Posts: 743
Threads: 35
Joined: December 1, 2014
Reputation:
12
Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:17 pm
(This post was last modified: March 25, 2015 at 8:18 pm by watchamadoodle.)
Here is a post from Parkers Tan:
(March 25, 2015 at 1:19 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: (March 25, 2015 at 12:54 pm)watchamadoodle Wrote: Both atheists and theists have faith in science [...]
I don't have faith in science. Science demonstrates its utility with its discoveries and inventions. Faith is not an apt descriptor for my attitude, thanks.
Probably most people share his sentiments, so I don't question the fact that "faith" is a poor word choice. I should have said "confidence" or "trust" maybe?
My question is: what do Christians mean by the attribute "faith" if they don't mean "confidence"? When I was a Christian, I always thought "faith" meant "confidence". My confidence in Christianity was not fundamentally different from my confidence in newspapers, text books, etc. Everybody I knew was either a Christian or kept their skepticism private, so I had confidence in Christianity.
IMO the only significant difference between Christian "faith" and plain "faith" is that Christianity is difficult or impossible to falsify. "Faith" in something that cannot be falsified is not the same as "faith" in something that can be falsified.
Any opinions? I'm especially curious if Christians agree that "faith" means "confidence" and that "confidence" must have a cause - whether the cause is seeing Moses split the Red Sea or simply being indoctrinated as a child.
Posts: 3395
Threads: 43
Joined: February 8, 2015
Reputation:
33
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:40 pm
"Faith," like many words in English, has more than one meaning. Take a look at:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini...ctCode=all
Quote:faith
noun
[MASS NOUN]
1 Complete trust or confidence in someone or something:
this restores one’s faith in politicians
2 Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof:
bereaved people who have shown supreme faith
2.1 [COUNT NOUN] A particular religion:
the Christian faith
2.2 [COUNT NOUN] A strongly held belief:
men with strong political faiths
Because of the various definitions, people often speak past each other. The proper solution, of course, is to ask each other, what, precisely, does one mean by ones terms?
For a discussion of 2 (which is essentially belief without evidence), take a look at what William Kingdon Clifford had to say at:
http://ajburger.homestead.com/files/book.htm
If you are thinking of 1, there is a difference between trusting someone or something with evidence that the thing one is trusting is actually trustworthy, and trusting it without such evidence.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Posts: 4738
Threads: 7
Joined: October 17, 2013
Reputation:
15
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:42 pm
The difference being, faith is choosing accept someone at their word, science does not do this.
Having to repeatedly preform tests actually shows lack of confidence.
Posts: 6990
Threads: 89
Joined: January 6, 2012
Reputation:
104
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:49 pm
(This post was last modified: March 25, 2015 at 8:53 pm by Fidel_Castronaut.)
(March 25, 2015 at 8:42 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The difference being, faith is choosing accept someone at their word, science does not do this.
Having to repeatedly preform tests actually shows lack of confidence.
Literally, lol. Hall of shame here we come!
You know what else it shows? That taking someone at their word over a claim without corroborating evidence to back up those claims is fucking mental.
would you accept a medical remedy to a given illness that some guy off the street offers you for the bargain price of $50?
Come the fuck along. Satire at its best huggy, hats off to you.
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:51 pm
(This post was last modified: March 25, 2015 at 8:52 pm by dyresand.)
(March 25, 2015 at 8:42 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The difference being, faith is choosing accept someone at their word, science does not do this.
Having to repeatedly preform tests actually shows lack of confidence.
Except with science you cannot be dissapointed in it.
You can use science to determin if someone is good at their word or not.
Science also can create devices that can determin if someone is a lair.
faith doesn't work.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 4738
Threads: 7
Joined: October 17, 2013
Reputation:
15
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:54 pm
(This post was last modified: March 25, 2015 at 8:56 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(March 25, 2015 at 8:49 pm)Pandæmonium Wrote:
Literally, lol. Hall of shame here we come!
You know what else it shows? That taking someone at their word over a claim without corroborating evidence to back up those claims is fucking mental.
would you accept a medical remedy to a given illness that some guy off the street offers you for the bargain price of $50?
Come the fuck along. Satire at its best huggy, hats off to you. A man's word used to mean something. There was a time where you would take the word of a "gentleman" without second thought.
Your cynicism is more a reflection of the times you live in.
Posts: 743
Threads: 35
Joined: December 1, 2014
Reputation:
12
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:57 pm
(This post was last modified: March 25, 2015 at 8:58 pm by watchamadoodle.)
(March 25, 2015 at 8:42 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The difference being, faith is choosing accept someone at their word, science does not do this.
Having to repeatedly preform tests actually shows lack of confidence. If you choose to accept someone at their word, you must have a reason.
- Maybe that person's body language was very sincere.
- Maybe that person's claims were relatively mundane and easy to accept
- Maybe that person was in a position of respect (such as a toddler feels for parents)
The level of confidence you feel in a claim is an involuntary response to your reasons IMO.
You can't choose to have confidence.
Furthermore, your actions are an involuntary response to your confidence in various claims that might potentially affect the outcome of your actions.
Posts: 6990
Threads: 89
Joined: January 6, 2012
Reputation:
104
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 8:58 pm
(March 25, 2015 at 8:54 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: A man's word used to mean something. There was a time where you would take the word of a "gentleman" without second thought.
Your cynicism is more a reflection of the times you live in.
Again, you've got a given illness and some guy comes up to you and offers you a miracle panacea that will cure your illness if you just give him some money.
just to confirm that you'd take him at his word right? Just open up your wallet and give him everything you've got.
Skepticism =/= cynicism
The times I live in huggy are about 1000 years ahead of the times you live in, apparently.
Shit, just when you think you've read the stupidest things people believe. Wow.
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 9:00 pm
Huggy's crossing into Poe territory...
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Christian "faith" vs. plain "faith"
March 25, 2015 at 9:06 pm
I'm saying...
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
|
![[Image: 146748944129044_zpsomrzyn3d.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i629.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu13%2FRXM843%2F146748944129044_zpsomrzyn3d.gif)
