Logical argument

[Annie]

I would suggest that they go hand in hand. What faith do I have if it is believing in something which makes not sense whatever. For example: I believe that God made everything including man. Is that logical? Yes and I can present logical evidence (logical argument) to demonstrate it. I can look at other issues in the Word and make logical arguments from the Word. The Lord Jesus used logic in His discussions/teachings. Why should I do any less?

What is faith? Is it not confidence in what God says simply because He says it? Your statement (bolded above) is itself not logical, in that it rests on a faulty definition of faith. Faith is (by itself), by definition, belief in something that cannot be proven. If I acknowledge the truth of a fact that can be proven, I'm not exercising faith...just knowledge.

Logic is reasoning, and is therefore something entirely different than (but not incompatible with) "faith." I have faith about a lot of things that cannot be proven, and do not "make sense"...the Trinity, for example. There's no verifiable evidence for the Trinity, other than what the Bible says about it, which must be taken strictly by faith. (And the Trinity doesn't even make "sense"; we cannot wrap our little reasoning minds around it.) Same with the concept of "eternity"...a self-existent God who never had a beginning, and will never have an end. We cannot logically or empirically prove that God created the heavens and the earth; we believe it by faith. Is there "evidence" that can be interpreted to support creationism? Well, sure...but we don't START with that evidence; we start with the presupposition that the Bible account is true (which we accept by faith). It's interesting that evolutionists find "evidence" all the time to support their presuppositions as well. This shows that faith--the presupposition--comes first, and all evidence gathered is interpreted in light of the presupposition. No one can start with nothing but empirical evidence, and prove definitively how the world came into existence. The understanding of the origins of the earth is outside the realm of scientific reasoning and logic.

I do not ask myself, when first considering a matter of faith, revealed by God in Scripture "Does this make sense?" No, I simply believe it, because God said it.

Am I "against" using logic? Of course not. I just don't believe that logic is the starting place for determining Christian doctrine. Do I think Christian doctrine "makes sense?" Does the Trinity make sense? Does eternity make sense? I guess it depends on what you mean by "making sense." The system of Christian doctrine is not UNreasonable...It's just BEYOND or ABOVE human reason. It cannot be arrived at by human reason, but must be taken by faith.

Unfortunately, Aristotelianism (a focus on the "things that were made" as "evidence" and "revealers" of the "things above," or the "true and real") has all but taken over, even in Christendom. Platonic thought (which focuses on the "things above" to explain the "things/shadows below") is all but lost these days, which is a real pity, since historic Christianity does not concern itself with "trying to prove" truth, but merely accepted it by faith, and interpreted all evidence in light of that truth, instead of being obsessed with "evidence," and using it as the starting point instead of faith. Edited April 9, 2011 by Annie

[JerryNumbers]

I once stated to one of those oneness Pentecostals that we can not fully understand the Trinity. He stated, "Oh, yes we can. its easy to understand, its Jesus and Jesus alone." Of course by believing that he is denying what the Bible says on that subject.

co 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Faith seems to be one of those things that's kind of hard to describe.

But as for the Trinity, we do have proof of it within the pages of the Bible, we also have proof of Jesus' death and His resurrection. It seems His death and resurrection is easier for the human mind to understand than the Trinity. Yet both are accepted by those who believe by faith. Faith that the Word of God is true. Yet its not blind faith.

I offer this recent article by David Cloud, it might be of help for some on this subject.

There are something's that our finite human minds will never fully understand until we get to heaven, those thing has to be accepted by faith, during this time period

[dantheman2]

What is faith? Is it not confidence in what God says simply because He says it? Your statement (bolded above) is itself not logical, in that it rests on a faulty definition of faith. Faith is (by itself), by definition, belief in something that cannot be proven. If I acknowledge the truth of a fact that can be proven, I'm not exercising faith...just knowledge.

Logic is reasoning, and is therefore something entirely different than (but not incompatible with) "faith." I have faith about a lot of things that cannot be proven, and do not "make sense"...the Trinity, for example. There's no verifiable evidence for the Trinity, other than what the Bible says about it, which must be taken strictly by faith. (And the Trinity doesn't even make "sense"; we cannot wrap our little reasoning minds around it.) Same with the concept of "eternity"...a self-existent God who never had a beginning, and will never have an end. We cannot logically or empirically prove that God created the heavens and the earth; we believe it by faith. Is there "evidence" that can be interpreted to support creationism? Well, sure...but we don't START with that evidence; we start with the presupposition that the Bible account is true (which we accept by faith). It's interesting that evolutionists find "evidence" all the time to support their presuppositions as well. This shows that faith--the presupposition--comes first, and all evidence gathered is interpreted in light of the presupposition. No one can start with nothing but empirical evidence, and prove definitively how the world came into existence. The understanding of the origins of the earth is outside the realm of scientific reasoning and logic.

