Is faith a reliable way to know truth?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Renate said:
I'm not sure I follow... what is the spirit of truth? And how does one witness that something is truth?
Click to expand...

Since nobody appears willing or able to answer your question, the Spirit of truth is not a what, but a who. And the who is the Holy Ghost, whose name is the LORD, the only begotten of the eternal God.

'Because I will publish the name of the LORD: .....'
'..... for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.'
Deut 32:3-4

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
John 14:16-18
 
trofimus said:
No, faith is not a realiable source of truth.

Faith is a subjective thing. If its a source of truth, then humans are source of truth. They are not.

Truth is an objective reality which we can discover and know by evidence, revelation, logic and similar.

Faith without evidence is a blind faith. Faith in something that is not true is a false faith.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. Did you read the rest of the thread?
 
Renate said:
It's different from religion because religious people say: "We don't know how it happened, therefore God did it." Whereas scientists say "We don't know how it happened." and stop there. Then they do research to try to find out how it happened. That is a huge difference.
Click to expand...

Yet all that they've been able to prove so far is that they are incapable of discovering the cause of creation. That in itself is evidence.
 
Zmouth said:
Since nobody appears willing or able to answer your question, the Spirit of truth is not a what, but a who. And the who is the Holy Ghost, whose name is the LORD, the only begotten of the eternal God.
Click to expand...

A little confusion there. The holy spirit is not the only begotten, neither is its name the LORD.
 
HeRoseFromTheDead said:
Yet all that they've been able to prove so far is that they are incapable of discovering the cause of creation. That in itself is evidence.
Click to expand...
That in itself is not evidence of anything other than that it is very difficult to do science in that area. Also, in your statement you are assuming that the universe was created. How do you know that?
 
Renate said:
Because I don't believe there is a God. (Yes, I know "the fool says in his heart...") I see no reason to believe in God to be honest. I'm trying to understand why other people believe.
Click to expand...

When you are blind, you can't see unless a doctor performs an operation that causes you to see. You could pretend you can see but it would be a bit ridiculous and of course it wouldn't be true.

When you used to be a Christian, you were thinking God probably existed. You couldn't see for sure that He did. So you could say you had faith, but you didn't really - you only had a supposition.

The good news here is that Jesus never once refused to let a man see who asked for Him to heal their blindness. So...it couldn't hurt to ask Him. The sort of bad news is...if everyone on earth is born blind, they don't know they're blind. They think they're just normal because they are like every other man. So of course they don't ask to see because they think they already can.

Similarly, if all men on earth were born with one arm, they wouldn't know they were originally supposed to have two arms. And if a man was then born with two arms, they would consider him a defect.
 
Stunnedbygrace said:
When you are blind, you can't see unless a doctor performs an operation that causes you to see. You could pretend you can see but it would be a bit ridiculous and of course it wouldn't be true.

When you used to be a Christian, you were thinking God probably existed. You couldn't see for sure that He did. So you could say you had faith, but you didn't really - you only had a supposition.
Click to expand...
Why are you assuming this about me? When I was a christian I was sure that God existed, and I even believed I had felt his presence. Then I started doubting that and I now believe I was wrong.

Stunnedbygrace said:
The good news here is that Jesus never once refused to let a man see who asked for Him to heal their blindness. So...it couldn't hurt to ask Him. The sort of bad news is...if everyone on earth is born blind, they don't know they're blind. They think they're just normal because they are like every other man. So of course they don't ask to see because they think they already can.

Similarly, if all men on earth were born with one arm, they wouldn't know they were originally supposed to have two arms. And if a man was then born with two arms, they would consider him a defect.
Click to expand...
The thing is though, that I HAVE asked him. When I used to believe I prayed for the holy spirit, but never got an answer.
 
Renate said:
That in itself is not evidence of anything other than that it is very difficult to do science in that area. Also, in your statement you are assuming that the universe was created. How do you know that?
Click to expand...

It very much is evidence to those who are seeking truth. The fact that science, which by definition is limited to measurement of physical phenomena, can't demonstrate what created the universe (it can only speculate) is in itself evidence that something independent of the physical realm created it. It's like the dog that didn't bark in Sherlock Holmes' short story, The Adventure of Silver Blaze. Absence of evidence can be very telling evidence.
 
Stunnedbygrace said:
Because true faith does not just mean you think something. Faith is evidence. Have you read that verse?
Click to expand...
If you are referring to Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen", yes I have read that verse. But faith is not evidence, it does not hold up to scrutiny.
 
Stunnedbygrace said:
Because true faith does not just mean you think something. Faith is evidence. Have you read that verse?
Click to expand...

For instance...I'm getting ready to cook some bacon and eggs. I think I will probably not burn myself. I don't have faith that I won't because there is no evidence that I won't. In fact, there IS evidence that I could burn myself because it has happened in the past, but there is no evidence that I won't for sure. So I can say I think I won't burn myself and I hope I won't burn myself, but I can't say that I have faith I won't.
 
Renate said:
Thanks for your reply! Actually I used to be a Christian, I went to church every sunday. I just started having lots of questions that no one seemed to be able to answer convincingly.
Click to expand...

You should ask God, rather than people, and you may have to be very patient to receive the answer. Some things take time to explain and for example, are explained through demonstration, which takes time. Even patience - it can't be demonstrated quickly; it's something waited for :)
 
Renate said:
If you are referring to Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen", yes I have read that verse. But faith is not evidence, it does not hold up to scrutiny.
Click to expand...

It only fails scrutiny when it's misplaced, i think, if the scrutiny is proper. You can wrongly scrutinize a thing, and reach erroneous conclusions.
 
Stunnedbygrace said:
For instance...I'm getting ready to cook some bacon and eggs. I think I will probably not burn myself. I don't have faith that I won't because there is no evidence that I won't. In fact, there IS evidence that I could burn myself because it has happened in the past, but there is no evidence that I won't for sure. So I can say I think I won't burn myself and I hope I won't burn myself, but I can't say that I have faith I won't.
Click to expand...
So you're saying that you need evidence in order to have faith?
 
Renate said:
If you are referring to Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen", yes I have read that verse. But faith is not evidence, it does not hold up to scrutiny.
Click to expand...

If evidence doesn't hold up to scrutiny, then how is anyone ever convicted of a crime?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back