Re: \"Faith\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If all religions claim that part of the reason to believe in them is pure faith, how can they expect someone to switch from his religion to theirs? Worse yet, how can they believe that God would expect it, perhaps even sending them to hell if they don't? That person who doesn't switch will point to his own faith and what can they say in return? If they try to say that evidence is overwhelmingly in their favor, their own faith argument goes away.
[/ QUOTE ]
if religions are based on blind faith i would venture out and say that there is no way of telling which religion is correct. it would be chaotic. who is right and who is wrong? it is a good thing that religions are not based on pure blind faith (at least the ones i am familiar with).
How do i know if a religion is correct? you must analyze the evidence of validity of the religion. what kind of evidence can i look at? prophecy and fulfillment (and if you so choose to do so, the probablity of them).
Christianity is NOT based on a blind leap of faith. Rather, our faith is based upon substantial evidences. The following are but a few examples:
Hundreds of miraculously fulfilled prophecies.
The empty tomb.
The testimony of more than 500 eye-witnesses to the resurrection.
Numerous archeological finds.
The whole counsel of the Word of God.
So if there is evidence for Christ being the Messiah why dont people believe in Him? Maybe they havent examined the evidence.
note - Faith as defined in the Hebrews of the NT: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
[ QUOTE ]
it still doesn't explain why almost no one switches from the religion of their birth
[/ QUOTE ]
How did you arrive at this assumption?
good nite,
frank
PS A lot of what is in this post is not original in idea(approx 0%). i dont explain things well so for some of the post i just cut and pasted from another site.
[/ QUOTE ]
I still say blind leap of faith. Do you see why?
|