(November 9, 2014 at 8:10 am)comet Wrote:

(November 7, 2014 at 6:50 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I believe if you think your goofy spelling is funny, nobody will laugh. Covering illiteracy with annoying stereotypical "accents" won't fool anyone. If your spelling and grammar suck, just own it, and do the best you can.

Sorry, I was drinking,

But anyway, if you can't get through the wording to see the meaning that might be telling. I posted it so I did (and do) own my suck ass writing and understand I am not funny, it doesn't mean I can't try and have fun. You might want to think about the need to address such a meaningless post too.

Okay. Then let me address your point. You cannot have faith without knowledge, because faith involves ideas, and all idea must have at their core knowledge of some kind.

(November 9, 2014 at 8:34 am)bennyboy Wrote: Okay. Then let me address your point. You cannot have faith without knowledge, because faith involves ideas, and all idea must have at their core knowledge of some kind.

Yeah, but those who have faith are sure to have knowledge. If religious, they take their holy books for solid evidence.

(November 9, 2014 at 8:38 am)abaris Wrote:

(November 9, 2014 at 8:34 am)bennyboy Wrote: Okay. Then let me address your point. You cannot have faith without knowledge, because faith involves ideas, and all idea must have at their core knowledge of some kind.

Yeah, but those who have faith are sure to have knowledge. If religious, they take their holy books for solid evidence.

They have knowledge about an IDEA, and faith that it represents reality. Their commitment is so strong that they have adopted the idea into their world view. It is faith because even according to that world view, God will not reveal himself directly to any but the chosen few. If, on the other hand, someone believes he has actual been contacted by God, it will no longer be faith-- it will be belief. And if he repeatedly has this experience, he will call it knowledge of God.

But none of this knowledge, or faith, or belief, means anything in the world of shared experience. All I can learn from him is the knowledge that some people are willing to hold beliefs for which they cannot produce evidence, and can interpret as knowledge experiences which I simply consider tricks of a highly stimulated (or severely subdued) brain.

(November 9, 2014 at 8:42 am)bennyboy Wrote: But none of this knowledge, or faith, or belief, means anything in the world of shared experience.

On that we agree.

I only argued that there are a whole lot of people, who strongly feel, they have knowledge and evidence for their believes, for their faith.

(November 9, 2014 at 8:47 am)abaris Wrote:

(November 9, 2014 at 8:42 am)bennyboy Wrote: But none of this knowledge, or faith, or belief, means anything in the world of shared experience.

On that we agree.

I only argued that there are a whole lot of people, who strongly feel, they have knowledge and evidence for their believes, for their faith.

Well, that is a philosophical problem. All our knowledge is suspect-- we could be in the Matrix for all we know, and everything we "know" is wrong. But sometimes it's so obvious that people have it wrong that we can take that philosophical jump and say, "Nahhh. . . you're just full of shit."

(November 9, 2014 at 9:06 am)bennyboy Wrote: But sometimes it's so obvious that people have it wrong that we can take that philosophical jump and say, "Nahhh. . . you're just full of shit."

Of course we can. I do it all the time.

But discussing faith from our perspective won't get us anywhere with those, who build their lives on it.

(November 9, 2014 at 9:16 am)abaris Wrote:

(November 9, 2014 at 9:06 am)bennyboy Wrote: But sometimes it's so obvious that people have it wrong that we can take that philosophical jump and say, "Nahhh. . . you're just full of shit."

Of course we can. I do it all the time.

But discussing faith from our perspective won't get us anywhere with those, who build their lives on it.

Nothing but a ball-peen hammer can achieve that.

(November 9, 2014 at 8:34 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(November 9, 2014 at 8:10 am)comet Wrote: Sorry, I was drinking,

But anyway, if you can't get through the wording to see the meaning that might be telling. I posted it so I did (and do) own my suck ass writing and understand I am not funny, it doesn't mean I can't try and have fun. You might want to think about the need to address such a meaningless post too.

Okay. Then let me address your point. You cannot have faith without knowledge, because faith involves ideas, and all idea must have at their core knowledge of some kind.

At the risk of appearing to give aid and comfort to the dim of wit .. I don't think prepositional knowledge is at all necessary for faith. Just as we know directly whether we are in balance physically, it is possible to simply feel faith. Presuppositional bullshit? I say there is a baby in that bath water and we'd be fools not to barbecue him.

Hmmmmmm. I think you have to have at least SOME idea to form faith. Or at least, you'd have a word to act as a focal point for all the feelings you threw at it. What if God is nothing more than a word around which feelings of faith: trust, a sense of great power, a connection to something outside the self, etc., could be focused towared?

Someone must at least hear the words "God is the one in whom we must have faith," and then see some examples of real-life faith, in order to adopt a feeling of faith. No?

Then how would we explain the "first of the faithful"? That hypothetical prime mover of asshattery that must have (at least once but much more probably many times) been the first to have "faith" in the wider web of his peers? I think that your description of what god -is- fits like a glove. I also think that the greater umbrella of "faith" is so complicated now that no one intuitively or instinctively arrives on any modern representative. No one says "I believe in divinity and trinity" without having been conditioned. There's a claim there, a referent to knowledge...on that much I wholeheartedly agree. I just wonder how that scenario fits the first storyteller? As to a "feeling of faith". Judging by the number of faithful interpretations it must be damned vague feeling. Nothing quite so specific as any of my other feelings. I 'd have difficulty accepting a "divinity and trinity" feeling. I suppose I'd decide that anyone who deigned to -tell me- about "god" would be Bennys faithful..whereas anyone who said "it's like all things are connected or something" would be Whatevs faithful.