People don't seem to understand faith

[FunctionalAtheist]

Sadly I do understand faith. The problem has numerous causes however. For example, people say faith lacks evidence. You have faith that if you text you best friend in a time of need they'll respond. You have faith that you'll survive another day every time you make plans. These are not unfounded at all. "Fideism" is the rejection of evidence in favor of faith, pure faith, with no care to evidence. Faith is stuck somewhere in between.

I feel like we really should start teaching logic sooner than college as an option course.

I have 'experience' that when i text my friends, they text back. I have 'experience' that I one more day of survival is immensely more probably than not surviving. You are correct. These beliefs are not unfounded. They are founded in experience.

You recognize that there is a difference between accepting an unfounded belief (faith) and rejecting founded beliefs (fideism)? I recognize this. Thanks.

 

[Bunyip]

I'll help you guys out so we can get on track.

Knowledge
facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.
"a thirst for knowledge"
synonyms: understanding, comprehension, grasp, command, mastery

Faith
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
"this restores one's faith in politicians"
synonyms: trust, belief, confidence, conviction; More

Fideism
the doctrine that knowledge depends on faith or revelation.

Fideism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which is of course very different from the biblical definition of faith which is;

*Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1, KJV). Hebrews.

Which is what you seem to miss.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

You prove my point. I was am not at all aggressive, fallacious or ignorant - nor
am I or any others 'kicking and screaming'.

The truth is simply that the word faith has a meaning specific to the context of religion.

Yea, he kind of failed on that. You were as reasonable as could be....for a beast lol.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

There seems to be here a desire to call common beliefs based on everyday experience 'faith' and then somehow justify unfounded faith by association. Simple word games!

 

[Bunyip]

Yea, he kind of failed on that. You were as reasonable as could be....for a beast lol.

HOW DARE YOU SPEAK TO ME LIKE THAT!

ARGHHHHHHH............(tranformation beginning)......Noooooooooo! Hair growing....teeth longer........GRRRRRRRRRRF! AWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....

 

[1137]

I have 'experience' that when i text my friends, they text back. I have 'experience' that I one more day of survival is immensely more probably than not surviving. You are correct. These beliefs are not unfounded. They are founded in experience.

You recognize that there is a difference between accepting an unfounded belief (faith) and rejecting founded beliefs (fideism)? I recognize this. Thanks.

Whoa you've experienced the future? Please do elaborate on it!

Oh wait, you mean based on past experiences and knowledge you have evidence supporting your faith in your friends. Yeah, that's what I already said.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Sheesh mate, Dawkins is a lamb. Talk about over-reacting. He is not bullying anyone - nobody is forced to attend his lectures, they pay to see them.

It's not about seeing his lectures... It's the fact that his lectures are based on specific people and in a comedic way to purposely offend them. It is over-reacting from your perspective, I suppose. Bigotry is often noticed from the other party rather than the bigot themselves. I'm not saying you are a bigot, simply that Dawkin's bigotry relates to the opinions many atheists share.

 

[1137]

Which is of course very different from the biblical definition of faith which is;

*Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1, KJV). Hebrews.

Which is what you seem to miss.

I'm surprised you adhere to biblical definitions as truth. Very interesting, but for my purposes let's not treat the bible as the be all end all.

 

[1137]

There seems to be here a desire to call common beliefs based on everyday experience 'faith' and then somehow justify unfounded faith by association. Simple word games!

Everyday experience? Why have faith in what's already happening? You have beyond proven my point, but that'll be all.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Whoa you've experienced the future? Please do elaborate on it!

Oh wait, you mean based on past experiences and knowledge you have evidence supporting your faith in your friends. Yeah, that's what I already said.

So you have evidence of your faith? I'd love to know how many times you've texted god and he has texted back. BTW/ you mischaracterizing my, and others responses to you, is not helping your argument that those who disagree with you are the ones which tend to get emotional.

 

[Bunyip]

I'm surprised you adhere to biblical definitions as truth. Very interesting, but for my purposes let's not treat the bible as the be all end all.

LOL That was just silly mate. Words have different meanings in different contexts - 'faith' in the religious context means belief without evidence. Look it up in any dictionary and you will see these two distinct definitions.

 

[1137]

It's not about seeing his lectures... It's the fact that his lectures are based on specific people and in a comedic way to purposely offend them. It is over-reacting from your perspective, I suppose. Bigotry is often noticed from the other party rather than the bigot themselves. I'm not saying you are a bigot, simply that Dawkin's bigotry relates to the opinions many atheists share.

You can't honestly be surprised that criticizing an essentially religious leader isn't going to be received well.

 

[1137]

LOL That was just silly mate. Words have different meanings in different contexts - 'faith' in the religious context means belief without evidence. Look it up in any dictionary and you will see these two distinct definitions.

We pick and choose, I see. And how are you different from the average religious person, exactly?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Everyday experience? Why have faith in what's already happening? You have beyond proven my point, but that'll be all.

Haha you are a riot. You state you have faith that a friend will return a text. I point out it is experience that justifies this belief, then you ask why have faith at all? Thanks for agreeing with me. Faith is useless.

However you seem to have a problem distinguishing between arguing from position and blind adherence to unfounded belief. Oh, yea, i suppose you have 'faith' that you are winning this debate. hahaha Unfortunately the experience differs.

 

[1137]

So you have evidence of your faith? I'd love to know how many times you've texted god and he has texted back. BTW/ you mischaracterizing my, and others responses to you, is not helping your argument that those who disagree with you are the ones which tend to get emotional.

I'm an atheist, what exactly are you hoping for me to prove to you?

 

[Bunyip]

We pick and choose, I see. And how are you different from the average religious person, exactly?

No. Only an idiot would 'pick and choose' in this case. The meaning of faith is clearly understood in the context of religion and is defined eloquently in scripture.

Flinging mud at atheists and pretending that they are misbehaving is a very weak pretext for wishing away a very clear distinction.

 

[1137]

Haha you are a riot. You state you have faith that a friend will return a text. I point out it is experience that justifies this belief, then you ask why have faith at all? Thanks for agreeing with me. Faith is useless.

However you seem to have a problem distinguishing between arguing from position and blind adherence to unfounded belief. Oh, yea, i suppose you have 'faith' that you are winning this debate. hahaha Unfortunately the experience differs.

Yeah, you think that me believing my friend will respond to a text is somehow current, present experience of him returning a text, and I'm the riot? Hahaha. You fundamentalists are so cute.

 

[1137]

No. Only an idiot would 'pick and choose' in this case. The meaning of faith is clearly understood in the context of religion and is defined eloquently in scripture.

Flinging mud at atheists and pretending that they are misbehaving is a very weak pretext for wishing away a very clear distinction.

I guess we can't debate unless I adhere to scripture. Good day then.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

I'm an atheist, what exactly are you hoping for me to prove to you?

Ah, well in a hope to move this discussion along, perhaps you would be so kind as to submit something in which you have faith, in which you do not also have observational experience.

 

[Bunyip]

You can't honestly be surprised that criticizing an essentially religious leader isn't going to be received well.

Criticise Dawkins all you like, why would I care.

If you wish to portray a very successful scientist as a slavering moron, that reflects on your biases not mine.