What's up

[fr0d0]

It's a serious subject which merits discussion in my book Nap. Sorry you don't feel up to discussing it. I make points and you just ignore them. If you're going to respond with anything but 'I don't want to discuss it' then how am I supposed to know that? It's annoying to me, like you continually stating your correctness in the face of unanswered arguments. Never mind. Let's leave it there.

[Napoléon]

It's a serious subject which merits discussion in my book Nap. Sorry you don't feel up to discussing it. I make points and you just ignore them. If you're going to respond with anything but 'I don't want to discuss it' then how am I supposed to know that? It's annoying to me, like you continually stating your correctness in the face of unanswered arguments. Never mind. Let's leave it there.

When have i ever stated myself to be correct when i am not?
Want to recap on how this all started?

I said i deny god everyday...

You said you need to understand god to deny it.

I proved myself to be correct under a definition of the term 'deny', that you don't.

Then you start dragging up other broader arguments on a fucking introduction thread!


For a 50 year old man you seem to act like a fucking child.

[fr0d0]

You failed to prove yourself under the definition of deny, which I pointed out.

If you want to be treated like a child then that's ok. Sorry for doing anything other.

[theVOID]

Hello arguments from establishment

'we believe we know'? How unnecessary indeed. That is saying I know I know. It's blue blue. Wheeeeeee! Redundancy ^_^

That's pretty much what I expected, you have knowledge defined so as to make it synonymous with belief... And you're complaining about redundancy? Bit hypocritical, no?

That page isn't an argument from establishment, it is a page analyzing the debate on knowledge over the last few hundred years, it makes no conclusions but it's pretty damn clear that every philosopher who has ever talked about propositional knowledge has never used it synonymously with belief.

We don't need another word for belief, we already have one, and 'truth' refers to a proposition being accurately reflective of reality, so we only need a word for a 'belief that is true' and that, essentially, is knowledge.

Christian Faith:
Being persuaded and fully committed in trust, involving a confident belief in the truth, value, and trustworthiness of God. When it comes to Christianity, 'faith' is defined by three separate but vitally connected aspects (especially from Luther and Melancthon onwards): notitia (informational content), assensus (intellectual assent), and fiducia (committed trust). So faith is the sum of having the information, being persuaded of its truthfulness, and trusting in it. To illustrate the three aspects: "Christ died for ours sins" (notitia); "I am persuaded that Christ died for our sins" (notitia + assensus); "I deeply commit in trust to Christ who I am persuaded died for our sins" (notitia + assensus + fiducia). Only the latter constitutes faith, on the Christian view.

Consequently, notitia and fiducia without assensus is blind and therefore not faith. This shipwrecks the egregious canard that faith is merely a blind leap. Faith goes beyond reason—i.e., into the arena of trust—but never against reason. From the Enlightenment onwards, faith has been subject to constant attempts at redefining it into the realm of the irrational or irrelevant (e.g., Kant's noumenal category); but all such attempts are built on irresponsible straw man caricatures that bear no resemblance to faith as held under the Christian view: notitia, assensus, and fiducia.

Faith is not required for belief in God. Belief in God is required for faith (i.e., assensus is a predicate of faith, not vice versa)—because faith without assensus leaves just notitia and fiducia, and is therefore "not faith." Remove any of the three predicates and it is no longer faith, becoming instead untrusting belief or blind trust and the like. Remember, faith is the sum, the right-hand side of the equal sign (N + A + F = faith)

Fair enough, I'm fine with using that definition.

[tackattack]

What thread is this I am have supposed to not given a response to?