How certian is your faith (or lack thereof) in God?


#1

Basically, I’m curious as to how certian you folks are in your belief in a personal God.


#2

Extremely certain. “God” explains everything, and quite elegantly (and beautifully). Nothing else comes close.


#3

100% conviction!
Sure as there is day and night, dark and light, black and white, left and right, good and evil… My God lives and reigns! The sovereign God!


#4

Very high probability, about 98 percent or so. But we always walk by faith, not by sight. One day my certainty will be 100 percent. :slight_smile:

I am satisfied philosophically that there is a God, but that’s not what steered me that direction in the first place. As Kierkegaard said, “How can there be no God, since I know that He has saved me?”


#5

It’s unlikely that a personal God exists. It’s possible that there is an impersonal “God”, but there is insufficient evidence or reason to conclude either that God exists or doesn’t exist.

The question is largely academic since if God exists, “he” appears uninterested in revealing himself. Hence, the question of God is of little practical importance as long as believers aren’t using their beliefs to justify making life worse for everyone else and non-believers aren’t using their supposed intellectual superiority to oppress believers.


#6

Question to Exalt before everyone starts in on Benedictus: Did you want a “poll” or a discussion? I have a sneaking suspicion that with Benedictus’s post, the “poll” might be over and the “debate” might begin. :wink: So as the OP, what’s your preference?


#7

100% I just know that God exists!


#8

I believe it was Msgr. Ronald Knox who observed that at 3 o’clock in the morning (that dark hour before the dawn when everything is unnaturally still) that he sometimes doubted God’s existence.

All believers have such “empty” moments or times of spiritual dryness. And why do I cite this? Because it is evidence (not solid proof but evidence) that we do not base our beliefs on our feelings, but on certain historical facts.

My belief is based in the Resurrection of Christ. I believe absolutely in the Resurrection of Christ because it is an historical fact witnessed by hundreds of people who were overwhelmingly astonished by it.

My feelings come and go, but God is always the same, and always keeps his word–verifiably so. And that satisfies me.

I couldn’t respond to the poll because the only choice than came close used the phrase “You just know” implying knowledge based on mere feelings, and since that isn’t the case, it didn’t fit the description of my belief.


#9

A discussion is no problem. I have a few thoughts, anyway.

My belief is based in the Resurrection of Christ. I believe absolutely in the Resurrection of Christ because it is an historical fact witnessed by hundreds of people who were overwhelmingly astonished by it.

How do you know this?


#10

[quote=Della]My belief is based in the Resurrection of Christ. I believe absolutely in the Resurrection of Christ because it is an historical fact witnessed by hundreds of people who were overwhelmingly astonished by it.
[/quote]

[quote=Exalt]How do you know this?
[/quote]

Because the witnesses wrote about it, unless we dismisses the NT accounts simply because they are considered “religious writings.” They are more than that, they are an historical witness to this world altering event.


#11

The first choice :slight_smile:

Equally, certainty of God is not static - it needs always to increase; it can always be stronger, fuller, clearer, more vivid. It can always be lost - not because God fails us, but because we fail God. If it does not growing, it decreases: to have more, one must exercise it - using it, is what stops it wearing out or running out

And it is not just information, like being certain that elephants live in India; it is practical. And it is certainty, not in some fuzzy who-knows-what, labelled “God”; but certainty that is the gift of Someone of a specific character. So it is not faith in some abstract “god of the philosophers”


#12

He seems to have done a good job revealing Himself for 1,900 years to the Israelites and 2,000 years in the Catholic Church. Are you looking for a scientific proof?


#13

*Hi this is my first post and i thought this is a good way to do that. i am a new catholic i was baptized in 2006. this last year and a b it has proven the trueness of god to me. i see his hand in everything in my life. i am a new transformed person, my life has totally changed, for the better. I am a peaceful happy soul. the answer to prayers happens quickly, the presence of God i can feel all the time. :extrahappy: *


#14

The writers of the New Testament were not eye witnesses, if that’s what you’re refering to.


#15

Without a single doubt. Even when I was going through spiritual struggles, I never doubted it. I haven’t since the day I was born and I won’t ever, not on the day I die or beyound that.

For me, personally, it just makes sense that God exsists. Do a little reading on the human body and how each and every cell has a purpose in keeping the magnificant machine of the body working. Sit in your backyard and take in how many diffferent weeds and birds and inscets are there, and then think how many there must be in all of the backyards on earth! Listen to the stories of people who have survived against odds and succeded against all odds. When I think of these things, I not only know that God exsists but that He is the Ultimate Good.


#16

Welcome home, my friend…And yes I too believe 100% in God. Just look at the complexity and order of life and creation. It takes more faith to be an atheist. You would have to believe that something came from nothing. My faith is not that strong. I have to choose to believe in a Creator. And one who loves me because he created me. God Bless you, gentlefatih and enjoy your faithfilled journey,teachccd:)


#17

I’d ask you the same question you asked earlier: How do you know this? Please don’t answer: “The certain conclusions of modern scholarship.” Such as The Jesus Seminar? Please.


#18

I think this is a great question, Exalt! It is one i’ve asked myself and one for which i have found satisfying, rational answers. Since an answer is still pending from the person you asked, let me try to answer it.

There are many passages in the New Testament where the authors state that they were eyewitnesses of Jesus. For example, the ancient historian Luke begins his gospel this way:

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account…

and Jesus’ close associate Peter, who spent three and a half years with the man had this to say:We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.(2 Peter, chapter 1)

Paul also writes:… For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born… (1 Corinthians, chapter 15)Now, a critic might ask, “But were not these men all bias? Were they not just propagating a big lie?”

There are many good reasons why we do not believe the authors of the New Testament were trying to deceive. Others here, i’m sure, can explain several of these reasons. The one that is most convincing to me is the answer to this question:

Why would any sane and rational man die for what he knows is a lie?That’s another question i asked myself and others like yourself, and no one has an answer to that one. I mean, radical Muslims strap bombs to themselves and blow themselves up to kill as many around them as they can. They die for a lie, but the do NOT KNOW it is a lie. They actually believe the Koran when it says that if they die fighting for God that they will go straight to Paradise.

The writers of the New Testament, on the other hand, said that they talked with Jesus and touched Jesus and had dinner with him after he rose from the dead. This assertion that they were with Jesus after his resurrection, if it was false, would without a doubt be in their minds a bona fide lie. Yet Peter was willing to suffer persecution and finally death by being whipped, beaten and crucified upside down. Why? Paul suffered at least as much, for he writes

I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again. Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn? If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness. The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever, knows that I am not lying. (2 Corinthians 11)The historian Luke’s Acts of the Apostles verifies many of the sufferings through which Paul went before he died. It’s not as if Paul and Peter had nothing to lose. Peter had a profitable fishing business. Paul was a student of the great ancient rabbi Gamaliel. He was preparing to become a great rabbi himself as well as one of the rich and powerful Pharisees in Palestine. Yet he gave all that up to suffer and die. Again i have to ask, “Why?”

The only answer that makes any sense is because they really did see a dead guy walking and in perfect health who claimed he rose from the dead. If you have another answer that makes sense, Exalt, i will certainly listen to what you have to say.


#19

Why? They reported what they saw with their own eyes, heard with their own ears, touched with their own hands–the risen Christ. What other definition of a witness do we have?


#20

also What about Thomas he put his hands into the wounds. That was witness and touching. also the disiples ate with Christ.

But as for poll 100%

I used to have doubts, not anymore. After a few out and out arguements, and more than a few awful words on my part. And being gently proved wrong each time. I decided to eat my crow with no garlic.

To quote U2

" An intellectual tortoise
Racing with Your bullet train"

So I gave up arguements and doubts, my eyes were blind, but they are totally clear now. :slight_smile:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.