Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Faith

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    1 Not allowed!

    Default Faith

    There are various concepts of faith which have different connotations. In the dictionary there are multiple limiting definitions across a common theme:
    1. Confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
    2. Belief that is not based on proof.
    3. Belief in god or in the doctrines or teachings of religion.
    4. Belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.
    5. A system of religious belief.
    6. The obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.
    7. The observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.
    8. The trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.
    All are legitimate definitions, possessing thematic inter-relation.

    The variety of definitions for the term is one reason why so few arguments on the subject of faith lead to useful ends. If different individuals are using different definitions, both sides are inclined to make errors of equivocation.
    Mark Twain also created a classic definition in his book, Pudd'nhead Wilson: "Faith is believing what you know ain't so."
    This is similar to Nietzsche's definition:

    "Faith means not wanting to know what is true."
    Many atheists regard faith as the act of coming to a conclusion first, and then filtering the facts to match preconceived expectations. In a sense, this is the opposite of science.

    While useful for illustrating the problems associated with faith, this derisive use of the term sometimes hinders discussion of the topic, and thus, hinders intellectual growth.

    Faith can apply to any assertion of truth, regardless of the quality of the reasons for that assertion. This is an important distinction because while faith includes counter-factual (wrong) beliefs, it also includes both factually supported and factually-neutral positions.

    Factually-neutral positions include subjective statements (that's a pretty picture) and value-judgements (it's wrong to hurt people for fun). These are factually-neutral positions because it is impossible, even theoretically, to prove them right or wrong. Facts, effectively, do not apply to them.

    Religions typically assert a number of positions in which they have faith, and do not typically differentiate between positions which can and cannot have facts applied to them. Since most religions do not have formal vetting processes, there is not typically a need for them to do so. This can lead to miscommunication when secular atheists vocalize a rejection of faith. For instance, most religions assert (explicitly or not) the central tenet of humanism: Human beings are morally valuable. As this is a factually-neutral stance, it is an article of faith. Secular atheists (like most people) typically do not reject factually-neutral ideas as fallacies, and (like most people) do not typically reject the idea that humans have moral value. A religious person hearing someone reject faith in general may well misunderstand this statement as a rejection of all moral values, as all moral values are eventually based on factually-neutral premises. This helps lead to the characterization that atheists have no morals.

    "Then Jesus told him, 'Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.'"
    — John 20:29

    My personal definition of faith is accepting some belief as true without reason, evidence, or justification.
    Faith is the excuse people give for believing something they don’t have sufficient reason to affirm as true that which is not evidently true. Faith is an assertion of absolute conviction that is assumed independent of evidence, and which must be defended against all evidence to the contrary. Until a belief is indicated in evidence it does not warrant affirming its truth claim.

    Imagine a bar of believability, evidence piles up and as it increases, this constitutes evidence for finding the belief credible. Propositions ought to be proportioned in accord with the weight of the evidence in support of them. Any epistemic shortcut, jump, or lateral move in order to bridge the gap of believability is equivalent to faith in accepting a claim as true. Had I had good reasons, I would not need faith to believe something. Faith is the excuse that people give for believing something they don’t know is true: no true justified beliefs.
    Last edited by Petros Agapetos; 11-27-2016 at 12:34 PM.

  2. #2
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    A number of arguments exist in defense of faith.
    1. Faith is a virtue: Faith is something to be desired, in and of itself.
     The idea that a premise should be accepted without evidence and that the premise is better without evidence can be used to justify any claim. One could just as easily believe that God wants people to love their neighbors as one could believe that God wants people to kill their neighbors for working on the Sabbath. For example, faith is often used as a justification for suicide bombers.

    Arguments exist within the Christian community (as well as in other religious communities) as to whether faith, when spoken of as a virtue, should apply to all believed premises or only some. For instance, there are those who believe that faith, in this sense, means something closer to optimism, and not a blatant disregard for reality. It has often been argued by linguists that the terms 'faith' and 'hope' are not distinct in the language of the Bible.

