Why 'Rational faith' Is An Oxymoron

[Samson]

I'm not talking about USING evidence...I'm talking if there IS evidence...

If there IS evidence to support a belief whether we KNOW if there is or NOT...if there IS - then that is a rational reason to believe. And any valid reasons to believe that a belief IS actually TRUE - IOW ARE evidence.

If on the otherhand...there ISN'T evidence to support a belief....to believe anyway would be to believe 'on faith' therefore by the definition of faith that I am using. And to believe 'on faith' is therefore irrational because that means without evidence and without evidence must mean there IS NO evidence which means there is no valid reason to believe....because a valid reason to believe WOULD BE evidence.

EvF

Very well put and understood......

This is my fault, I believe I was misinterpreting your breakdowns before...The one I quoted you on here, you went into a bit more detail on...Thank you for that....

The logic of faith I was speaking of would be to where something in the beginning gave "Reason" and a continued faith would be because of that beginning logic of reason and of course the faith someone put into it would be justified rationally in the end through evidence....

Thanks for your patience...... I may be a Chemist, but sometimes even typing it out on paper can get a bit hard......lolol.... Old age is kicking in.....