The difference between Believers and non-believers.

[Christianathlete]

I was thinking last night about what is the main difference in the thought processes of believers and non-believers and this is what I came up with. I could be stating a dumb fact or be flat-out wrong but it's just a thought.

I think the biggest difference is the thought process of how a person looks at new information. Believers (myself at least) believe things are true until proven false and non-believers see things as false until proven true. This is why we are debating here. There's not enough physical evidence to persuade a person either way. I am a believer and I see proof everyday in normal occurances or the occasional miraculous event. But a non-believer can look at the same things happening but says there is no proof that what is happening is not coincidence so there is no reason to believe that it may be an act of God but they have no proof that it is not an act of God either. So we argue in a never-ending battle for the Great Commission that God has given to us. I for one have no problem with this.

I believe (though I'm only 18 and not as knowledgeable as many of you) that God has me on here for a reason. I've learned a lot in the week or so that I have been on the site and the arguements have challenged me to do added research on top of what I already do and it is making me into a better, more knowledgeable Christian.

So I want to thank those of you alongside me that are ever zealous in your effort on here. I know that the knowledge I gain on here will help me to lead lost souls to the Truth in the future.

[Goose]

Hi Christianathlete. It's good to see a young Christian eager to learn more about his/her faith. I wish more Christians were like you.

My two cents.

I think the biggest difference is the thought process of how a person looks at new information. Believers (myself at least) believe things are true until proven false and non-believers see things as false until proven true.

This is generally true in regards to the Bible. However, we might say the opposite when other subjects are introduced such the Theory of Evolution. So Christians can be guilty of the same accusation. Christians need to present their case to non-believers using mechanisms that do not start with the assumption the Bible is true because it is the Bible. More objective methods that do not use circular reasoning are needed in these forums. We'll make far more progress this way.

In my opinion, Christians should spend more time focusing on why we believe Christianity is true, not try to make Christianity more palatable. Christianity is what it is. I'm not a Christian because I like Christianity. I'm a Christian because I believe it be true.

There's not enough physical evidence to persuade a person either way.

I would disagree with that statement.

[Christianathlete]

Hi Christianathlete. It's good to see a young Christian eager to learn more about his/her faith. I wish more Christians were like you.

My two cents.

There's not enough physical evidence to persuade a person either way.

I would disagree with that statement.

I should have said this differently. There is not enough physical evidence to make the population believe one certain way. There is enough to convert some. But some will be stubborn til the end when "every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord". If we had enough physical evidence to back us up at this moment in time there would be no atheists.

[Goose]

If we had enough physical evidence to back us up at this moment in time there would be no atheists.

I don't believe that for three reasons.

1. Theologically speaking, I lean more towards predeterminism than free will.

2. The amount, type or quality of evidence is irrelvent if one has already made their decision a priori. Some reject Julius Caesar existed. Some reject the Holocaust. I'm sure we could even find a few people that reject their own existence.

3. Following from number 2. athiests tend not to have an objective method for determining the historical truth when it comes to Christianity. Ironically, many atheists appeal to science which requires objective methods.

[joer]

Hey Christianathlete, Like Goose, I think it's great you are asking these questions. I had a real interesting thread where non-believers sort of answer this question you pose in their own terms. And It made a lot of sence to me.

I think it's kind of like you're touching on, It's a narural response for one to form their world-view which includes belief and/or non-belief in God.

If you have some time and are still interested check this thread out. For me it hieghtened my love for my athiest and non-believer brothers and sisters. Which is how Christ taught me to think of them.

Why do atheists/others Deny God, Scriptures,

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... php?t=8155

Bless You brother. may your soul forever drink from the water of Eternal Life