A Question for Christians

[QuestioningMind]

When I claim that the reason I’m an atheist is because I have yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to conclude that a God or any gods exist I have often been told by Christians that what I lack is faith. They say that first I must accept Jesus Christ as my savior and then God will reveal Himself to me.

My question for any Christians who may feel this way is, how exactly is such a thing possible? How can you genuinely believe that something substantial exists before you’ve ever been presented with what you feel is sufficient evidence to believe that it does? As an example, what if you were told that strawberries contain a magical substance that will not only make you 25 years old again, but will keep you that youthful age for the rest of your life. However, you first have to genuinely believe that strawberries actually do possess this magical substance before it will have any effect. Would you be able to make yourself genuinely believe that this magical substance in strawberries exists just because you happen to want it to be true? As much as I’d love to live out the rest of my days with the body and health I had at 25, there’s just no way that my rational thinking brain would be able to convince myself that this magical substance truly does exist without any verifiable proof. When it comes to accepting Jesus Christ as my savior in exchange for eternal salvation, my rational thinking brain functions in the exact same manner.

I’ve said enough… I humbly await your responses, if any.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Most so called "Christians" have it wrong. God gives faith only to those He chooses. If you do not have faith, it is not your fault. If and when God wants you, you will know it.

 

[Skwim]

Not a Christian; however, if I may.

I believe Christians often say that one must have faith because they lack any convincing reason.
"Just accept [have faith in] Jesus Christ as your savior and then God will reveal Himself to you," is the fall back position because, recognizing how unreasonable the Biblical underpinnings of Christianity are, this is what they have to do. And they have to do it because they crave the support, and comfort Christianity offers, and are willing to accept it even if it means stuffing their doubts in the back of the closet.
Not that they should be faulted for it, but it's just the way it is.


.

 

[Glaurung]

When I claim that the reason I’m an atheist is because I have yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to conclude that a God or any gods exist I have often been told by Christians that what I lack is faith. They say that first I must accept Jesus Christ as my savior and then God will reveal Himself to me.

There's some truth to that. If you're looking for something utterly incontrovertible before you will accept the Christian faith then you will be disappointed. Christ makes it clear that not having complete certainty is itself part of the test as it were. John 20:29 Without at least some room for doubt, faith isn't really worth anything. Nevertheless God can be found, but only on his terms. 1 Corinthians 3:19-20
Humility, prayer, fasting, his Church, the Scriptures and most importantly his grace. Faith is ultimately a grace given by God. It is up to us to cooperate with that grace and cultivate faith.

My question for any Christians who may feel this way is, how exactly is such a thing possible? How can you genuinely believe that something substantial exists before you’ve ever been presented with what you feel is sufficient evidence to believe that it does?

It's not up to God to present himself to you, it's up to you to search for him. If you do not wish to do that then you've already made the decision. Of course, nothing is sealed while you still breathe.

? As an example, what if you were told that strawberries contain a magical substance that will not only make you 25 years old again, but will keep you that youthful age for the rest of your life. However, you first have to genuinely believe that strawberries actually do possess this magical substance before it will have any effect. Would you be able to make yourself genuinely believe that this magical substance in strawberries exists just because you happen to want it to be true? As much as I’d love to live out the rest of my days with the body and health I had at 25, there’s just no way that my rational thinking brain would be able to convince myself that this magical substance truly does exist without any verifiable proof.

And this kind of atheist talking point really begins to annoy me. It's sheer dishonesty to equate the notion of a higher power with something as absurd as magic strawberries.

You do not have to believe in God to recognise that there is a chasm of difference between the belief in God and the belief in elves, unicorns and magic strawberries. No intelligent theist believes in a magic man in the sky. It's a vapid reading of the theistic traditions by the philosophically bankrupt. (Or more often, from those with an axe to grind).

When it comes to accepting Jesus Christ as my savior in exchange for eternal salvation, my rational thinking brain functions in the exact same manner.

If you honestly cannot bring yourself to God then that will be between you and him. Only God can see into the soul, and the honestly of your disbelief will ultimately be for him to judge.

 

[Skwim]

Most so called "Christians" have it wrong. God gives faith only to those He chooses. If you do not have faith, it is not your fault. If and when God wants you, you will know it.

Not to make an argument out of this, but if having faith is the only way to keep from going to hell, doesn't such choosing seem a bit unfair? Like, why you and not me?


.