    Arguments against faith
     "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." – Voltaire
     "A casual stroll through an insane asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." – Friedrich Nietzsche
     "Faith is what credulity becomes when it finally achieves escape velocity from the constraints of terrestrial discourse–constraints like reasonableness, internal coherence, civility, and candor." – Sam Harris, The End of Faith

    Belief in belief
    Rather than directly justifying faith, some would argue for belief in belief in a god. Daniel Dennett posits that belief in god may be less common than belief in belief in god. This would allow doubters to act as if they believed in what a true believer believed in. Belief in belief in god would allow them to feel comforted in the knowledge that they adhere to common moral and ethical norms. In addition, this would allow doubters to benefit from accessing all the ready-made social support and acceptance embedded within a religious community.

    It would be prudent to also include mention of a more secular, popular meme of "belief" currently in use, especially in the United States. This can be defined by equating its use under the category of “self-help,” or “positive-thinking.” Belief in the notion that “one can do anything one puts one’s mind to” can be very powerful. Belief in this belief has sold many a self-help book, (This is not to denigrate any sincere effort on anyone’s part to strive for personal growth.) and it is just another variable one might add to the amorphous nature of the study of faith and belief.

    Theist claim: “It takes more faith to disbelieve than to believe”.

    Atheists maintain that there is currently no evidence to justify positive belief in God. Therefore, it is not necessary, logical, or reasonable to believe in any of the various gods posited by world religions. The absence of evidence could represent either evidence of absence or simply the absence of a proper means of detection. Regardless, positive claims about the existence of gods made in the absence of evidence are difficult to defend. Belief is warranted when the existence of a god can be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt. For the purposes of this discussion, the relevant definition of faith is:

    "Accepting a proposition as true based on intuition or reason, regardless of the evidence."
    A separate issue is that, in general, it seems believing requires less psychological effort than disbelieving.

    Counter Apologetics to Faith
    When there is not sufficient evidence to support a claim, the default position should be rational skepticism if the goal is to minimize the number of false beliefs and maximize the number of true beliefs one holds. A central problem of faith is that if it can form a reasonable basis for believing one proposition without evidence, why does it not also form a reasonable basis for believing a contrary proposition? By what means can faith be discerned to lead to true beliefs, when it can be used with equal effectiveness to support conflicting propositions? One cannot argue that faith claims can be rationally evaluated in any way whatsoever to demonstrate their truth, because once faith claims are rationally considered against alternative hypotheses, the claims are either 1) no longer held (in favor of an alternative claim) or 2) no longer based on faith (i.e., rationality forms the basis for the claim). Atheists maintain that there is no strong evidence for the presence of a higher power, which is why theists need faith -- to replace evidence. Ironically, many theists have the confidence to deny the existence of fairy tale creatures from other mythologies and cultures, and deities of other religions, for which there is likewise no strong evidence.

    Not believing in fairies or Father Christmas is not an act of faith, because those who are making these claims have the burden of proof, and must provide evidence to support the acceptance of such propositions. Technically, disbelief of a claim, when evidence is lacking, requires less a statement of faith, in the same sense that 0 is less than 1. Definitionally, it doesn't make sense to say that disbelieving "takes more faith," as it doesn't require any faith not to place one's belief in unsubstantiated truth claims. An analogous claim would be, "Not playing sports requires more athletic ability than playing football." However, when discussing the faith required to be an atheist, it is helpful to point out that two basic forms of atheism exist, and each could be described as requiring different degrees of faith:

    weak (or default) atheism - the position of atheists who simply fails to accept propositions for the existence of a god; requires no faith because no claims are accepted as true without evidence. The weak atheist, therefore, does not accept that absence of evidence for a god is evidence of absence. strong atheism - the position of atheists who believe actively that there is no god; requires more faith because the positive claim that there are no gods is accepted as true without evidence. The strong atheist, therefore, accepts that absence of evidence for a god is evidence of absence.

