Faith by Definition

I was watching Schindlers List recently and it struck me how much God was operating in that situation: enabling people to do what they could not do on their own. Doors opening where doors shouldn't open. God working in the ugly stuff. His good becomes more noticeable when you pause to consider how much worse it could have been. Retrospect is a great way of seeing God at work in and around you I find. I often don't see much in the way of progress in the moment. Oftentimes I feel I'm going backwards - but its when I look back over the last 1,2,3,4 years I can plot the upward curve as clear as a bell. And a steeper slope upwards than I could have ever dreamed was possible.I think the occasional disatisfaction comes from the fact that his standards are so high that simple square function growth rates - although astounding to me - is in itself insufficient. God wants growth to be exponential. He invented the possibility of exponential growth afterall.

I can look at the same evidence as you do PY and come to a completely different conclusion. It's a bit like this...Scroll down under the boxBeyond The Veil

Very entertaining.
I don't see any evidence in any of the images though. They are specially designed to be ambiguous images or outright optical illusions.You can't reach conclusions from optical illusions.In most cases I can switch from one view to the other at will with no bias in either direction.

The evidence is each pixel. We can examine position and colour and tone. Then we can look at all the available evidence and come to a conclusion about what the picture is. If one wasn't looking with the expectation of optical illusion they might decide the picture looks like a beaufiful woman. Then they notice that unusual object is a feather in her hair and that line around her neck is a choker. IOW, once the initial diagnosis is made, all the subsequent evidence goes to elaborate on the initial diagnosis. The more one investigates the more it all fits togetherAll I'm saying is that the same information can lead to another diagnosis altogether and that all the subsequent evidence goes to support that view.So your assertion that I am ignoring the evidence can be bounced back at you s'all

You must have a point because I disagree with you on this subject so in a way that actually reinforces your point, at least as far as your own method of reaching conclusions goes.I don't work that way. To me, I see both possibilities as equally valid until a thorough examination of all the pixels in the picture reveals either one image or the other as the prevalent one.
In the case of optical illusions, it is easy enough to see through them.
Take the one with the blocks and the wavy (or is it parallel) lines. At first you can't tell so you devise a test. Put a straight edge ruler against the screen of your PC monitor and the truth becomes obvious. They are parallel.In the case of the pictures which can be one thing or another, the chances of each being correct remain equal. The conlusion that I reach is that the pictures are equally valid either way because they were either designed that way or some fluke of chance made them that way.Conclusion = There is no correct way to look at them.

Fine, except that I made no such assertion. You made it yourself. I was only echoing it.Here is what you said. If you are travelling the path that leaves the evidence to reach your destination (conclusion) then you are ignoring the path of evidence.
Either that or you are talking some sort of double speak which makes no logical sense.

Hate to go off-topic, but that web-page is a good example of why I think the implicit bias test doesn't work.But isn't that what is so amazing about God?

I don't know if anyone still has their ears on regarding this thread, but, I just wanted to respond to the post regarding Heb. 11 and the definition of faith.There seems to be a misquote - rather than " faith is the EVIDENCE of things hoped for..." it should be:Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Substance is from the Greek hupostasis: setting under or essence, assurance, confidence.IMHO, that goes far beyond a declaration of what faith accomplishes and qualifies as a definition of what faith is.hth

---

http://www.christiansoldiersonline.org

Maybe not, but let's see if we can raise it from the dead. Good point. Faith refers to "assurance" or "confidence" - not at all to what we, in modern English, would call "substance".

quote:

---

1. that of which a thing consists; physical matter or material: form and substance.
2. a species of matter of definite chemical composition: a chalky substance.

---

Too many Christians put faith on the same level as evidence.Welcome to EvC. You'll find a lot of discussion here about the kind of rubbish your website is full of.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

Welcome to EvC. You'll find a lot of discussion here about the kind of rubbish your website is full of.

---

Thank you (I think).

---

http://www.christiansoldiersonline.org

Hi Phat, I'm a bit late here and am referring back to your first post. Looking at the above quotes, are you putting faith (confidence) in a personal experience that is supported by the bible? If so, would you care to elaborate on this experience?Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed quote

I had the experience of being saved from the ridiculous ideas put forward of god, jesus and the bible. The faith begins with oneself to make up one's own mind.

I had grown up in a family that went to church because, as Dad put it, "it makes you feel good"....well it never made me feel good, except that I noticed that a few of the people there actually had a glow about them when talking of Jesus...as if He were actually a person they had met. I never gave it much thought, because I went to church mainly to please my Dad. I would much rather sleep in or watch cartoons!It was some years later when I, the consummate stoner/partier/endurance athlete was invited by this girl I knew to attend her church. I did so, mainly out of respect for her (she and I used to sit up late at night talking about religion...she grew up Catholic...) and I was struck by the oddity of the people in this church. They had that same quirky love affair with Jesus, but although a bit odd, they did seem to care about people and fed the homeless when not involved in praise/worship. (They met a lot!)Part of me thought them eccentric and not normal. Part of me was drawn by the relationship they spoke of. One day, I went to the altar and was swept up by a powerful catharsis. The change was not really evident until the next morning, when I awoke so happy I could laugh and cry at the same time! I threw all my pot away, cleaned my house for the first time in years, (thoroughly, that is) and rode this wave of emotional happiness, feeling of exclusivity, and awareness of something in me that I had never been aware of before.Much has happened since then, and I have some more corroborating stories...as well as some stories that challenge the belief paradigms as well.
One thing is certain, in my belief.....God is real, be He actually real or be He an internal emotional construct.

Thanks, I find it very interesting. I take it that all the experiences leading up to your catharsis played a vital role in creating a new and wonderful experience. I have no doubt this is true. I believe the human race is opening up towards new experiences. To begin creating anew instead of re-creating the old.What still puzzles me is why you attribute this to god? Your final words of 'or be he an internal emotional construct' are far closer to the mark. I have concluded within my own experiences that I am not convinced there is a god but I am convinced we can create one of our own imaginings.

Heinrik, what I meant is that I cannot prove that it is God, but I personally do not believe that God is an artificial human construct. I believe that it was actually GOD that I met at that moment in time that day in 1993. I also do not believe that my experience has ended. I believe that I am getting to know GOD more and more as I get to know myself more and more and the roadblocks and detours that I have set up in my mind and heart that prevent me from this communion.Of course, you may just see it as personal growth and that GOD is not necessarily part of the equation....