People don't seem to understand faith

[1137]

I believe it will snow tomorrow

I have faith it will snow tomorrow.
______________________________

Same difference.

I believe Sherry Writeson wrote “I smile because you are my father,I laugh because there ain’t a damn thing you can do about it.”

I have faith that Sherry Writeson wrote, "I smile because you are my father,I laugh because there ain’t a damn thing you can do about it.”
________________________________

If she wrote it then you know she wrote it. If she didn't you either know she didn't or are simply wrong. Where's the faith?

I believe that

​

I have faith that

​

_____________________________________

What do you believe about faith?

What is your faith concerning belief?​

Same as 2+2=4, once you believe in objective reality things like this are simply true or false. When it comes to facts that will never change like 2+2=4 there's no need for faith.

​

Synonyms? Hardly! :slap:

The only on topic example you gave showed them to be synonyms.

 

[Skwim]

Same as 2+2=4, once you believe in objective reality things like this are simply true or false. When it comes to facts that will never change like 2+2=4 there's no need for faith.

IF they are that apparent.

I specifically chose a complicated equation because its equality is not immediately apparent. Unlike the simple 2+2=4, if I had composed the equation I presented I might well ask a colleague "I believe this is correct. "Would you take a look at it to see if I missed anything?" Whereas I would not say "I have faith this is correct. Would you take a look at it to see if I missed anything?"

The only on topic example you gave showed them to be synonyms.

Then you are unmindful of the not too subtle character of trust that differentiates faith from belief. Belief does not harbor trust, whereas faith does.

 

[outhouse]

Hope

You can hope all you want, but your interpretation of the definition is a personal opinion. Nothing more.


And what we have seen it is rather narrow and biased leaving you with no credibility at all.

 

[1137]

IF they are that apparent.

I specifically chose a complicated equation because its equality is not immediately apparent. Unlike the simple 2+2=4, if I had composed the equation I presented I might well ask a colleague "I believe this is correct. "Would you take a look at it to see if I missed anything?" Whereas I would not say "I have faith this is correct. Would you take a look at it to see if I missed anything?"

Well playing meaningless games is certainly not new.

Then you are unmindful of the not too subtle character of trust that differentiates faith from belief. Belief does not harbor trust, whereas faith does.

Belief

noun
1.
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists
2.
trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
synonyms: faith, trust, reliance, confidence, credence
"belief in the value of hard work"

Seriously guys, Google rocks and saves you from embarrassing yourselves.

 

[1137]

You can hope all you want, but your interpretation of the definition is a personal opinion. Nothing more.


And what we have seen it is rather narrow and biased leaving you with no credibility at all.

Um, I haven't made up any definitions for this thread. I've simply provided the definitions for the words. It's absolutely hilarious that when it comes to challenging your essentially dogmatic positions on certain topics (such as faith) you react in the same exact way that your average stubborn theist does.

But yeah, I'm the biased one

 

[Bunyip]

Um, I haven't made up any definitions for this thread. I've simply provided the definitions for the words. It's absolutely hilarious that when it comes to challenging your essentially dogmatic positions on certain topics (such as faith) you react in the same exact way that your average stubborn theist does.

But yeah, I'm the biased one

Sure, you are clearly the one intellectually crippled by bias in this case.

The only person here being dogmatic is you buddy. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of faith relevant to this forum.

 

[1137]

The secondary definition based on scripture does, yes. For the last time, I do not adhere to scripture or secondary definitions provided by one holy text which cannot apply to all situations. You want to base all philosophy off Christian scripture, go for it. Christ be with you in all the glorious irony.

Here's me acknowledging the scripture definition, and you blatantly lying about it like a good fundy below.

Sure, you are clearly the one intellectually crippled by bias in this case.

The only person here being dogmatic is you buddy. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of faith relevant to this forum.

You're actually the one refusing a definition. You're right that I'm bias, I dogmatically adhere to objectivism and truth, which is why I dont use a scriptural definition of faith since it's only relevant to that one religion. See, I get why you want us to use it, it's easy to tear down and allows for you to separate your position from the christian position. That's militant atheism at its finest, tearing down the weakest link and feeling like they've destroyed religion. You're such a dogmatic atheist that you'll fideistically ignore an objective and established definition of faith, then insist we adhere to scripture just so you can say you don't have faith! :bow: you're an inspiration for stubborn dogmatism everywhere.

 

[420blazeit]

"Complete trust or confidence in someone or something." that is the definition of faith and most atheists do have faith in science because it is basically the study in ((reality)) "the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them." Everything lives & stays in this reality and, not having faith in science is all most saying you don't have complete trust on confidence in reality or your life.

But you see there is a second definition in faith witch is "strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof."
So make sure you said what definition your using when you say faith.

HOPE THAT HELPS:yes:

 

[1137]

Oh, let me help you out

Dogmatism
the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others.

 

[420blazeit]

Oh, let me help you out

Dogmatism
the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others.

That is irrelevant because we all could say everything is dogmatism.

 

[Sunstone]

Most recently with some "new atheists" I realized that they deteriorate to the level of beasts when you tell them that everyone has faith and belief. People seem to think that faith and blind acceptance / belief are one in the same, yet faith is simply about deep trust. Evidence is not a factor in the definition. You tell some people they have faith in science and they will freak out.

My question is why this happens. What's so wrong about faith? My theory is these individuals cannot evolve past the original rebellion and just associate faith with religious beliefs, beliefs that must be rejected for them to develop a new sense of Self. They ironically become the same thing that they hate, in this and other ways.

Are you fond of drawing false equivalences?

 

[1137]

Are you fond of drawing false equivalences?

Mind pointing out what your concern is?

 

[1137]

That is irrelevant because we all could say everything is dogmatism.

Don't tell the militant atheists that! They'll flip out ;-)

 

[Bunyip]

Here's me acknowledging the scripture definition, and you blatantly lying about it like a good fundy below.

You acknowledge it exists, but moronically label anyone who uses it as a fundy. You also utterly fail to see how it totally demolishes your OP.

You're actually the one refusing a definition. You're right that I'm bias, I dogmatically adhere to objectivism and truth, which is why I dont use a scriptural definition of faith since it's only relevant to that one religion. See, I get why you want us to use it, it's easy to tear down and allows for you to separate your position from the christian position. That's militant atheism at its finest, tearing down the weakest link and feeling like they've destroyed religion. You're such a dogmatic atheist that you'll fideistically ignore an objective and established definition of faith, then insist we adhere to scripture just so you can say you don't have faith! :bow: you're an inspiration for stubborn dogmatism everywhere.

Itis not that I ignore that definition of faith, it is just that is is not the right definition in this context - a simple fact you are unable to grasp.

 

[Skwim]

Well playing meaningless games is certainly not new.




Belief

noun
1.
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists
2.
trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
synonyms: faith, trust, reliance, confidence, credence
"belief in the value of hard work"

Seriously guys, Google rocks and saves you from embarrassing yourselves.

   
​

But I see how you work. You look up a word in an on-line dictionary and blithely accept any "synonym" it lists as an unequivocal equivalent, such as.

war

noun
1.
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

synonyms: conflict, warfare, combat, fighting, (military) action, bloodshed, struggle; battle, skirmish, fight, clash, engagement, encounter; offensive, attack, campaign; hostilities; crusade;
​

which means that if two of my kittens are fighting they are at war. Or if I engage my mailman in a discussion about the weather we are at war. Or if I encounter a fireman at the grocery store we are at war. Or if I campaign for school redistricting I am waging war. Or if . . . . . . . . :thud:

 

[1137]

You acknowledge it exists, but moronically label anyone who uses it as a fundy. You also utterly fail to see how it totally demolishes your OP.


Itis not that I ignore that definition of faith, it is just that is is not the right definition in this context - a simple fact you are unable to grasp.

Right because you pick and choose what can be used where so you can make it fit your philosophy. I use the more objective definition, you use one catered to scripture (and even provided the source material!). I don't call you a fundy for caring about context, but this was never about scripture. Sure, you want to discuss faith with someone who accepts the bible then you can use the biblical definition. I don't, it was never the proper context for the conversation. You have faith, boo hoo, cry me a river. But take you pick-and-choose, scripture adhering, out of context stubbornness and run along now.

 

[1137]

   
​

But I see how you work. You look up a word in an on-line dictionary and blithely accept any "synonym" it lists as an unequivocal equivalent, such as.

war

noun
1.
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

synonyms: conflict, warfare, combat, fighting, (military) action, bloodshed, struggle; battle, skirmish, fight, clash, engagement, encounter; offensive, attack, campaign; hostilities; crusade;
​

which means that if two of my kittens are fighting they are at war. Or if I engage my mailman in a discussion about the weather we are at war. Or if I encounter a fireman at the grocery store we are at war. Or if I campaign for school redistricting I am waging war. Or if . . . . . . . . :thud:

So you're complaining to me about the nature of synonyms?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA , wow that is a whole new level of ridiculousness. I think you all might actually be worse than the stubborn theists I've dealt with.

Edit: haha, I'm actually still laughing about this. It's absolutely adorable.

 

[Bunyip]

Right because you pick and choose what can be used where so you can make it fit your philosophy. I use the more objective definition

Nope. LOL

You use the wrong definition in this context, personally I am smart enough to understand that words have different meanings in different contexts and so choose the appropriate one.

You on the other hand pick a specific definition and throw a silly paranoid tantrum about nasty militant athiests at anyone who knows better.

, you use one catered to scripture (and even provided the source material!)

LOL, no sparky - I use whatever definition fits the context.

. I don't call you a fundy for caring about context, but this was never about scripture. Sure, you want to discuss faith with someone who accepts the bible then you can use the biblical definition. I don't, it was never the proper context for the conversation. You have faith, boo hoo, cry me a river. But take you pick-and-choose, scripture adhering, out of context stubbornness and run along now.

Hey dude, no need to go all postal and freak out.

 

[Bunyip]

So you're complaining to me about the nature of synonyms?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA , wow that is a whole new level of ridiculousness. I think you all might actually be worse than the stubborn theists I've dealt with.

Edit: haha, I'm actually still laughing about this. It's absolutely adorable.

Buddy, you are the poster child for the Dunning Kruger syndrome.

 

[Skwim]

So you're complaining to me about the nature of synonyms?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA , wow that is a whole new level of ridiculousness. I think you all might actually be worse than the stubborn theists I've dealt with.

Edit: haha, I'm actually still laughing about this. It's absolutely adorable.

Yeah, I didn't think you'd have a coherent reply, but would have to resort to childish ad homs.

My sympathy for your plight. Have a god life.
​

Buddy, you are the poster child for the Dunning Kruger syndrome.

And in spades.