantinga sounds interesting--he's written a lot, where to start?

I have The Problem of Evil and Warranted Christian Belief. I bought the latter in both its full and abridged version which pissed me off. I thought they were two different books.

[JAG]

Why do you suppose it's called "Faith"?

Good point.

However, not everybody on the Internet knows that it is a Faith.

So?

So some constantly ask {or demand} that Christians produce 2 + 2 = 4 certainty-level Empirical evidences
for the existence of God and for the truth of Christianity --- which is impossible to produce.

JAG

Scot me up Beamy.


``

[JAG]

Plantinga is a joy to read.
I was going to say earlier on one of your other threads that I don't have
faith per se in God. God seems likely to me. I have faith in the Gospel.
The way Plantinga uses the term (albeit the correct way) is not what
some people here typically mean by faith. For them, it's something
blind and ultimately irrational.

Mister D,
Thanks for your comments.
Regarding Faith in God: You sound like you're heading down "the right road."
Regarding "blind faith" my Opening Post condemns it. Its Fideism.
Fideism is not good.
There are many arguments for the truth of Christianity but none can ever
rise to the certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4 or to the certainty-level of this
syllogism:

P 1 All men are mortal.
P 2 Mister D is a man.
C Therefore Mister D is a mortal.

So?

So we are left with making arguments that have various levels of
Probability and Plausibility --- and these kinds of arguments are
subjective which means they have a lot of human biases and
prejudices and presuppositions that come into play when we
scale them out on any kind of scale that grades their
Plausibility , , for example the 1 to 10 scale.
Some would grade an argument at 1
Others would grade the same argument at 6
Others would grade it at 9

JAG

Scot me up Beamy.


``

[JAG]

Plantinga is a joy to read.

I just now posted a new thread titled "Alvin Plantinga's Free Will Defense Regarding The Problem Of Evil"
You might find some of his points interesting.

http://thepoliticalforums.com/thread...82#post2925282

[Peter Ainslie]

Granted the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ through His substitutionary death , burial , resurrection is a matter of faith.
But when you logically examine the fulfilled historical prophecies of the entire bible it is impossible not to realize that the odds against their coming true by accident are simply astronomical .
Just the specific prophecies concerning the nation Israel's history from beginning to it's present , and that of the Jews is astounding.
So confident is the scripture of it's sovereign prophecies:

" Indeed I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it, I will also do it." ( Isaiah 46:9-11 )

:that it even makes a prophecy of the fact that all the other world religions right up until present day will fail to even make an attempt at predicting specific future events as only God can do :
" Let them bring forth and show us what will happen , let them show the former things , what they were, that we may consider them,
and know the latter end of them, or declare to us the things to come.
Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods , yes do good or do evil , that we may be dismayed and see it together."
( Isaiah 41:22-24)
Not one of the hundreds of the worlds religions even dares to make an attempt at predicting specific future events but the bible contains many . Some even being fulfilled in our present day .