Faith

I see it as having different kinds of faith within faith.First off, I HAD faith in God, until he proved himself to me over and over again by living up to his word in the bible. So now its not really faith anymore.Its faith when I do something he asks, and expect him to follow through on his promise.So its faith that he will do what he promises, but not so much faith that I believe in him, because he has proven himself to me over and over again. If all that stops happening, then I retain the right to question his exsistance. Faith is believing in something for which there is no proof. I also do not need to prove my proof's to any of you, the truth lies within yourself. Its a spiritual thing for which you say is impossible.If I pray for something and it happens, isn't that proof?
Don't tell me about any placebo effect, because that would then make all medicine untrue.
There are many rules for praying and getting what you asked for, if it is within those rules, and your prayers consistantly get answered, isn't that proof?
If Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to us as a guide, and I recieve it, and use it as a guide, and he never lets me down, isn't that proof?It would seem an athiest believes if he does nothing, he has faith that nothing happens. So it happens over and over agin, so now its true for him.

So what your saying is because Love is subjective, and cannot be tested it is therefor untrue? So the sun doesn't actually rise, its always in the same spot. Now what?

So what your saying is because Love is subjective, and cannot be tested it is therefor untrue? So the sun doesn't actually rise, its always in the same spot. Now what?

It would seem for some, that is the case, yet they would never say as a result of those tests that it is 100% proven. So since nothing is ever proven, all things require an element of faith to believe in.I agree with you, it's sad

What would make you deviate from that path?

I agree with that, but if you trust in something such as reasoning isn't that actually faith since reasoning is baloney?
Do you think trusting in a reason until the reason changes isn't faith?

Does that make it untrue?

I wouldn't fully trust any kind of reasoning.
I am also not saying that all faith has the same level of faithfulness, or trust.But it would seem that everything we see or believe in has an element of faith and trust. So I can't see justifying believeing in something because it is more likely to produce a certain result more than another thing. Because if it has odds that the results will change, then it will change, no matter the odds. Thats my personal observation.The odds are that the earth will turn and we will see the sun tomorrow, but it may be producing a harmful magnetic storm over night and wipe out every electronic component in the world and disable us to a point were the world population could collapse, so I'm not going to put my faith in it.

I'm saying it appears to rise to you, but it actually doesn't rise.So you would go and tell another person the sun is rising, and thats what he would think since, thats what he saw too every morning.Plus just because you believe the sun will rise tomorrow doesn't actually mean its going to rise.*edited to add a thought*
We are only a heartbeat away from some huge object colliding with us and either stopping our rotation, or somthering the earth's atmosphere with debri, so that we won't see the sun anymore. It happened a mere 65 million years ago, so we believe.This message has been edited by riVeRraT, 08-31-2004 11:18 AM

Yes, the difference is your level of trust, thats why I said "an element of faith"

Again you are trying to address my concerns over astronomy threats, and you are not qualified to do so.
We cannot say that, not in the least. Of the known objects we can say they won't hit us anytime soon, unless they themselves get hit, and get thrown off course.
Comet hyutake missed us by less than the distance of the moon to earth.
We would not have been able to stop it. It went straight over our heads.

Oops, I made a mistake, it was less than 1,000,000 miles.
.10 AU which = 930,000 miles.So the moon is less than 250,000 miles from us.
So basically it was less than 4 times the distance from us to the moon, not 100 times like you said.I was 800,000 miles off with my mistake, but you were 24,070,000 miles off, so if you get your facts straight, I will get mine.Either way my point is still valid, it was close enough to be of concern, and yes it was spotted, only because it was a comet. If was an asteriod, we might not have found it, or found it much later in its approach.So tell me, what are the odds that something will hit the earth?This message has been edited by riVeRraT, 08-31-2004 05:55 PM

REally? You mean an object the size of Texas traveling with enough kenetic energy wouldn't have an affect on the earths rotation if hit in the right spot? No you can't jar. You just don't know or understand the physics involved, or the possibilities. Correct and incorrect.
I corrected my distance, and if it ended human life, wouldn't that be enough? I never meant anything more than life as in our life. Not true. We only search for things that are in our orbital plane of the solar system. Thats all we are capable for right now. So an object could come from another solar system and blind side us. Also, there is no guarantees on our on going search that we would fins anything coming at us. Something could come from the other side of the sun, and we would not be able to see it coming.So you tell me, what are the odds of us getting hit?

Which proves.........you guessed it, nothing.
This is my point, since you can't prove anything, then it all requires an element of faith.

Tell me, think there is any truth to Murphy's law?Just because the odds are a trillion to one, what are the odds that the one may happen this year?