DBT

Err, General relativity?- Up, down,3 o'clock on earth,noon on mars are determined by an observer's particular point of reference in time and space.
And they are just as real and true for the moment the particular relationship exists as any "absolute" such as the speed of light through a vacuum,etc
I'm not sure why you have included the Trinity.



Albert, the former are useful frames of reference but as for the latter-
we can't see any evidence of God's action on physical existence, there are no frames of reference, so we have no choice but to assume that God does not exist.

Ellis14

Albert, it seems that we disagree on the definition of faith. Though neither one of us need be wrong.

If you are right, and faith as expressed by other churches, i.e.: Protestants, is "belief no matter what", we agree that faith is non-rational, non-sensical, arbitrary and ultimately self-destructive.

It is this definition of faith, the most popular one that I reject and oppose.

I won't get into a discussion over whether I agree that your definition of faith is scriptually sound; there are some things I think you're taking out of context, but if "faith" for you is not the "conviction despite evidence" belief that most theists see it as, then I have no problem with your "faith".

Albert Cipriani

Alleluia! Now that's a horse of a different color! We actually agree on something. :notworthy

My only quibble is you personalizing the Catholic Faith as some concoction of my own as expressed by your "for you". And I also would take you to task regarding the Protestant version of faith as being "the most popular."

Until the great apostasy of Vatican II, 1 billion Catholics outnumbered all the Protestant sects put together and multiplied. Now, of course, that's all just academic. The non-traditional Catholic is functionally no different than any Protestant. -- Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic

Free Thinkr

I agree with Ellis, but I'd like to point out that, for the vast majority of people, your definition of faith is very misleading. You coming in to the thread and lambasting Ellis for his criticism is unfair, seeing as how you use a non-standard definition. I'm not going to speculate as to your motives, I'm just saying that, in the future, you should try to keep this in mind.

DBT

I tried a casual little survey with friends and co-workers ,about 15 roughly,during the course of this thread.
I asked them to define the meaning of the word faith, and it did not come as much of a supprise that there were roughly 15 different versions.
It seems that faith a carries quite an element of emotion.

Ellis14

Albert, despite your beliefs which I won't get into a discussion of, (because they are irrelevant and you obviously believe them), the most popular definition of faith today is the one I have presented here, and the one theists in general actually use themselves. It's not just the Protestant version of faith, it's the version of faith that most other religions use today, and indeed non-religious people when they hold to beliefs they admit have no proof, i.e.: in ghosts, the supernatural etc.

As Freethinkr says, your definition might be right, but it is non-standard, but I have no problems with 'your faith' anyway.

The kind of faith I've spoke of in this thread, and the one that most atheists reject and oppose is, refreshingly, not the one that you subscribe to.

Psalm 13:5

I think many nonbelievers have the wrong idea of what faith is. I'll come back tomorrow to add to this, because it's super late here. I'm about to fall asleep.

Ellis14

Anticipating your rebuttal, I will point out that nonbelievers have only the idea of faith as presented by theists.

Perhaps theists sometimes do not realise what they are really saying when they use the word faith?

Albert Cipriani

Perhaps you're thinking of this:

Note the "AND." This supports the Catholic Church's contention that the Protestant doctrine of sola fides is erroneous. Belief alone is not enough.

Belief plus action is enough. And the first action is baptism. When the two become one, both belief and action, faith and baptism, then the person is made whole, then one begins their salvation pilgrimage. -- Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic

Albert Cipriani

I have privately apologized to Ellis. I took offence to what seemed to me to be his lampooning of his own straw man argument.

I often forget to what depths of dismal depravity the state of theological affairs has descended. Thus, I apologized for my outburst after realizing afresh how Ellis and you guys cannot be blamed for your erroneous theological conceptions. -- Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic