Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why is Faith a Virtue?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 46 of 294 (334610)
07-23-2006 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by nator
07-23-2006 7:14 PM


The honest people who reported it. As I said.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 07-23-2006 7:14 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by nator, posted 07-23-2006 7:47 PM Faith has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 47 of 294 (334616)
07-23-2006 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Faith
07-23-2006 7:19 PM


quote:
The honest people who reported it. As I said.
And I asked, who were those honest people?
Who were they?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 7:19 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 8:18 PM nator has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 48 of 294 (334630)
07-23-2006 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by nator
07-23-2006 5:06 PM


empiricist dogma
That is an oxymoron.
Hardly - unless a persons spirit would be acceptable to you as one of the 'senses' empiricists include in their dogma. Which I suspect it isn't.
wiki writes:
The doctrine of empiricism was first explicitly formulated by John Locke in the 17th century. Locke argued that the mind is a tabula rasa ("clean slate" or "blank tablet") on which experiences leave their marks. Such empiricism denies that humans have innate ideas or that anything is knowable without reference to experience.
It is worth remembering that empiricism does not hold that we have empirical knowledge automatically. Rather, according to the empiricist view, for any knowledge to be properly inferred or deduced, it is to be gained ultimately from one's sense-based experience

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by nator, posted 07-23-2006 5:06 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by nator, posted 07-24-2006 6:08 AM iano has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 49 of 294 (334631)
07-23-2006 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by nator
07-23-2006 7:47 PM


All the people who experienced it and reported it. All the writers of the OT and NT, and all the people they describe as witnessing the evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by nator, posted 07-23-2006 7:47 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 8:43 PM Faith has replied
 Message 83 by nator, posted 07-24-2006 6:10 AM Faith has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 50 of 294 (334634)
07-23-2006 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by RickJB
07-23-2006 11:24 AM


Re: respect the straw man
The primary reason why someone believes is because God brings them to the point of being able to.
So you believe in God because you have evidence. But to get the evidence you have to believe in God!!
Read it again Rick. Better said: "But to get the evidence God has to bring you to the point of belief. There has to be a reason to believe before you can believe (otherwise you are being irrational: blind belief). God does that work - you don't"
Ever read "Kissing Hank's Ass"?
Yup. An amusing demolition of a straw god
Edited by iano, : No reason given.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by RickJB, posted 07-23-2006 11:24 AM RickJB has not replied

  
Chief Infidel
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 294 (334636)
07-23-2006 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
07-23-2006 8:18 PM


Faith, it seems very circular. The bible is true because it is written reports of the truth?
If this is the case, why isn't the koran true? Or the Iliad?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 8:18 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:04 PM Chief Infidel has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 52 of 294 (334645)
07-23-2006 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Chief Infidel
07-23-2006 8:43 PM


The Bible is a historical document, reporting on historical events by eyewitnesses throughout and taken as such by millions of believers through the centuries. The Koran is nothing but a collection of precepts. I don't know much about the Iliad except that I didn't think anyone regarded it as anything but fiction.
{edit: The Bible reports eyewitness accounts of many miracles. There are no miracles in the Koran. I have no idea why you think the Iliad belongs in this company at all.}
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 8:43 PM Chief Infidel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by macaroniandcheese, posted 07-23-2006 9:14 PM Faith has replied
 Message 55 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 9:20 PM Faith has replied
 Message 56 by jar, posted 07-23-2006 9:21 PM Faith has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 53 of 294 (334648)
07-23-2006 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
07-23-2006 9:04 PM


the iliad was considered a factual account of the batle of troy. in truth, the war against troy was much longer and drawn out, but a great deal of the information in the book is more accurate than our understanding prior to considering the text. (especially considering that we thought troy at all was a myth).
and i do have to mention how much we know for certain about the reliability of eyewitness accounts.... there isn't any. eyewitness accounts are completely untrustworthy.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:16 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 54 of 294 (334650)
07-23-2006 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by macaroniandcheese
07-23-2006 9:14 PM


Eyewitness accounts cannot possibly be "completely untrustworthy" or you wouldn't dare get out of bed in the morning.
The Bible accounts are multiple and overlapping, on the Biblical criterion that any event must be multiply witnessed to be reliable. The Bible meets its own criterion.
Perhaps the Iliad has true historical elements. What that has to do with the Bible is beyond me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by macaroniandcheese, posted 07-23-2006 9:14 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by nator, posted 07-24-2006 6:22 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 108 by macaroniandcheese, posted 07-24-2006 12:33 PM Faith has replied

  
Chief Infidel
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 294 (334652)
07-23-2006 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
07-23-2006 9:04 PM


Okay then the mahabharata. Plenty of miracles in there. Millions of hindus out there. I'm sure that hindus have been killed/tortured for their beliefs.
What evidence do you have for god that hindus do not have for krishna?
Edited by Chief Infidel, : grammar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:33 PM Chief Infidel has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 56 of 294 (334653)
07-23-2006 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
07-23-2006 9:04 PM


Again, you are avoiding the question.
The Bible is a historical novel, reporting on myths, folktales and events by storytellers and taken as such by millions of believers through the centuries.
Personally I don't see how Faith itself can be a virtue or a vice anymore than running or jogging or eating can be considered virtues or vices. It is the validity of a given belief and the behavior of individuals in a given situation that determine whether it is virtue or vice. For example the Faith of Christians during the 60's-80's that lead to the White Flight from the cities and the creation of the thousands of Avoidance Schools would be considered a vice IMHO. Todays Christian Faith that leads folk towards Biblical Creationism or YEC is a vice and ultimately a disservice to all the kids it will effect. The Faith that lets Christians support oppressing other folk just because they happen to be homosexual is no different than the Faith that led to expelling the Jews from Europe, burning witches or the Inquisition.
On the other hand the Faith that the universe is orderly and understandable, that GOD is not a liar or trickster as portrayed by Fundamentalist Christians is IMHO a virtue. The Faith that we will be able to one day cure many of the remaining deseases and defects that plague mankind is a virtue. The Faith that led artists to create wonders like the Great Cathedrals , that inspires acts of sacrifice or kindness is a virtue.
Faith is neither vice or virtue. What is done can be either.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:04 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 57 of 294 (334656)
07-23-2006 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Chief Infidel
07-23-2006 9:20 PM


Okay then the mahabharata. Plenty of miracles in there. Millions of hindus out there. I'm sure that hindus have been killed/tortured for their beliefs.
What evidence do you have for god that hindus do not have for krishna?
The Bible is a lengthy continuous history that demonstrates the doings of God among ordinary human beings over two millennia. It is unique. Its many writers over the many centuries all contribute to the consistent history. I see nothing similar except in the most superficial ways between it and any other ancient or modern document.
If you really think the Mahabharata is equivalent in credibility, that's your judgment call.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 9:20 PM Chief Infidel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 10:33 PM Faith has replied

  
Chief Infidel
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 294 (334669)
07-23-2006 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Faith
07-23-2006 9:33 PM


Full Circle
The Bible is a lengthy continuous history that demonstrates the doings of God among ordinary human beings over two millennia. It is unique. Its many writers over the many centuries all contribute to the consistent history. I see nothing similar except in the most superficial ways between it and any other ancient or modern document.
I want make sure I totally understand your faith. You have faith in god because god is in the bible. The bible is the word of god. End of discussion? Period?
I know your evidence is the bible which is self-verified by god but where does your faith in the inerrancy of the bible come from?
If you really think the Mahabharata is equivalent in credibility, that's your judgment call.
I do. Except the mahabharata is longer and older than the bible.
Can you see where I am having trouble with your circular reasoning in this?
Why is it virtuous to believe in something without evidence?
Edited by Chief Infidel, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 9:33 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 10:40 PM Chief Infidel has not replied
 Message 60 by Faith, posted 07-23-2006 10:56 PM Chief Infidel has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 59 of 294 (334672)
07-23-2006 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Chief Infidel
07-23-2006 10:33 PM


Re: Full Circle
The Bible is self-verifying. It is patently authentic, its authors patently honest witnesses. Again a judgment call.
I suspect it also teaches things that are of infinitely more importance to human beings than the Mahabharata does, but not having studied the latter, though I've read books by various Hindu gurus and about Hinduism in general, this is merely what I suspect.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 10:33 PM Chief Infidel has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by lfen, posted 07-24-2006 12:05 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 86 by nator, posted 07-24-2006 6:25 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 60 of 294 (334674)
07-23-2006 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Chief Infidel
07-23-2006 10:33 PM


age
The age of these documents is not of particular importance, but I knew when you said the Mahabharata was older than the Bible that couldn't be so, but I let it go. Then I looked it up, and found that its oldest portions are dated to the 5th century BC. I suppose you would follow a modern revisionist dating of the Bible, but believers all the way back know Moses wrote and oversaw the writing of the first five books, and that puts its oldest portions back to 1400 BC; and the last books of the Old Testament around 400 BC.
Perhaps I should also be suspicious of the dating of the Mahabharata. Maybe it's actually older than they say it is too. But I know a major reason for dating the Bible more recently is disbelief in the supernatural by the scholars who do the dating, which rather begs the question to put it mildly, and probably the Mahabharata doesn't suffer from such problems.
Mahabharata - Wikipedia
In its final form, it is assumed to have been completed between the 3rd and 5th centuries, with its central core (consisting of only a fraction of the full 1.8 million words) going back as far as the 5th century BC.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Chief Infidel, posted 07-23-2006 10:33 PM Chief Infidel has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by lfen, posted 07-24-2006 12:15 AM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024