how come atheists talk about Christians and their faith, when they too have faith in things unseen?
When you go to the restaurant or by food to eat, you have "faith" that it’s all good to eat. You don’t know that its been processed right, you weren’t there so you don’t know. The only way to know is if you got sick or something. Christians also put faith in the unknown, God. And the only way to see Him, is that you have to die. So it’s the same type of thing going on.
So don’t athiests to have "faith" in things unseen and unknown?
You could say the same thing about Evolutionists Vs Creationists.
Evolutionists would say Creationists have faith in some imaginary being they can not see, but ditto the evolutionis because he has faith in his interpretation of the remains of material things when he did not witness at first hand how they were formed, how they lived, how they died, how they were preserved, or the time-frame involved.
If Darwin lived today and had access to the wealth of contemporary scientific knowledge (e.g., still no (undisputed) missing links, nor any sign of finely graduated series of fossils linking phyla; so-called living fossils showing no change over the assumed millions of years hiatus between their fossil occurrence and the present; and developments in microbiology which show the sheer complexity of the cell), Darwin would almost certainly have seen his theory in a different light.
Single-celled organisms to people evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture. It’s a best guess based on what are known facts combined with a unprovable presupposition that we got here via purely natural means.
That presupposition required "faith" in things unseen and unknown and If that supposition is wrong then the conclusions will be wrong even though they nicely fit the available facts.
January 31st, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Atheist claim they have a degree of confidence, -based on past peformance, and guessing at future anticipated results.
When this is applied to ‘faith’ in our God, – they have a premise that it’s fabricated anyway, – so our ‘faith’ is founded on faith not on a degree of past experience or ‘evidence’
How wrong they are.
References :
January 31st, 2010 at 5:57 pm
You could say the same thing about Evolutionists Vs Creationists.
Evolutionists would say Creationists have faith in some imaginary being they can not see, but ditto the evolutionis because he has faith in his interpretation of the remains of material things when he did not witness at first hand how they were formed, how they lived, how they died, how they were preserved, or the time-frame involved.
If Darwin lived today and had access to the wealth of contemporary scientific knowledge (e.g., still no (undisputed) missing links, nor any sign of finely graduated series of fossils linking phyla; so-called living fossils showing no change over the assumed millions of years hiatus between their fossil occurrence and the present; and developments in microbiology which show the sheer complexity of the cell), Darwin would almost certainly have seen his theory in a different light.
Single-celled organisms to people evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture. It’s a best guess based on what are known facts combined with a unprovable presupposition that we got here via purely natural means.
That presupposition required "faith" in things unseen and unknown and If that supposition is wrong then the conclusions will be wrong even though they nicely fit the available facts.
References :