Christian, but not 'Bible-believing'

[Fenris]

On what basis would one determine that a proposition is true, etc.? Possibly, "objective fact gathering"? Or is that objectively not the subjective case?

One can't "fact gather" about entities that cannot be seen. All religious belief is subjective. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus... whoever.

[Slug1]

In my opinion, objective fact gathering

There are no objective facts when it comes to religious belief.

Wikipedia's definition is pretty good: A belief is a subjective attitude that a proposition is true or a state of affairs is the case.

Many may accept this as a definition. However, while a belief can be "subjective" when does a belief transition to being "objective?" Case in point, if I say that I believe in Jesus and because of this belief, I experience salvation. To me, my personal salvation becomes an objective truth despite any denial from anyone who does not believe I am saved by Christ.

If I was to testify to a group of deniers and speak to them about Christ (spreading the Gospel message of Christ) and the Holy Spirit manifests. I pray over and layon of hands of one who has a nasty bruise due to an injury and the Holy Spirit heals that person. Is the healing "subjective" or "objective" evidence of the power of Christ that is in me? Also, does that evidence make my belief I am saved by Christ, "subjective" or "objective?"

Point being, we all can say that a fact is only subjective but when we fail to recognize at which point a fact becomes objective, then all we experience will only be subjective in our minds.

Faith is what allows us to take what we believe is ONLY subjective and realize/experience what is/has been objective all along, when it comes to Christ and faith (believing) in Him.

[Athanasius]

On what basis would one determine that a proposition is true, etc.? Possibly, "objective fact gathering"? Or is that objectively not the subjective case?

One can't "fact gather" about entities that cannot be seen. All religious belief is subjective. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus... whoever.

Is that a fact?

[Fenris]

Many may accept this as a definition. However, while a belief can be "subjective" when does a belief transition to being "objective?" Case in point, if I say that I believe in Jesus and because of this belief, I experience salvation. To me, my personal salvation becomes an objective truth despite any denial from anyone who does not believe I am saved by Christ.

What is this "personal salvation"? Can you show it to me? Can it be shared with others? No, you can't. The very phrase " To me, my personal salvation becomes an objective truth" means that it is subjective.

If I was to testify to a group of deniers and speak to them about Christ (spreading the Gospel message of Christ) and the Holy Spirit manifests. I pray over and layon of hands of one who has a nasty bruise due to an injury and the Holy Spirit heals that person. Is the healing "subjective" or "objective" evidence of the power of Christ that is in me?

Disappearing bruise? I'd love to see that.

Point being, we all can say that a fact is only subjective but when we fail to recognize at which point a fact becomes objective, then all we experience will only be subjective in our minds.

The fact that it's in your mind (or mine, or anyone else's) means it is subjective.

[Fenris]

Is that a fact?

Ahhh I see what you did there.

[Slug1]

Many may accept this as a definition. However, while a belief can be "subjective" when does a belief transition to being "objective?" Case in point, if I say that I believe in Jesus and because of this belief, I experience salvation. To me, my personal salvation becomes an objective truth despite any denial from anyone who does not believe I am saved by Christ.

What is this "personal salvation"? Can you show it to me? Can it be shared with others? No, you can't. The very phrase " To me, my personal salvation becomes an objective truth" means that it is subjective.

If I was to testify to a group of deniers and speak to them about Christ (spreading the Gospel message of Christ) and the Holy Spirit manifests. I pray over and layon of hands of one who has a nasty bruise due to an injury and the Holy Spirit heals that person. Is the healing "subjective" or "objective" evidence of the power of Christ that is in me?

Disappearing bruise? I'd love to see that.

Point being, we all can say that a fact is only subjective but when we fail to recognize at which point a fact becomes objective, then all we experience will only be subjective in our minds.

The fact that it's in your mind (or mine, or anyone else's) means it is subjective.

Everything I said, when does what can be subjective, become objective?

Long time ago, God told Abraham that he was gonna have a child in his and Sarah old age. Was this fact subjective or objective? If subjective, when did the fact become objective?

This is why I originally brought up Scriptural prophecy as a means to help a person choose to believe whether or not God's Word is "inspired."

[Fenris]

Everything I said, when does what can be subjective, become objective?

When it takes place someplace else aside form inside one's head?

Long time ago, God told Abraham that he was gonna have a child in his and Sarah old age. Was this fact subjective or objective? If subjective, when did the fact become objective?

It became objective when he had a child that everyone could see.

This is why I originally brought up Scriptural prophecy as a means to help a person choose to believe whether or not God's Word is "inspired."

But being "saved" is not visible.

[Slug1]

Everything I said, when does what can be subjective, become objective?

When it takes place someplace else aside form inside one's head?

Long time ago, God told Abraham that he was gonna have a child in his and Sarah old age. Was this fact subjective or objective? If subjective, when did the fact become objective?

It became objective when he had a child that everyone could see.

This is why I originally brought up Scriptural prophecy as a means to help a person choose to believe whether or not God's Word is "inspired."

But being "saved" is not visible.

But how did the birth of Issac become "objective" for you, when the element of "seeing" must happen for a truth to go from subjective to objective?

edit: If I don't respond for several days it's due to a road trip, visiting my daughter and travel begins Thursday :-)

[Athanasius]

On what basis would one determine that a proposition is true, etc.? Possibly, "objective fact gathering"? Or is that objectively not the subjective case?

One can't "fact gather" about entities that cannot be seen. All religious belief is subjective. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus... whoever.

I would say, though, that one could gather compelling evidence. That an entity cannot be seen doesn't mean that an entity has not acted in the world in ways that - arguably - can be seen.

That is, there has to be something that separates faith from blind faith. It should probably also be acknowledged that faith as knowledge of propositions isn't the whole of faith and that faith, in the sense we mean will necessarily be relational. One could, in theory in this sense, know propositions but reject relationship, with faith being more about the latter than the former thing, even as it's about both.

[Fenris]

But how did the birth of Issac become "objective" for you, when the element of "seeing" must happen for a truth to go from subjective to objective?

Because a person being born can be seen by others. Your personal feeling of being "saved" is not visible to anyone else, only felt by yourself.

edit: If I don't respond for several days it's due to a road trip, visiting my daughter and travel begins Thursday :-)

Enjoy! We'll continue when you return.

[Fenris]

I would say, though, that one could gather compelling evidence. That an entity cannot be seen doesn't mean that an entity has not acted in the world in ways that - arguably - can be seen.

Yes but the interpretation of such events would itself be subjective.

A simple example. The reestablishment of the state of Israel after 2000 years. I see that as God acting in history. As the literal fulfillment of biblical prophecy. As proof that God's covenant at Sinai remains in effect. As proof that the Jewish faith is correct.

Nobody else here believes that. And yet it seems completely obvious to me. But I don't expect anyone to believe it because I understand that my view of these historical events are in fact subjective even as Israel's existence is objective.

That is, there has to be something that separates faith from blind faith.

I am certain that everyone finds their own personal evidence, whatever it may be, to support their beliefs. But its subjective.

[Athanasius]

I would say, though, that one could gather compelling evidence. That an entity cannot be seen doesn't mean that an entity has not acted in the world in ways that - arguably - can be seen.

Yes but the interpretation of such events would itself be subjective.

A simple example. The reestablishment of the state of Israel after 2000 years. I see that as God acting in history. As the literal fulfillment of biblical prophecy. As proof that God's covenant at Sinai remains in effect. As proof that the Jewish faith is correct.

Nobody else here believes that. And yet it seems completely obvious to me. But I don't expect anyone to believe it because I understand that my view of these historical events are in fact subjective even as Israel's existence is objective.

That is, there has to be something that separates faith from blind faith.

I am certain that everyone finds their own personal evidence, whatever it may be, to support their beliefs. But its subjective.

So one can "fact gather", then. What's in question is how the fact is interpreted. Or said another way, proof of God's covenant at Sinai is proof even if someone doesn't believe it is. Their subjectivity doesn't override the fact, which is out there in the world.

[Fenris]

Or said another way, proof of God's covenant at Sinai is proof even if someone doesn't believe it is.

No... Belief that a covenant even took place at Sinai is in fact subjective.

[Athanasius]

Or said another way, proof of God's covenant at Sinai is proof even if someone doesn't believe it is.

No... Belief that a covenant even took place at Sinai is in fact subjective.

I'm not talking about the belief that a covenant took place, I'm talking about the proof of the covenant.

[Fenris]

I'm not talking about the belief that a covenant took place, I'm talking about the proof of the covenant.

The proof of the covenant is also subjective. It requires that one believe the veracity of the bible.