Question: Does faith come from reason? Do rational thoughts lead one to faith?twobitsmedia wrote:Faith is a fruit of reason and rational thoughts.
Most non-theists and a good number of theists would deny this.
Moderator: Moderators
Question: Does faith come from reason? Do rational thoughts lead one to faith?twobitsmedia wrote:Faith is a fruit of reason and rational thoughts.
No. As I’ve said I’m here only to defend my faith from misconstrued or poor understanding on the subject.bernee51 wrote: What is this...a game of 'ask the right question"?
Now, you ask a good question.bernee51 wrote: I'l bite...what do you understand as the "teaching the Holy Church" in relation to faith?
Hebrew:bernee51 wrote: The definition given was Paul's...Hebrew 11.1.
What misconceptions have you seen regarding that?
Quoting the scripture does not give you a passage to an accurate description of the word, term or doctrine lest understanding the doctrine as believed and professed by the believers. For even Satan is capable of quoting the scripture but that doesn’t mean he is right when he quotes from the scriptures.bernee51 wrote: They are merely quoting scripture - is that not an accurate description?
No.bernee51 wrote: Because you say so...?
The ignorance is because the definition doesn’t correctly/ truthfully defined the subject in its true sense and therefore one can only deduce the wicked motivation of the person if not “uninformed” is only seeking to malign the belief of others.bernee51 wrote: Can you help me out please...what is " the ignorance of the definition given by someone who has no formal understanding on the subject?
What faith (exactly) is being misconstrued by whom (exactly)?ST_JB wrote:No. As I’ve said I’m here only to defend my faith from misconstrued or poor understanding on the subject.bernee51 wrote: What is this...a game of 'ask the right question"?
This is just completely wrong. Hebrews 11:1 is a definitive statement. You can twist that into anything more than a simple declaration even though it does show the specious nature of your previous lines of personal attack and obfuscation.ST_JB wrote:Paul is not outlining the meaning of faith but the essence of faith in the affairs of man.
The answer to this is simple: the Abrahamic myth. Paul, or whoever the author of Hebrews may have been, was making a simple declaration that the basis of the Christian religion was belief without evidence. This was being presented as a strength. In this era, the understanding of logical constructs were rather primitive, so belief based on emotional; connection was seen as not only a valid system, but a show of dedication. It is easy to believe when shown proof, but it takes a special attachment to believe without proof. Moreover, it is a sign of faith, and loyalty, that belief is held for "things unseen".ST_JB wrote:What are the things that we hoped for? And what is the evidence of things that appear not?
First of all, it is not for anyone to "figure out the difference". You assume that an aloof stance of arrogance will somehow win arguments. That is not even close to reality. Speaking for myself, this is not my first time posting on the internet. Bravado to cover bovine scat nets nothing of substance. Can you figure out the difference??? between an argument of substance and ethereal rhetoric? (???)ST_JB wrote:1. Objectively, it stands for the sum of truths revealed by God in Scripture and tradition and which the Church presents to us.
2. Subjectively, faith stands for the habit or virtue by which we assent to those truths.
Can you figure out the difference???
Objectivity is not found in a relative system. The Christian/Catholic "God" is one in a million of constructive deities throughout history. "The Church" is just one more human created business to provide an income for the idle economic class. Neither this god, or the business created to profit from the myth, mean the least to me, so you fail the test of objectivity.ST_JB wrote:1. Objectively, it stands for the sum of truths revealed by God in Scripture and tradition and which the Church presents to us.
Non sequitur doesn't make for a very good argument. What truth?ST_JB wrote:2. Subjectively, faith stands for the habit or virtue by which we assent to those truths.
You disagree? That's fine! As I said before, feel free to edit my definition to your liking, or write one of your own. I was simply tired of everyone arguing about arguing about the definition of faith, so I threw in one of my own.twobitsmedia wrote:It is late and I want to chew on this a bit more, but something just does not sit right with me about this definition. It seems to sidestep any need for reason and places a lot of emphasis on "feelings" and "experience."
Faith cannot be given, but it can be guided to if the one following is willing to go; yes, but it can be empathized with; I'm not quite sure what that is, but by the sound of things, probably.What purpose does faith serve if it cannot be shared? Is faith really that personal? Is this an offshoot of religious relativism?
We are all on separate paths, though they are often similar, and the destination is the same for all. In this way we can relate to those near ourselves, and, until the end when the paths begin to converge, animosity to those on paths that appear far from ours.Are we all truly so complex and different that god cannot reach anyone at the same level of consciousness or reason, even? If we are, then would that not make it difficult for us to relate even to each other?
Faith is not a process so much as a reward. I obviously cannot speak for you or anyone else's path, but I had to go through quite a bit of reasoning before I felt something I would describe as "faith."If God created man, and man has the ability to reason, and the highest point of "reason" then would be a connection with his creator.....why would God then not make that a part of the process and leave it just to an experiential feeling? Probably other questions coming....
Is the strong faith of a Moslem who straps explosives around his waist in order to kill people and go to heaven “a fruit of reason and rational thoughts?”McCulloch wrote:Question: Does faith come from reason? Do rational thoughts lead one to faith?twobitsmedia wrote:Faith is a fruit of reason and rational thoughts.
Most non-theists and a good number of theists would deny this.
Perhaps in some cases, but hardly across the board. The historical accounts of the NT provide a great deal of evidence for faith.jamesearl wrote:Faith is based on ignorance, and thats fact, end of discussion.
"The fool says in his heart there is no God."jamesearl wrote: This is why the most educated people are atheist, and less intelligent/educated people theist, because of ignorance.
The U.S. is the greatest nation on earth, and most of us are religious.jamesearl wrote: Just look at the best educated nations in the world, and you will see its people are highly secular, whiles populatins such as Iraq, Iran, United States and african ntions are highly religious, because of poor education and/or low intelligence.
What hisotrical accounts? Give detail.Perhaps in some cases, but hardly across the board. The historical accounts of the NT provide a great deal of evidence for faith.
That did not answer anything."The fool says in his heart there is no God."
Define "greatest" and give detail.The U.S. is the greatest nation on earth, and most of us are religious.
That claim is simply without merit.Easyrider wrote: The U.S. is the greatest nation on earth, and most of us are religious.