|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why is Faith a Virtue? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The honest people who reported it. As I said.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2169 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: And I asked, who were those honest people? Who were they?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1940 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1940 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chief Infidel Inactive Member |
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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chief Infidel Inactive Member |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chief Infidel Inactive Member |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024