I do not ask myself, when first considering a matter of faith, revealed by God in Scripture "Does this make sense?" No, I simply believe it, because God said it.

Am I "against" using logic? Of course not. I just don't believe that logic is the starting place for determining Christian doctrine. Do I think Christian doctrine "makes sense?" Does the Trinity make sense? Does eternity make sense? I guess it depends on what you mean by "making sense." The system of Christian doctrine is not UNreasonable...It's just BEYOND or ABOVE human reason. It cannot be arrived at by human reason, but must be taken by faith.

Unfortunately, Aristotelianism (a focus on the "things that were made" as "evidence" and "revealers" of the "things above," or the "true and real") has all but taken over, even in Christendom. Platonic thought (which focuses on the "things above" to explain the "things/shadows below") is all but lost these days, which is a real pity, since historic Christianity does not concern itself with "trying to prove" truth, but merely accepted it by faith, and interpreted all evidence in light of that truth, instead of being obsessed with "evidence," and using it as the starting point instead of faith.

Annie,

Where do I begin? What you have just stated has no basis in fact and can quiet easily be disprove.

The faith which you just described is not faith. It is not the faith which we read of in the Bible. What of Thomas who would not believe (have faith) unless he actually saw Christ. What was his response when he saw Jesus? What of the Samaritans in John 4? Faith is not believing in something which we can not prove.

Just one of your points: you spoke of the Creation. Can we prove it? Absolutely!!! Sure, we know that there are those who claim to have prove of evolution but when doing a little study we see faults within their evidence. How sad that you build your faith on nothing more than "believing in something" which you really "cannot know?" Annie, that simply is not faith.

[John81]

Annie,

Where do I begin? What you have just stated has no basis in fact and can quiet easily be disprove.

The faith which you just described is not faith. It is not the faith which we read of in the Bible. What of Thomas who would not believe (have faith) unless he actually saw Christ. What was his response when he saw Jesus? What of the Samaritans in John 4? Faith is not believing in something which we can not prove.

Just one of your points: you spoke of the Creation. Can we prove it? Absolutely!!! Sure, we know that there are those who claim to have prove of evolution but when doing a little study we see faults within their evidence. How sad that you build your faith on nothing more than "believing in something" which you really "cannot know?" Annie, that simply is not faith.

If you could, would you please put forth proof that God exists and the He created all things? Thank you.

[Invicta]

If you could, would you please put forth proof that God exists and the He created all things? Thank you.

We believe by faith, not proof.

My wife says of her mother, who was not a believer, "She carries logic to illogical extremes."

[John81]

We believe by faith, not proof.

My wife says of her mother, who was not a believer, "She carries logic to illogical extremes."

I knew a guy like that in university. He wasn't a Christians but he knew the Bible better than most professing Christians. He could argue the Bible pro or con equally well, However, he couldn't in his mind logically grasp some things so he rejected Christianity and the God of Christianity. Too smart for his own good, as some would say. Very sad though.

[dantheman2]

If you could, would you please put forth proof that God exists and the He created all things? Thank you.

Look in the mirror!

[John81]

Look in the mirror!

That is your logical argument for the existence of God and that He created all things?

[Annie]

Annie,

Where do I begin? What you have just stated has no basis in fact and can quiet easily be disprove.

The faith which you just described is not faith. It is not the faith which we read of in the Bible. What of Thomas who would not believe (have faith) unless he actually saw Christ. What was his response when he saw Jesus? What of the Samaritans in John 4? Faith is not believing in something which we can not prove.

What was Jesus' response to Thomas, Dan? Jn. 20:29: "Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." Jesus also called him "faithless" in verse 27. Oh, and Dan, how can you logically prove that this little incident really happened, anyway? I see no evidence that it did, do you?

I'm not sure what your point is about John 4. Jesus did miracles on earth to show who He was. We didn't see those miracles; there is no physical evidence that verifies that He did miracles. How, then, can you believe that the story recorded in John 4 is true? One word: faith. How do you know that Christ rose again? What "proof" do you have for that other than that the Bible says He did and that He was seen by several people...and that you believe that account by faith? You make absolutely no sense. Faith and logic are not incompatible, but they are different. When you can use real logic (not "look in the mirror" but "Premise 1, Premise 2, Conclusion") to prove creation, the Trinity, the resurrection, Christ's miracles, then I might start listening to you...

A look at Hebrews 11 wouldn't hurt, either. Edited April 11, 2011 by Annie

[dantheman2]

What was Jesus' response to Thomas, Dan? Jn. 20:29: "Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." Jesus also called him "faithless" in verse 27. Oh, and Dan, how can you logically prove that this little incident really happened, anyway? I see no evidence that it did, do you?