 

[QuestioningMind]

There's some truth to that. If you're looking for something utterly incontrovertible before you will accept the Christian faith then you will be disappointed. Christ makes it clear that not having complete certainty is itself part of the test as it were. John 20:29 Without at least some room for doubt, faith isn't really worth anything. Nevertheless God can be found, but only on his terms. 1 Corinthians 3:19
Humility, prayer, fasting, his Church, the Scriptures and most importantly his grace. Faith is ultimately a grace given by God. It is up to us to cooperate with that grace and cultivate faith.



It's not up to God to present himself to you, it's up to you to search for him. If you do not wish to do that then you've already made the decision. Of course, nothing is sealed while you still breathe.



And this kind of atheist talking point really begins to annoy me. It's sheer dishonesty to equate the notion of a higher power with something as absurd as magic strawberries.

You do not have to believe in God to recognise that there is a chasm of difference between the belief in God and the belief in elves, unicorns and magic strawberries. No intelligent theist believes in a magic man in the sky. It's a vapid reading of the theistic traditions by the philosophically bankrupt. (Or more often, from those with an axe to grind).



If you honestly cannot bring yourself to God then that will be between you and him. Only God can see into the soul, and the honestly of your disbelief will ultimately be for him to judge.

What I'm asking is how can you do that? How are you able to turn off your rational brain and convince yourself of something for which you have no proof? It almost sounds as if your saying I need to 'pretend' like I believe, even though I still have doubts. Again, that's something I don't seem to be able to do. I can go through the motions, but in the back of my mind I know that it's all just an act.

I've spent close to five decades searching for Him but have yet to find sufficient evidence that He actually exists.

So sorry that you're offended by my example. I agree that there is a HUGE difference between a God and and strawberries that possess a seemingly magical substance and I in no way am attempting to equate the two. I'm simply attempting to think of an example of a rather fantastical claim with no verifiable proof to back it up. Surely you agree that many of the things depicted in the bible are rather fantastical, such as virgin births, talking animals, walking on water, rising from the dead. I'm trying to understand how your rational brain is not able you to accept magical strawberries without proof, but somehow it CAN accept the fantastical seemingly magical concurrences in the bible. If you can think of a better example that you aren't offended by, please share.

The 'honesty of my disbelief'? Okay, now THIS is one of those theist talking points that really begin to annoy me. It's the questioning of the true validity of my disbelief, as if I actually DO believe in Him, but just refuse to admit it. That's like me saying that you actually DO believe in Vishnu and the other Hindu gods, but you're just too stubborn to admit it. But if you can honestly say that you've been told about the Hindu gods but simply have never been presented with enough evidence to actually believe in them, why would you question my honesty when it comes to not having enough evidence to believe in your Christian God?

 

[Estro Felino]

They say that first I must accept Jesus Christ as my savior and then God will reveal Himself to me.

As a Christian, I think this is really a meaningless sentence. You are not supposed to accept something because other people tell you to do so. You accept something only if you're absolutely convinced about something.
If the story of Jesus Christ doesn't convince you, do not accept it. Because accepting it would mean 1) you are lying to yourself 2) you will become less and less authentic.

If you want to become a Christian, you have to understand that we have the duty to be true to ourselves. Firstly : understand who you are, and the meaning of your existence. After that, if your life is completely meaningful and you don't need any God, then don't look for God. If you're happy and you understood who you are, you don't need any God, I can promise you that.
Being a Christian, means to use your free will to understand reality and to achieve happiness. If you understand how to use your free will, how to control it, how to manage it...then you are already a Christian in my eyes, even if you don't believe in any God.

I must say, you are one of the more rational and reasonable Christians I have encountered. I wish there were more like you representing your faith. Thanks for the reply.

You're welcome...and it's nice to hear that. I am really glad my speech made sense to you.

 

[QuestioningMind]

As a Christian, I think this is really a meaningless sentence. You are not supposed to accept something because other people tell you to do so. You accept something only if you're absolutely convinced about something.
If the story of Jesus Christ doesn't convince you, do not accept it. Because accepting it would mean 1) you are lying to yourself 2) you will become less and less authentic.

If you want to become a Christian, you have to understand that we have the duty to be true to ourselves. Firstly : understand who you are, and the meaning of your existence. After that, if your life is completely meaningful and you don't need any God, then don't look for God. If you're happy and you understood who you are, you don't need any God, I can promise you that.
Being a Christian, means to use your free will to understand reality and to achieve happiness. If you understand how to use your free will, how to control it, how to manage it...then you are already a Christian in my eyes, even if you don't believe in any God.

