Faith -> works, or faith + works?

[Aloysium]

. . . I gave an example to MT1926 of how God could convince me of his existence. So the “ball” is in his court.

How you want Him to convince you is trivial in comparison to how He will. Be prepared for a wild ride.

 

[MT1926]

You are mistaken. I would be very glad to cross that street, if I would be given some evidence that there IS another side. There would be no need to “drag” me, I would be happy to go on my own. The trouble is that I have never met with anyone who could have mounted a good argument for the existence of the “other side”. As far as I am concerned we live on a Mobius strip, which has only one side.

I am not going to argue with you on this but don’t you mean “ALL” of the evidence that their is about the other side? Not saying it is right or wrong, I am just saying you keep setting up us with a bait and switch, by saying you have never heard a good argument, and then tell us we are wrong with our examples, because it has become evident that you will not accept anyone’s argument.

I think this next example of yours shows that you have to have visual evidence, verbal evidence, evidence to prove the evidence is true and finally a written contract before you will accept the evidence.

Sure. The principle is simple. To ask for something that cannot be done for humans, even super-humans or any super-duper space aliens. For example to predict which numbers will be selected the next time someone hits the jackpot on the Powerball lottery - along with the actual date and the name and address of the family that gets the money - along with the list of their purchases. Since only God can “foresee” the future with 100% accuracy (after all for God there is NO future ), such a prediction would prove that God manifested himself to me. Naturally, God would warn me not act on that revelation, since acting on it (for example playing the revealed numbers) would invalidate the prediction.

But this is just one example. You can create as many as you want. Just use a scenario which is impossible for humans.

Just curious if this was to actually happen for you, what would you do with it? How would you explain this to others with the same mindset that you currently hold? And how would you feel knowing the truth and no one believes you?

Sorry, I thought that the answer was obvious. If I would “know” something, there would be no place for “faith”. I am using the word “faith” in the biblical sense (Hebrews 11:1).

Well where I was going with this is if God did show you he existed in your above example, you would still have to have faith in everything else the bible tells us. So do you think it would be possible to acquire this faith or do you think you would require a one on one session with God to progress further than the Lottery trick he showed you?

If so, then God would have been participating in the “brainwashing” process, something that God - allegedly - never does. Because the process of education, teaching good habits IS a form of “brainwashing” - in the very good sense. Forget the negative connotations.

You really got me confused here. First, are you saying your parents brainwashed you into being a good person? And second, how is this an explanation to your statement that “it all comes from my upbringing, my parents, my family, and the rest, even the church I attended when I was young.” Did someone play a role in you being a good person today or is it all you?

Please check out the word “faith” in the next paragraph. Your example is pretty good. If you would do the chores for getting something is return, that allows you to develop good attitudes, which will become “a habit” as time goes on. That is how we all learn, from both positive and negative reinforcement. And we know that positive reinforcements are much more effective than the negative ones. Obviously we are on a higher level than the animals in the circus, but all the trainers know that giving some small reward is preferable to punishing a mistake. But the principle still holds for humans, too.

Your example of the circus animals got me thinking on this topic. I understand your example but this still leaves the question of who decides what is positive and what is negative? The circus is a good example because the trainer gets the animal to do something positive for the trainer to further his career. But in all actuality, quite often what the trainer wants is actually contrary to the animals nature, which we could consider a negative from the animals point of view. Just a thought.

Be careful with the usage of words. “Faith” is a very much abused word. As I said above, I have no need for “faith” as it was defined the Hebrews 11:1… to quote: “Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.” Which describes **BLIND **faith". The words “we do not see” is a synonym for “there is no evidence”.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Do you want me to be careful for you or me? I was using the word faith in the general sense when I say we all have a need for faith. Sorry if this was confusing but I just gave a non-biblical example of Thomas Edison not sure why you would relate Thomas Edison to God? Just curious, is “Blind Faith” a bad thing? Or is it just a bad thing when referring to “blind” faith in God?

Thanks

 

[Vico]

I am sorry that you wasted your time and effort. I have stated previously that references to the “holy scriptures”, the “sacred tradition” and the “magisterium” have no convincing value. Now I can also add the catechism to the list. By the way, this is not playing “hard to catch”. The same principles apply to any claim, not just the religious ones. I am an equal opportunity skeptic.

If God would manifest himself to me, I would know that he exists. I would not need to rely on the testimony of other people. After all the so-called testimonial “evidence” is far-far inferior to direct, observable, physical, real evidence. And God could manifest himself in a physical form, if he chose to do it - along with the convincing evidence that he is the “real McCoy”.

I gave an example to MT1926 of how God could convince me of his existence. So the “ball” is in his court.

Others benefit, is is not only for you. God manifests in the human conscience. A person may deliberate on this, but proof that God is not manifest in the conscience is not available. One can ignore conscience.

 

[Solmyr]

I am not going to argue with you on this but don’t you mean “ALL” of the evidence that their is about the other side?

I think we have a misunderstanding. I explicitly said that I - personally - have not seen a convincing evidence.

I think this next example of yours shows that you have to have visual evidence, verbal evidence, evidence to prove the evidence is true and finally a written contract before you will accept the evidence.

You asked me what would I find convincing evidence for God’s existence. I answered.

Well where I was going with this is if God did show you he existed in your above example, you would still have to have faith in everything else the bible tells us.

The bible is totally irrelevant. The catechism is irrelevant, the magisterium is irrelevant. Don’t forget, I never denied that I have “faith” in certain things. I only deny to have “blind” faith (Hebrews 11:1)

So do you think it would be possible to acquire this faith or do you think you would require a one on one session with God to progress further than the Lottery trick he showed you?

