Faith in the Unlimited is freedom!

So is running naked through the forest – but I’m not waiting in line to do that either

We can, by the way, rationalize and discuss all life long. People have been doing it for all of time. I think it simply shows that our reason has a limit. Faith does not. Faith in the Unlimited is freedom!

He is truly Infinite, then, by definition He is not limited at all in His ability to speak to His creation.

Then perhaps he is simply unwilling to speak to all but a few?

Ahhh, the assumptions I am making… by…back to that word… faith.

I began my faith journey completely apart from the Word of God. I simply believed there was a God who wanted to be my father and that He adopted me through the work of Jesus.

How did you know about the work of Jesus, or that God is like an adopting Father? From your family and friends? Where did they get those ideas?

I had no concept of the bible at that point

So maybe this would be a better characterization:

Before you knew about the Bible, your faith did not rely on circular logic; it relied on the premise that family and friends were correct about God.

But when you did come to know about the Bible, you understood that it contained the concepts about Jesus and the Father you were taught as a child.

So as a child, you were taught concepts about God which originate from the Bible, and you believed what you were taught. You later learned that the Bible was the origin of those concepts about God. Since you believed the concepts, you also believed the Bible. Since you believe the Bible, you believe in the concepts and therefore believe in God.

Divine inspiration of scripture is not necessary for you to believe in God since you believed what the Bible said about God without understanding that the it was divinely inspired. Therefore, you feel free to examine the evidence that shows that the Bible by and large is a human work and not a divine work. If you should conclude that it is indeed largely a human work (as many Christian scholars have), your faith in God will remain unchanged.

Is that a fair characterization?

I think our discussion is on the right track in that we seem to both understand the problem with circular logic and are looking at how faith in God does not necessarily require circular logic.

I don’t see it as circular to say that faith in something is faith in something that isn’t clear.

I don’t either.

The circular logic I see is this: (A) faith in God because of (B) what the Bible says and the belief that the its message is divine. if B then A.

Despite reasons to believe that the Bible is not divine, you (B) believe it is indeed divine because of (A) your faith in God. If A, then B.