    An atheist may wish to bring up this distinction to derail the "Atheism is a kind of faith" argument, as most consider themselves weak/default atheists. Some theists, such as Ray Comfort, may try to make the claim that this category is actually agnostics, as they usually represent strong atheism as the standard atheist position. One can point out that atheism categorically is, without belief in any gods, and that both definitions of atheism fall within this broader category. If the theist refuses to accept the self-applied label of atheist, then the atheist can suggest that the theist is making a distinction without a difference, and that moving on with the conversation is likely more productive than further semantic arguments (Careful however, as the theist might use their subjective definition to formulate strawman arguments later).
    A final point the atheist could consider is that religions assert that faith is a virtue, so it hardly makes sense to criticize the atheist for having as much faith as, or more faith than, the theist. A reasonable question to directly follow the theist's objection to this would be, "Does faith prove me wrong?" (as in "Does basing a viewpoint on faith invalidate it automatically?") If the answer is "yes," the theist is either admitting their beliefs are not faith-based, or that they are wrong according to this reasoning. If the answer is "no," the theist is admitting that faith doesn't distinguish between the truth of his or her beliefs and the beliefs of the atheist.

    Theist claim: “Atheism is based on faith too.”
    Apologists often claim that atheism is based on faith — that is, not believing in a god requires just as much faith, if not more, than belief. Norman Geisler expressed this argument in the title of his book, I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.
    "To be a [sic] Atheist one would have to be omniscient, knowing all things, having a perfect knowledge of the universe, to say they absolutely know God does not exist. For one to do this they would have to personally inspected all places in the present known universe and in all time, having explored everywhere seen and unseen."

    "Atheism is a faith in that which has not been proved."

    "If God is outside of nature, then science can neither prove nor disprove His existence. Atheism itself must therefore be considered a form of blind faith, in that it adopts a belief system that cannot be defended on the basis of pure reason."
    — Francis Collins, The Language of God

    Counter-apologetics to Faith
    The definition of "Atheist" in the argument above is an overly broad straw man: an atheist is one who either lacks positive belief in a god or who believes that no gods exist, not one who claims to know absolutely that no gods exist (see Atheist vs. agnostic).
    While a person would need perfect knowledge of the universe to be absolutely certain that no gods exist, such knowledge is not required for disbelief. And, in fact, individual theists disbelieve all kinds of claims (that various mythical beings exist, or that Earth is being regularly visited by aliens from space) without having complete knowledge even of the relevant subject areas.
    The use of the word "faith" is often an attempt to mislead based on the equivocation fallacy. As the article on faith discusses, the two primary meanings of the word are: (1) confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing; and (2) belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. One may reasonably claim that certain forms of atheism are based on "faith" using the first definition. However, the way this claim is often made implies that the second definition is being used, which is usually incorrect.
    Disbelief based on lack of evidence does not require faith. In fact, disbelief does not require evidence of any kind. Someone who has never heard of the concept of "gods" would not believe in them. Under the broader definition of atheism, they would be an atheist and yet not have faith that no gods exist. Similarly, someone who has been given evidence and simply finds it lacking (the classic narrower definition of atheist) would also not be relying on faith for his or her lack of belief.
    It is quite possible to obtain evidence discouraging belief in the existence of specific gods (i.e., "evidence-based atheism"). For example, if the god is defined sufficiently well, one may examine the definition for logical contradications. If the god is not logically consistent, then disbelief is justified. If a god is invoked to explain a certain phenomenon, then that explanation can be compared to the best scientific explanation of the same phenomenon. If science leads to a better explanation or a deeper understanding of the mechanisms involved, then why is belief in the god necessary?

    The argument equates non-belief in a proposition due to a complete lack of evidence and good reasons to suppose otherwise to the psychological leap of faith needed to believe such a proposition.

    Theists tend to treat belief in their particular god as the default position, and they will often back this up with some variation of the argument from design. But since theists make a positive claim of their god's existence, they have the burden of proof. In fact, their claim is quite extraordinary (e.g., a being that can create whole universes), so their burden of proof is all the greater for that.
    There is often an unspoken premise in this kind of argument that being an atheist is dangerous and therefore should not be entered into lightly. This is a classic appeal to emotion. (Not to mention the ironic implication that faith is not a good reason to disbelieve something; if that's true, then why should faith be a good reason to believe something?)

    Theists commonly consider faith to be a virtue. It seems odd, then, that they would criticize atheism for being based on faith. Moreover, the argument implies that the more faith a proposition needs, the less one should accept it as true, a position that many counter-apologists would welcome.

    Tu quoque! This argument attempts to defend faith-based religious claims by insisting that the atheist position falls into the same category. It also often serves as a non sequitur, and tends to derail the discussion about the merits of positive god claims.

    Theists often backslide and have trouble maintaining faith in their god. Atheists occasionally convert to theism, but do not tend to slip into various god-beliefs due to the "strain" required to maintain no belief in any gods. If atheism were an identity based on faith, one might expect atheists to share the same difficulties the religious have in maintaining their faith.
    Last edited by Petros Agapetos; 11-26-2016 at 03:23 AM.

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    0 Not allowed!

    Default


    Definition of faith and virtue

    A virtue, as defined by the Random House Dictionary, is a particular moral excellence, or a good or admirable quality or property.
    The meaning of faith, from the same dictionary, can be defined as a trust or belief in something that is not proven. Out of all the definitions of "faith" that exist, the only definition that atheists tend to object to is:
     Accepting a claim as true without sufficient evidence
    Often, theists will conflate these multiple definitions interchangeably, sometimes, mid-conversation. It's important to maintain focus on the above definition, as the pertinent one. The problem with the concept of "virtue", as defined, is that it's very subjective. Depending on the definitions, an argument could be made either way as to the virtue of faith.

    Theistic Argument for the Virtue of Faith
    Using faith in the terms of a belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
    A virtue is a character trait valued as being good. Faith may not fall under the four western cardinal virtues of prudence, temperance, fortitude, and justice, but is still seen as good to Christians based on the following passages:

    "Without faith, it is impossible to please God" (Hebrews 11:6 )
    "Jesus said to him, 'Because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed.'" (John 20:29)
    "Now abide, faith, hope, love, these three, but the greatest of these is Love." (1 Corinthians 13:13 )
    "For we are living a life of faith, and not one of sight." (2 Corinthians 5:7 )
    Aquinas believed that (living) faith is a virtue:

    "The will can not strive after God in perfect love unless the intellect have true faith toward him.[1]"
    "It is by human virtue that human acts are rendered good; hence, any habit that is always the principle of a good act, may be called a human virtue. Such a habit is living faith. For since to believe is an act of the intellect assenting to the truth at the command of the will, two things are required that this act may be perfect: one of which is that the intellect should infallibly tend to its object, which is the true; while the other is that the will should be infallibly directed to the last end, on account of which it assents to the true: and both of these are to be found in the act of living faith. For it belongs to the very essence of faith that the intellect should ever tend to the true, since nothing false can be the object of faith, as proved above (1, 3): while the effect of charity, which is the form of faith, is that the soul ever has its will directed to a good end. Therefore living faith is a virtue.[2]"

    "The faith of which we are speaking is based on the Divine Truth, which is infallible, and consequently its object cannot be anything false; so that faith of this kind can be a virtue.[2]"

    Non-Theistic Argument against the Virtue of Faith
    Faith can lead to wrong doing, sometimes faith based humility lead Roman Catholics to be respectful to their priests and to avoid questions about what paedophile priests were doing to their children. Other times faith leads to arrogance as in, "We're superior because of our faith" whichever faith that is and even to, "We have the right to punish those who don't share our faith." Again many faiths take that attitude.

    Virtue is established by what results in real, true beliefs. For instance, there's no virtue in believing something if there's no good reason to. It's nearly impossible to make rational and accurate decisions if the beliefs one holds are in error. Exercising skepticism, while discarding faith, can drastically increase how well tuned into reality one is. Accepting things on faith effectively halts investigation, retards progress in learning about how the universe works, and leads people to take actions that an otherwise rational person wouldn't. The Salem Witch Trials, for instance, occurred because a group of people simply accepted accusations of witchcraft as true, instead of skeptically and critically examining the accusations to ensure they actually were true.

    Faith has nothing to do with being a good person, being charitable, or being intellectual. The argument for the virtue of faith commits the errors originally pointed out, in that the meaning of faith and virtue are twisted and spun to have multiple loaded meanings, instead of the clearly defined scope of meanings already defined.
    To say that faith is a virtue is like saying that error, fallacy, and inhibited critical thinking is a virtue.

  4. #4
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    My personal definition of faith

    Faith is the excuse that people give for believing something when they don't have a good reason.
    What is your definition of faith?

    Do you think faith might be a reliable pathway to truth?

    Do you rely on faith, do you have faith at all?