Why do you call something a “trick”, which ONLY God could provide? I need no faith whatsoever that my wife, my son, my friends, the Earth, and the universe exist. They are all readily available to my senses.

You really got me confused here. First, are you saying your parents brainwashed you into being a good person? And second, how is this an explanation to your statement that “it all comes from my upbringing, my parents, my family, and the rest, even the church I attended when I was young.” Did someone play a role in you being a good person today or is it all you?

Don’t get too hung up on the usually negative usage of “brainwashing”. Every little piece of information you process results in a physical change in your brain. I use the word “brainwashing” for the shock value. When you read this post, it changes certain pathways in your brain. This is also “brainwashing”.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Do you want me to be careful for you or me? I was using the word faith in the general sense when I say we all have a need for faith.

That is the root of many problems. The usage of certain words. We need a common vocabulary, where words have mutually agreed upon meanings. Otherwise we just talk past of each other, and there can be no meaningful exchange of ideas.

 

[MT1926]

I think we have a misunderstanding. I explicitly said that I - personally - have not seen a convincing evidence.

Yes agree, you need to see the other side not be presented with evidence of it’s existence.

You asked me what would I find convincing evidence for God’s existence. I answered.

Yes which is all the evidence.

The bible is totally irrelevant. The catechism is irrelevant, the magisterium is irrelevant. Don’t forget, I never denied that I have “faith” in certain things. I only deny to have “blind” faith (Hebrews 11:1)

You are still misunderstanding the question. Not sure how to better explain it. I understand they are irrelevant to you but they are not to us that believe. So the question was once you see God’s evidence would you have Faith that they are relevant? or would God need to also tell you that they are relevant?

Why do you call something a “trick”, which ONLY God could provide? I need no faith whatsoever that my wife, my son, my friends, the Earth, and the universe exist. They are all readily available to my senses.

Sorry for using this word, but basically you are saying the only way you would believe is if God jumped through a hoop. Which is how I define a trick.

Don’t get too hung up on the usually negative usage of “brainwashing”. Every little piece of information you process results in a physical change in your brain. I use the word “brainwashing” for the shock value. When you read this post, it changes certain pathways in your brain. This is also “brainwashing”.

Well thanks for the info the only definition I have ever know is: “make (someone) adopt radically different beliefs by using systematic and often forcible pressure.” I guess this is that “usage of certain words” you accuse me of. Could you please give me a positive usage of the word “brainwashing”? I have never come across one.

That is the root of many problems. The usage of certain words. We need a common vocabulary, where words have mutually agreed upon meanings. Otherwise we just talk past of each other, and there can be no meaningful exchange of ideas.

Well it’s been nice talking to you but I guess I am incapable of not talking past you. You seem to avoid every question I ask by picking one word out and accuse me of giving it a different meaning. Since I am the only one in this conversation that seems to have to define what I mean I can’t really see us getting anywhere further without you answering the questions I already asked.

Thanks again.

 

[XndrK]

I see that I have created a monster, and that this conversation has gotten wildly off-topic, but I’m going to (very quickly) add my own two cents.

Solmyr, MT1926: A good book that may answer your objections in general is Kreeft and Tacelli’s Handbook of Catholic Apologetics. Also, for a few proofs of the existence of God (assuming that the exterior world exists): Aquinas’s Five Ways.

I’m not going to reply on this topic (at least on this thread), as I really want to get back to the topic stated by the thread’s title. Please move it to another thread at least, or PM it.

Thanks, and God bless to you both.

 

[Solmyr]

I see that I have created a monster, and that this conversation has gotten wildly off-topic, but I’m going to (very quickly) add my own two cents.

It’s a pretty good “monster”, I would say.

Solmyr, MT1926: A good book that may answer your objections in general is Kreeft and Tacelli’s Handbook of Catholic Apologetics. Also, for a few proofs of the existence of God (assuming that the exterior world exists): Aquinas’s Five Ways.

Why do you think that I am not familiar with those sources?

 

[MT1926]

I see that I have created a monster, and that this conversation has gotten wildly off-topic, but I’m going to (very quickly) add my own two cents.

Solmyr, MT1926: A good book that may answer your objections in general is Kreeft and Tacelli’s Handbook of Catholic Apologetics. Also, for a few proofs of the existence of God (assuming that the exterior world exists): Aquinas’s Five Ways.

I’m not going to reply on this topic (at least on this thread), as I really want to get back to the topic stated by the thread’s title. Please move it to another thread at least, or PM it.

Thanks, and God bless to you both.

Sorry about that. I couldn’t resist trying to find out why my beliefs are grossly unfair to nonbelievers.

Back to the topic at hand.

God’s grace leads us to Faith which gives us more of his grace which enables us to do good works, through him. This further strengthens our Faith thus giving us more grace enabling us to do even more good work’s.

God Bless

 

[Vico]

Sorry about that. I couldn’t resist trying to find out why my beliefs are grossly unfair to nonbelievers.

Back to the topic at hand.

God’s grace leads us to Faith which gives us more of his grace which enables us to do good works, through him. This further strengthens our Faith thus giving us more grace enabling us to do even more good work’s.

God Bless

That is to say, that the actual graces of God lead us to baptism and through that baptism God gives us directly the gifts (theological virtues) of charity, and hope, and faith, which are preserved, unless there is a turning away by sin.

Catechsm
1815 The gift of faith remains in one who has not sinned against it. 80 But “faith apart from works is dead”: 81 when it is deprived of hope and love, faith does not fully unite the believer to Christ and does not make him a living member of his Body.

1816 The disciple of Christ must not only keep the faith and live on it, but also profess it, confidently bear witness to it, and spread it …

80 Cf. Council of Trent (1547): DS 1545.
81 Jas 2:26.