Does having faith mean not seeking knowledge?

[nobspeople]

Recently someone said, when discussing knowledge, "It would have been much easier, less painful, to know by listening to God and by letting him explain it." Outside of God never explaining much of anything, it got my mind wondering if faith, itself, equates to (at least partial) lack of knowledge or the need to understand more.

A few things people don't know but accept by faith:
how God came to be
what God is
how God forgives
what lies beyond the reached of our universe
how God created all things - even things we don't know about yet
how can all of the earth save for one family be guilty enough to drown in a flood (even babies that were just being born - as it's a good assumptions that this was happening without the bible specifying)
why animals need to suffer for what people did and be drowned in the flood

The list can continue but this one is what I want to discuss:
Why did God not want Adam and Eve to eat from the knowledge of good and evil?
Christians say God doesn't want robots, but when Adam and Eve ate from the tree, they weren't acting like robots, but pure individuals. Yet, they (the story goes) condemned mankind for wanting to know the knowledge the tree held.
People could counter by saying they simple wanted to disobey God - they would have eaten from any tree - but because the bible points to this particular tree and its title or name, I don't believe it was simple rebellion.


God doesn't seem to want us to know more as outlined by this story of the tree, but he does want faith. So it seems, at least in part, God doesn't want us to know certain things and rely almost strictly on faith in him.
If that doesn't sound like robots.....

So what did that tree hold, exactly, that God didn't want them to know?

[The Tanager]

Sorry for the slight snark, but - opinion noted.

One can do all that with honest and unbiased intentions, of course, but for passages like many in Revelation, for example, the ‘best interpretation’ is still going to be subjective and disputed.

Yes, not all passages are equal, whatever literature is being talked about. Some issues are clearer than others. As I've said before, I think the central message of Christianity is clear (yet still disputed).

[The Tanager]

Interjecting my own opinion on this, when one promotes any external object as a type of authority [the bible - authoritative opinion]which overrides all other opinions, then one is unable to think that in parroting said authoritative opinion one is acting in bias.
Essentially it is not your own opinion you are parroting, but [in this case] a gods opinion.

"Parroting" seems a loaded word that doesn't accurately exhaust the options available when talking about an external object. What truly novel opinions do any of us hold, anyway? They are few and usually pretty obviously wrong and widely disbelieved because of that.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #143]

"Parroting" seems a loaded word that doesn't accurately exhaust the options available when talking about an external object.

I didn't see anything in the post speaking to it "exhausting all options available", but providing yet another (albeit much more likely and logical idea IMO) option. Though it seems you don't agree it's a possibility; another 'option'?

What truly novel opinions do any of us hold, anyway?

A cursory glance around this site, alone, should answer that question.

They are few and usually pretty obviously wrong and widely disbelieved because of that.

Is that factual or an opinion?

[William]

Interjecting my own opinion on this, when one promotes any external object as a type of authority [the bible - authoritative opinion]which overrides all other opinions, then one is unable to think that in parroting said authoritative opinion one is acting in bias.
Essentially it is not your own opinion you are parroting, but [in this case] a gods opinion.

"Parroting" seems a loaded word that doesn't accurately exhaust the options available when talking about an external object.

Do you have a better word you would use?

[The Tanager]

I absolutely do agree that people, including many self-professed Christians, do "parrot" what they think a book or some other perceived authority says, so, yes, I see parroting as a possibility and didn't say anything to give the impression otherwise.

To me "parrot" seems to denote something like non-thinking or uncritical acceptance of something. If that is what William means, then one can obviously parrot a belief or accept the belief as true after considering it (and that consideration can come in different degrees of scope, of course).

As far as whether there are any truly novel opinions, I would say I'm skeptical that there are any significant ones, making me an agnostic that leans towards "no-novel-opinion-ism" (would that be 'aneognomism'), but I'm open to changing my mind on that should anyone disagree and want to try to persuade me.

[William]

Words and their meanings can so distract from having to get about the business of good sound solid workable argument.

If anyone thinks they can present a case by not parroting any particular medium claiming to be authoritative of a gods opinion, please do so.

My preference is to fly on the spirit of my own unique experience and offer opinion on my perspective of that. No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge.

[The Tanager]

My preference is to fly on the spirit of my own unique experience and offer opinion on my perspective of that. No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge.

Many Christians do simply parrot. Many other Christians read widely, think widely, bring their philosophy to bear on reading the Bible and addressing issues the Bible doesn't address, (at least believe they) have personal experiences with God, in their own unique experience of reality from which they form their opinions. I don't see how what you describe is any different than the latter kind of Christian.

[William]

My preference is to fly on the spirit of my own unique experience and offer opinion on my perspective of that. No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge.

Many Christians do simply parrot. Many other Christians read widely, think widely, bring their philosophy to bear on reading the Bible and addressing issues the Bible doesn't address, (at least believe they) have personal experiences with God, in their own unique experience of reality from which they form their opinions. I don't see how what you describe is any different than the latter kind of Christian.

No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge. It is not my doing that has made it that way. If there are such Christians as you say, then I have yet to met them. Perhaps you are right and I will encounter those latter type Christians you refer to. Meantime I continue encountering those who parrot biblical interpretations as if somehow the bible [their interpretations of] is the end of all argument and anything else contrary to said biblical interpretations is from 'lying spirits' or some other creature from the ranks of their gods enemies...

[chriss]

My preference is to fly on the spirit of my own unique experience and offer opinion on my perspective of that. No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge.

Many Christians do simply parrot. Many other Christians read widely, think widely, bring their philosophy to bear on reading the Bible and addressing issues the Bible doesn't address, (at least believe they) have personal experiences with God, in their own unique experience of reality from which they form their opinions. I don't see how what you describe is any different than the latter kind of Christian.

No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge. It is not my doing that has made it that way. If there are such Christians as you say, then I have yet to met them. Perhaps you are right and I will encounter those latter type Christians you refer to. Meantime I continue encountering those who parrot biblical interpretations as if somehow the bible [their interpretations of] is the end of all argument and anything else contrary to said biblical interpretations is from 'lying spirits' or some other creature from the ranks of their gods enemies...

This is an interesting discussion. I have only just joined so I have only read the last page or so of this discussion. I agree with the Tanager. I think William is unjust in accusing Christians of parroting because thay believe that trhe bible is authoratative to them. Does William deal the same way with people who parrot existentialism, humanism, atheism etc?

[William]

My preference is to fly on the spirit of my own unique experience and offer opinion on my perspective of that. No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge.

Many Christians do simply parrot. Many other Christians read widely, think widely, bring their philosophy to bear on reading the Bible and addressing issues the Bible doesn't address, (at least believe they) have personal experiences with God, in their own unique experience of reality from which they form their opinions. I don't see how what you describe is any different than the latter kind of Christian.

No personality claiming to be a "Christian" has ever shown they are doing anything more than parroting biblical interpretations as their preferred opinion on matters of knowledge. It is not my doing that has made it that way. If there are such Christians as you say, then I have yet to met them. Perhaps you are right and I will encounter those latter type Christians you refer to. Meantime I continue encountering those who parrot biblical interpretations as if somehow the bible [their interpretations of] is the end of all argument and anything else contrary to said biblical interpretations is from 'lying spirits' or some other creature from the ranks of their gods enemies...

I think William is unjust in accusing Christians of parroting because thay believe that trhe bible is authoratative to them.

There is nothing 'unjust' in making the truthful observation that individual Christians parrot their favored interpretation of the bible, believing such to be "authoritative".