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Online
    02-19-2017 @ 11:29 PM
    Ethnicity
    Mr. Cogito
    Country
    Poland
    Region
    Lublin
    Gender
    Posts
    4,350
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,617
    Given: 2,771

    1 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    What is your definition of faith?
    I use it as a synonyme of believing in something, in religious context believing in a divine. Or afterlife.

    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    Do you think faith might be a reliable pathway to truth?
    Not necessarily. Validity of religion is based on death, and what - if anything - will happen. We cannot find the truth at all as long as we live. Similarly, when you have presidential elections in a country you listen to the candidates. They give you promises. One of them wins. But you will not know if they'll keep their promise until the moment when their govern will come to an end. Then you can make a summary, which will be undeniable.

    Neither faith, nor lack of it, will bring you the truth.

  6. #6
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Last Online
    03-01-2022 @ 08:17 PM
    Ethnicity
    Alien
    Country
    European Union
    Gender
    Posts
    3,345
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7,458
    Given: 6,396

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Faith comes from the Heart, that's why people usually say that's blind faith in something : your brain / mental is disconnected and you perceive with heart, no more with brain.

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    0 Not allowed!

    Default My Definition of Faith

    My personal definition of faith is accepting some belief as true without reason, evidence, or justification.
    Faith is the excuse people give for believing something they don’t have sufficient reason to affirm as true that which is not evidently true. Faith is an assertion of absolute conviction that is assumed independent of evidence, and which must be defended against all evidence to the contrary. Until a belief is indicated in evidence it does not warrant affirming its truth claim.

    Imagine a bar of believability, evidence piles up and as it increases, this constitutes evidence for finding the belief credible. Propositions ought to be proportioned in accord with the weight of the evidence in support of them. Any epistemic shortcut, jump, or lateral move in order to bridge the gap of believability is equivalent to faith in accepting a claim as true. Had I had good reasons, I would not need faith to believe something. Faith is the excuse that people give for believing something they don’t know is true: no true justified beliefs

  8. #8
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    What do you think of my definition of faith? Do you find it to be sound?

  9. #9
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    05-22-2023 @ 01:22 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    4,074
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,051
    Given: 756

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    I strongly contrast faith with reason

    Reason is the human faculty that allows one to draw valid (or at least useful) conclusions or inferences from given premises, assumptions or observations. It is closely related to logic and intelligence. A person who uses reason, or an argument based on reason, is described as rational; the opposite would be described as irrational.

    There is much debate as to whether, or to what extent, non-human animals display reasoning abilities. The religious view is usually that only humans employ reason because it — along with consciousness, intelligence and language — is seen as a gift from God that sets humans apart from the (other) animals.

    While reason is sometimes contrasted with faith ("belief without reason") as a method that can lead to truth, theology can be seen as the application of reason to questions about God. This can be problematic, however — especially when reasoning leads to answers that contradict scripture or established doctrine. Such contradictions often lead to schisms, or the splitting of one religious tradition into two or more different traditions.

  10. #10
    Insufferable by many Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"


    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Antarctica
    Politics
    Bros over hoes
    Gender
    Posts
    18,406
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 11,166
    Given: 13,531

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    My personal definition of faith is accepting some belief as true without reason, evidence, or justification.
    Faith is the excuse people give for believing something they don’t have sufficient reason to affirm as true that which is not evidently true. Faith is an assertion of absolute conviction that is assumed independent of evidence, and which must be defended against all evidence to the contrary. Until a belief is indicated in evidence it does not warrant affirming its truth claim.

    Imagine a bar of believability, evidence piles up and as it increases, this constitutes evidence for finding the belief credible. Propositions ought to be proportioned in accord with the weight of the evidence in support of them. Any epistemic shortcut, jump, or lateral move in order to bridge the gap of believability is equivalent to faith in accepting a claim as true. Had I had good reasons, I would not need faith to believe something. Faith is the excuse that people give for believing something they don’t know is true: no true justified beliefs
    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    What do you think of my definition of faith? Do you find it to be sound?
    Faith is not an excuse. I myself am a Christian who believs in whatever I believe and I have my reasons, but I don't claim anything - you can't call this an excuse.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. FAITH
    By danbr00 in forum Religion & Spirituality
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-24-2016, 06:41 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •