....
1) I find it very odd that a faith, which implies to me to be something personal like falling in love and all that, is set out and founded in such an intellectual manner.
Why do you think it is "like falling in love and all that"? I find it very odd that someone seems to think a belief in God should not be "set out and founded in such an intellectual manner." There are frequent claims on these boards that Christian faith is "believing despite the evidence and the like". As far as I can remember, my fellow chemists at university who became Christians became Christians in a similar manner and there are plenty of other Christians who became Christians that way, e.g. my vicar (a former computer programmer). Some of the big brains of Christianity did so too, e.g. CS Lewis.
Do you care to relay some of the personal experiences you hint at at the end of this section?
Stuff like an overwhelming sense of God's love sometimes. An overwhelming sense of gratitude last week when looking at the pictures of our congregation at church during our prayer week. A one-off, rather weird experience about 20 years ago when being prayed for. Knowing that I am God's son (big "G", little "s"). Stuff like that.
As I have said elsewhere, I tend not to bring this up too much as though knowing of a person's personal experience may be interesting and may be thought-provoking, I don't think it is evidence for someone else to hook onto and, as a result, become a Christian. For that they need to be clobbered by God directly as one of my friends was or to look at the good evidence there is and which we discuss endlessly here.
2) For me that's a big if. As someone who is in the Jungian camp I can explain that in psychological terms. This is based on the basis that it never took place but is something that grows up due to the interaction of consciousness with the Unconscious, and is a function of the elements of the Unconscious called archetypes.
As I mentioned in my PM a while back, I'm confused by your numbering here. My two number twos were:
2) Such believing in God requires more than an intellectual assent, something more than just accepting evidence. Whether we put our trust in him is very much bound up with our response to him telling us we are sinners. Do we respond to that by accepting it or rejecting it?and
2) Kalam cosmological argument.Which one are you discussing? The former?
3) That doesn't help. Any religion could say that about their God and outlook.
Assuming you are speaking of "Argument from design", so what? Arguments 1-4 do not specifically argue for the Christian God, but rather a generic deistic/theistic God, both of which would get you out of your atheism.
4) Actually it is what you claim atheists say or put forward - "This is logically equivalent to an argument often put forward by atheists that if (since) God does not exist, the universe has no explanation."
Who says this? It's rubbish as it makes no sense.
Eh? No. 4 is about the "Argument from objective morals". You seem to be speaking about no. 1, "the "Argument from contingency (Leibnitz's argument).
5) OK
I think we are all muddled up with our numbering. You seem to be accepting "The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.". That would be great, but somehow I don't think we are talking about the same point.
I'm going to stop here as I can't work out what points you are responding to. Here are my numbered items from 155/137.
It is often assumed, by Christians as well as non-Christians, that there are no concrete reasons for believing that God exists. Christianity has suffered from a reliance on feelings or “just having faith” for about a century. However, there are good reasons to believe in God’s existence.
Notes:
1) Believing in God is more than just believing he exists; it is trusting him, though to do that you need to believe he exists. Do you believe in Ed Milliband? Nick Clegg? David Cameron?
2) Such believing in God requires more than an intellectual assent, something more than just accepting evidence. Whether we put our trust in him is very much bound up with our response to him telling us we are sinners. Do we respond to that by accepting it or rejecting it?
3) None of the items below are an argument against biological evolution.
Six Reasons to Believe in God (for a Christian) and Five Reasons to Believe in God (for an atheist):
1) Argument from contingency (Leibnitz’s argument).
2) Kalam cosmological argument.
3) Argument from design.
4) Argument from objective morals.
5) The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
6) The internal witness of the Holy Spirit (Christians only).
These arguments are based on those put forward by Dr. William Lane Craig who has a really good website at www.reasonablefaith.org.