I must say, you are one of the more rational and reasonable Christians I have encountered. I wish there were more like you representing your faith. Thanks for the reply.

 

[rusra02]

The Bible defines faith this way: "Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities that are not seen." (Hebrews 11:1) "Evident demonstration" refers to convincing evidence of unseen realities. Thus, I believe true faith is based on evidence, not blind credulity. What evidence? I find abundant evidence for God's existence and power in what exists all around us. Antony Flew, a famous atheist, became convinced God exists partly by his study of DNA. Believing the information in DNA arose by undirected forces, IMO, is akin to believing the Encyclopedia Brittanica exists by the undirected selection of letters that appeared by chance. I believe nature can teach us much about the Creator, and the Bible can teach us what nature cannot; why we exist, God's personality and purposes, and what the future holds. Again, faith in the Bible comes from convincing evidence within this book. I do not believe Jesus told anyone to believe in him without evidence that he was the Messiah. (John 10:37,38)

 

[Misunderstood]

When I claim that the reason I’m an atheist is because I have yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to conclude that a God or any gods exist I have often been told by Christians that what I lack is faith. They say that first I must accept Jesus Christ as my savior and then God will reveal Himself to me.

Hello QuestioningMind, I am sure you know this, but believing God exists and believing In God are two different things. You can believe In God without believing He exists, and vise versa. But, I would feel it is wrong to say you need to have faith (believe in God) before you can be shown he exists. I feel the devil would know He exists as he was in heaven with God, but I do feel the devil does not believe 'In God'. Just as you know our president exits, you may or may not believe in him.

For now I feel you are looking to just believe He (God) exists. I myself cannot give you proof he does exist, but I do believe it. There are a few different theories on how man came to earth; Creation, Evolution, hitched a ride on an asteroid, planted by another alien race and many more. None of these can be proven without a doubt and takes some faith to believe in any of them. There is science available to prove that something happened, but that same evidence can and is used to support all of these theories. I just feel that the science proves a God is a part of it, more than the other theories.

I find many areas in astronomy, archeology, and other sciences that prove Gods existence. rusra02 has given what he finds as evidence in his post I have quote below. I have items I believe also and would be happy to go into more detail if you would like. You just need to look into it with an open mind and you will come away with an opinion one way or another.

The Bible defines faith this way: "Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities that are not seen." (Hebrews 11:1) "Evident demonstration" refers to convincing evidence of unseen realities. Thus, I believe true faith is based on evidence, not blind credulity. What evidence? I find abundant evidence for God's existence and power in what exists all around us. Antony Flew, a famous atheist, became convinced God exists partly by his study of DNA. Believing the information in DNA arose by undirected forces, IMO, is akin to believing the Encyclopedia Brittanica exists by the undirected selection of letters that appeared by chance. I believe nature can teach us much about the Creator, and the Bible can teach us what nature cannot; why we exist, God's personality and purposes, and what the future holds. Again, faith in the Bible comes from convincing evidence within this book. I do not believe Jesus told anyone to believe in him without evidence that he was the Messiah. (John 10:37,38)

 

[QuestioningMind]

"Misunderstood, post: 5087542, member: 57354"]Hello QuestioningMind, I am sure you know this, but believing God exists and believing In God are two different things. You can believe In God without believing He exists, and vise versa. But, I would feel it is wrong to say you need to have faith (believe in God) before you can be shown he exists. I feel the devil would know He exists as he was in heaven with God, but I do feel the devil does not believe 'In God'. Just as you know our president exits, you may or may not believe in him."

You appear to be equating believing in God with supporting God. Correct me if I'm wrong.

For now I feel you are looking to just believe He (God) exists. I myself cannot give you proof he does exist, but I do believe it. There are a few different theories on how man came to earth; Creation, Evolution, hitched a ride on an asteroid, planted by another alien race and many more.

Okay, I'm going to have to correct you here. There are MANY theist who believe that God created human beings and that the method He employed to created them was evolution. This is the position of not only the Catholic Church but a majority of Christian faiths. Since evolution doesn't even address HOW life began, but ONLY how simple organisms evolve into more complex organisms over time, most Christians don't see any conflict between the idea that God created all life and the established theory of evolution. After all, who's to say how an all powerful all knowing supreme being would go about creating people?

"None of these can be proven without a doubt and takes some faith to believe in any of them. There is science available to prove that something happened, but that same evidence can and is used to support all of these theories. I just feel that the science proves a God is a part of it, more than the other theories."

Sorry, but the only established scientific theory that you mentioned is the theory of evolution. The ideas that perhaps life arrived here on Earth via asteroid or was planted by an alien race are both scientific hypotheses about how life may have originally started on Earth but have thus far not been able to garner enough replicate-able evidence to be deemed actual scientific theories. Creationism - the notion that God created all species on Earth fully intact over six 24-hour days some six to ten thousand years ago - is not even a scientific hypothesis since it doesn't even employ the scientific method to support its claims, but rather theological argument.

Science has determined that evolution is not just a hypothesis but a full fledged scientific theory, which is as close as science ever comes to claiming anything is an established fact. Did you know that the concept that the Earth is in orbit around the sun is also a scientific theory? Did you also know that there is SIGNIFICANTLY more evidence to support the theory of evolution than there is to support the theory that the Earth orbits the sun? If you trust the scientific method to establish truths about how our solar system works... if you trust the scientific method to establish reliable means for you to use electrons to send messages over the Internet... then you have to trust the scientific method when it indicates how life developed on the planet over billions of years.

I find many areas in astronomy, archeology, and other sciences that prove Gods existence. rusra02 has given what he finds as evidence in his post I have quote below. I have items I believe also and would be happy to go into more detail if you would like. You just need to look into it with an open mind and you will come away with an opinion one way or another.[/QUOTE]

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

When I claim that the reason I’m an atheist is because I have yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to conclude that a God or any gods exist I have often been told by Christians that what I lack is faith. They say that first I must accept Jesus Christ as my savior and then God will reveal Himself to me.

Well, it's bull, because that isn't how an objective entity works. God doesn't exist just because you believe, just as He doesn't die like Tinkerbell if you don't. Even though you have little evidence God exists, the principle I'm mentioning applies to other things/people as well. It's "I think, therefore I am", NOT "someone else thought of me, therefore I am".

As an example, what if you were told that strawberries contain a magical substance that will not only make you 25 years old again, but will keep you that youthful age for the rest of your life.

It's amazing what the Placebo Effect can accomplish, though.

It's not up to God to present himself to you, it's up to you to search for him.

He's supposedly omnipresent. That the OP can't seem to find an omnipresent being calls that into question, no?

So sorry that you're offended by my example. I agree that there is a HUGE difference between a God and and strawberries that possess a seemingly magical substance and I in no way am attempting to equate the two. I'm simply attempting to think of an example of a rather fantastical claim with no verifiable proof to back it up. Surely you agree that many of the things depicted in the bible are rather fantastical, such as virgin births, talking animals, walking on water, rising from the dead. I'm trying to understand how your rational brain is not able you to accept magical strawberries without proof, but somehow it CAN accept the fantastical seemingly magical concurrences in the bible. If you can think of a better example that you aren't offended by, please share.

Yahweh was married to Asherah, even before the bible. For some reason that eludes me, faith tells the Abrahamics that God is one and without anyone else, while the bible itself complains about the other gods AND we can see archaeological evidence for it, so why wouldn't faith show us what was actually going on at the time?

 

[Misunderstood]

'You appear to be equating believing in God with supporting God. Correct me if I'm wrong.'

Yes, in the context I am using it, that is what I was trying to convey. I could say Trust In, have Faith In, or Willing to Die For.

I was just pointing out that you can have one or the other, or even both. But even if God were to prove to you beyond a doubt to you He exists doesn't mean you will agree with anything He says or stands for.


Okay, I'm going to have to correct you here. There are MANY theist who believe that God created human beings and that the method He employed to created them was evolution. This is the position of not only the Catholic Church but a majority of Christian faiths. Since evolution doesn't even address HOW life began, but ONLY how simple organisms evolve into more complex organisms over time, most Christians don't see any conflict between the idea that God created all life and the established theory of evolution. After all, who's to say how an all powerful all knowing supreme being would go about creating people?

I'm sorry if I was not clear, as I totally agree with you here. Christians and others use evolution to prove their points and agree with it. I was trying to elude to it when I said 'There is science available to prove that something happened, but that same evidence can and is used to support all of these theories.' I was referring to anyone who uses evolution to support what they believe in.

Sorry, but the only established scientific theory that you mentioned is the theory of evolution. The ideas that perhaps life arrived here on Earth via asteroid or was planted by an alien race are both scientific hypotheses about how life may have originally started on Earth but have thus far not been able to garner enough replicate-able evidence to be deemed actual scientific theories. Creationism - the notion that God created all species on Earth fully intact over six 24-hour days some six to ten thousand years ago - is not even a scientific hypothesis since it doesn't even employ the scientific method to support its claims, but rather theological argument.

I will agree that I used the word theory exclusively, I did it to save some time in writing, I was trying to just say there are different ideas out there.

Science has determined that evolution is not just a hypothesis but a full fledged scientific theory, which is as close as science ever comes to claiming anything is an established fact. Did you know that the concept that the Earth is in orbit around the sun is also a scientific theory? Did you also know that there is SIGNIFICANTLY more evidence to support the theory of evolution than there is to support the theory that the Earth orbits the sun? If you trust the scientific method to establish truths about how our solar system works... if you trust the scientific method to establish reliable means for you to use electrons to send messages over the Internet... then you have to trust the scientific method when it indicates how life developed on the planet over billions of years.

This I disagree to for the most part. Evolution has to add in a lot of unknowns as we do not know the properties of the earth in all of its time as a planet. Evolution has been evolving as well and the theory has tightened up some, but still has a lot of hypothesis filling in the unknowns.

I do know the suns orbit is based somewhat on theory. But I feel it is a more proven theory. We can measure the properties of the sun, Calculate the attraction of two objects to each other, Centrifugal force, angular motion and other forces acting on the earth. This can be proven easily, however, there are a few forces that cannot be accounted for and some hypothesis have been made.

But, I feel I am getting off topic. I think the original statement in condensed form was that you feel you do not have enough evidence to prove God, but people say you need to believe before he will reveal himself to you and how this idea is so faulty. It can work that way, but I do agree it is hard to do. But I think you can prove God as easily as any other idea.

 

[psychoslice]

Many Christians just simply don't know the truth, they take what is given to them as truth, because this so called truth agrees with their expectations and their wishes, such as an afterlife, where they believe they will meet all their wonderful friends and family, they will adhere to this belief no matter what, in some cases they will even kill to protect it, even though this is more prevalent in other religions such as the Muslim faith.

 

[Glaurung]

What I'm asking is how can you do that? How are you able to turn off your rational brain and convince yourself of something for which you have no proof? It almost sounds as if your saying I need to 'pretend' like I believe, even though I still have doubts. Again, that's something I don't seem to be able to do. I can go through the motions, but in the back of my mind I know that it's all just an act.

I am not saying accept the faith despite reason, but that you will never find sufficient grounds for faith in reason alone. At some point you have to make a leap. My own experience was an infuriating suspicion deep within me that our existence is no accident. My reason tells me that Christianity is the answer to this feeling, even though I can never have rational certainty about that answer while I'm still on this earth.

In short what I'm saying is that my faith isn't contrary to my reason, but I cannot justify it on terms of reductive reason alone.

I've spent close to five decades searching for Him but have yet to find sufficient evidence that He actually exists.

It's not a question of strict evidence, but whether or not you can find a foundation for faith within yourself. This itself is a gift from God.

I admit there is a paradox here. As saint Augustine puts it.
Grant me, Lord, to know and understand which is first, to call on Thee or to praise Thee? and, again, to know Thee or to call on Thee? for who can call on Thee, not knowing Thee? for he that knoweth Thee not, may call on Thee as other than Thou art. Or, is it rather, that we call on Thee that we may know Thee? but how shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed?

urely you agree that many of the things depicted in the bible are rather fantastical, such as virgin births, talking animals, walking on water, rising from the dead. I'm trying to understand how your rational brain is not able you to accept magical strawberries without proof, but somehow it CAN accept the fantastical seemingly magical concurrences in the bible. If you can think of a better example that you aren't offended by, please share.

If you accept that God exists, and that Jesus is omnipotent God, then that he should be born of a virgin and be able to preform miracles isn't at all fantastical. As for the serpent, I interpret that as an allegory for Satan. I don't read the creation story as a face-value description of events. I don't believe that original sin was an act of eating an apple on the behest of a talking snake.

The 'honesty of my disbelief'? Okay, now THIS is one of those theist talking points that really begin to annoy me. It's the questioning of the true validity of my disbelief, as if I actually DO believe in Him, but just refuse to admit it.

I never accused you of that. I specifically said that only God can see into the soul. I don't know you.

What I am saying is that it's naive to think that a person's atheism can have no motive. Belief is an act of the will as much as it is of the intellect.