I'm not sure what your point is about John 4. Jesus did miracles on earth to show who He was. We didn't see those miracles; there is no physical evidence that verifies that He did miracles. How, then, can you believe that the story recorded in John 4 is true? One word: faith. How do you know that Christ rose again? What "proof" do you have for that other than that the Bible says He did and that He was seen by several people...and that you believe that account by faith? You make absolutely no sense. Faith and logic are not incompatible, but they are different. When you can use real logic (not "look in the mirror" but "Premise 1, Premise 2, Conclusion") to prove creation, the Trinity, the resurrection, Christ's miracles, then I might start listening to you...

A look at Hebrews 11 wouldn't hurt, either.

Anne,

Notice that He said "....that have not seen" not that have no evidence.

Ummmm......what physical evidence do you have that Abraham Lincoln existed? Don't say you can dig his body up because you can't prove that in fact that body belongs to who it is said it does. What evidence do you have that anyone whom you have never met exist? You have not seen them. So, until you see them, you (by your argument) can never know that anyone exists. As a mater of fact, do you know that I exist? Does Dan exist or does he not???? Hmmmm.....prove it.

I never said that logic and faith are in fact the exact same thing. What I said is that your definition of faith is not what the Bible teaches about faith. I was going to suggest that you look at Heb 11.

If you want logic formulas, I will be more than happy to provide them for you.

Oh, by the way John 20:30-31 states that John wrote those things for what purpose???

[dantheman2]

That is your logical argument for the existence of God and that He created all things?

I did not put it in a logical formula but the fact that you exist does prove that God exists. You could not exist if there was no God. We can put it in an actual formula if you prefer.

[John81]

I did not put it in a logical formula but the fact that you exist does prove that God exists. You could not exist if there was no God. We can put it in an actual formula if you prefer.

That is not a logical argument and wouldn't stand at all in a logic class or as grounds for a debate in logic.

The statement you provided is circular and in no way proves the existence of God nor that God created all things.

[Annie]

Anne,

Notice that He said "....that have not seen" not that have no evidence.

Right...Your whole point was that Thomas had "faith" BECAUSE he saw...IOW, he had physical evidence: the evidence of seeing with his eyes.

Ummmm......what physical evidence do you have that Abraham Lincoln existed? Don't say you can dig his body up because you can't prove that in fact that body belongs to who it is said it does. What evidence do you have that anyone whom you have never met exist? You have not seen them. So, until you see them, you (by your argument) can never know that anyone exists. As a mater of fact, do you know that I exist? Does Dan exist or does he not???? Hmmmm.....prove it.

You need to go back and read my post. You've misunderstood me. I never said that a person "cannot know" something unless he has physical evidence for it. There is indeed knowledge that can be arrived at by logic, and then there are matters which must be accepted purely by faith.

I'm still waiting for you to tell me upon what your belief in the resurrection, Trinity, Bible, etc., is based. Logic? Produce it, please. The fact of the matter is that, although there are indeed certain things we can know through logic, we as Christians hold beliefs which simply cannot be "proved" logically, with physical evidence. Is there evidence for our belief? Sure. But we cannot start with evidence. We start with faith alone.

I never said that logic and faith are in fact the exact same thing. What I said is that your definition of faith is not what the Bible teaches about faith. I was going to suggest that you look at Heb 11.

Now faith is the substance (or certainty) of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith is itself the "evidence" that unseen things exist. This verse is not talking about logic, or physical evidence, or anything outside of what faith is. The chapter goes on to praise all of the Bible heroes who died in faith...having not seen...having not experienced the promises...having no evidence (other than their faith) that what they believed was true. That's what made them worthy of mention!

If you want logic formulas, I will be more than happy to provide them for you.

That would be great.

Oh, by the way John 20:30-31 states that John wrote those things for what purpose???

How do we even know that John 20:30-31 is true? How do we know that a man named John wrote the book at all? FAITH! Edited April 11, 2011 by Annie

[dantheman2]

That is not a logical argument and wouldn't stand at all in a logic class or as grounds for a debate in logic.

The statement you provided is circular and in no way proves the existence of God nor that God created all things.

Premise 1: If it is true that you exist
Premise 2: AND it is true that you can exist by no other means than by God creating you
Conclusion: THEN God must exist.

1: You do exist
2: You can exist by no other means than by God creating you
3: Therefore God must exist

[John81]

Premise 1: If it is true that you exist
Premise 2: AND it is true that you can exist by no other means than by God creating you
Conclusion: THEN God must exist.

1: You do exist
2: You can exist by no other means than by God creating you
3: Therefore God must exist

First you have to prove that God does indeed exist before you can proceed to claim He created us and everything else. You have not done that.