And yes, with many it's not so much that that can't believe, but that they do not want to. When I see someone who shrieks at the mere mention of Jesus, (you surely know the type) then I know that there is more than mere "disbelief" at play.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I am not saying accept the faith despite reason, but that you will never find sufficient grounds for faith in reason alone. At some point you have to make a leap. My own experience was an infuriating suspicion deep within me that our existence is no accident. My reason tells me that Christianity is the answer to this feeling, even though I can never have rational certainty about that answer while I'm still on this earth.

In short what I'm saying is that my faith isn't contrary to my reason, but I cannot justify it on terms of reductive reason alone.

Faith is believing in something despite what reason tells you. If anyone were to claim that there were a virgin and that they'd given birth your rational reasoning mind would reject it as extremely unlikely if not impossible. Yet if you have faith in Christianity you're able to set aside your rational reasoning mind and accept it without question. I don't know if I'm just different than others, but my brain simply does not allow me to turn off my rational reasoning mind, especially when it comes to such significant claims.


It's not a question of strict evidence, but whether or not you can find a foundation for faith within yourself. This itself is a gift from God.

I guess that's my problem, I'm incapable of finding a foundation on which I can stop using my rational reasoning mind. However, considering what I see others doing because they willfully stopped using reason and rational thought ( think flying airplanes into buildings in order to please God) I'm not convinced that it's such a great gift to possess.

I admit there is a paradox here. As saint Augustine puts it.
Grant me, Lord, to know and understand which is first, to call on Thee or to praise Thee? and, again, to know Thee or to call on Thee? for who can call on Thee, not knowing Thee? for he that knoweth Thee not, may call on Thee as other than Thou art. Or, is it rather, that we call on Thee that we may know Thee? but how shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed?


If you accept that God exists, and that Jesus is omnipotent God, then that he should be born of a virgin and be able to preform miracles isn't at all fantastical. As for the serpent, I interpret that as an allegory for Satan. I don't read the creation story as a face-value description of events. I don't believe that original sin was an act of eating an apple on the behest of a talking snake.

I guess. I mean, I suppose that if you first accept the fantastical claim that magical wizards do exist then the idea that a magic spell turned a person into a toad wouldn't seem fantastical. But it seems you have to accept the initial fantastical claim to begin with.


I never accused you of that. I specifically said that only God can see into the soul. I don't know you.

What I am saying is that it's naive to think that a person's atheism can have no motive. Belief is an act of the will as much as it is of the intellect.

And yes, with many it's not so much that that can't believe, but that they do not want to. When I see someone who shrieks at the mere mention of Jesus, (you surely know the type) then I know that there is more than mere "disbelief" at play.

"If you honestly cannot bring yourself to God then that will be between you and him." I guess I took you putting honestly in bold as an accusation, as if you were questioning it. I certainly agree that a person's atheism CAN have motivations beyond simple disbelief, I guess I encounter far too many people who assume that ALL atheists are motivated by something other than simple lack of evidence.

 

[Nakosis]

When I claim that the reason I’m an atheist is because I have yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to conclude that a God or any gods exist I have often been told by Christians that what I lack is faith. They say that first I must accept Jesus Christ as my savior and then God will reveal Himself to me.

My question for any Christians who may feel this way is, how exactly is such a thing possible? How can you genuinely believe that something substantial exists before you’ve ever been presented with what you feel is sufficient evidence to believe that it does?

Former Christian, but as I see it, if you're going to allow a teacher to teach you, you have to have enough faith in that teacher to listen and test the truth of what they teach you. If you don't have any faith in a person, you're not going to listen to what they have to say. You're not going to bother trying to verify any of it for yourself. I really think this was the faith Jesus was asking for. Trust him enough to allow him to instruct you.

Jesus said many things which were beyond the experience of most folks. There's no way for them to comprehend the truth of what Jesus was saying. So Jesus was saying trust in him enough to test the truth of his words.

However Christianity revolves more around the instructions provided by the Apostle Paul to the church. Christianity asks you not only to trust the words of Jesus but also that of Paul whereas LDS also ask you to trust/have faith in the words/teachings of Joseph Smith.

So how many Christians do you know trust Jesus enough to sell their possessions, give it to the poor and rely on solely on God to provide for their needs?

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Original post basically asks how you can believe God exists without proof. Short answer is that you can't. If God wants you to believe He will give you the understanding you need. By youself, it is not possible.

 

[Nakosis]

Original post basically asks how you can believe God exists without proof. Short answer is that you can't. If God wants you to believe He will give you the understanding you need. By youself, it is not possible.

With this ideology, there's no need to follow anything Jesus taught. Just believe it will happen by doing nothing.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

99% of people would not follow anything God says if it was tattooed on their arms.