99Percent

Belief and therefore faith in something requires free will, because it involves the choice between two or more possible alternatives.

For example if my wife is pregnant I can say "I believe the baby is a boy" because there is the possiblity that it could be a girl too. If we did an echo and the doctor determines that the sex of the baby is indeed male then I can no longer say "I believe the baby is a boy", I would have to say "I know the baby is a boy". There is no longer an element of free will in my statement.

Correct me if I am wrong but in the Christian faith, the faith one has in God must come from ones own free will. This means that the belief in God comes from the real possibility that God indeed does not exist. If a theist claims he knows that God exist then he is in fact commiting a sin by his own logic because he is not having faith in God at all! In fact the theist is having faith because he is going against his empirical knowledge and is even joyous of the idea that he is doing it because of his own free will to do so. Sort of like affirming his own free will. The atheist is in the opposite position. He is an atheist because there is no possibility in his mind that God exists, there is no choice in his belief and therefore becomes a lack of belief. It becomes knowledge.

In short theists are really hanging in their faith with a very fine string, once a single doubt creeps in they are in great danger of losing it.

Not Prince Hamlet

Not so. In general, theists cling to their faith so desperately (for fear of being ostracized?) that they will teach themselves to overlook almost any inconsistancy. A lot of religious figures are very clever, by the way, and protect themselves with a virtually unassailable, "God works in mysterious ways" or "This is one of the higher mysteries of faith."

For instance, take the Holy Trinity. God is three different beings all at once. Sheer rubbish, but people are taught to look at it like it was some sort of mystical truth, that if they were just somehow smart enough, it would make sense to them.

It reminds me of a lot of David Lynch's works. Sure, the scenes could be there because there's all sorts of hidden symbolism and clues and stuff ... or they could be there because Lynch just likes being weird.

Jeff

[ March 06, 2002: Message edited by: Not Prince Hamlet ]</p>

Godless Sodomite

Though it isn't quite on topic, I agree with your feelings about Lynch's movies. It's easy to confuse incoherent with profound, but lately I've concluded that Mr. Lynch makes his films more and more obtuse to mask the fact that he keeps telling the same story over and over again.

-Jerry

Tercel

I know that God exists, atheists believe he doesn't.

Consider yourself corrected.

No, the theist would be committing a sin by your logic. But thankfully we don't have to accept your understanding of "faith" as meaning "uncertain belief" but we can accept the traditional Christian interpretation of faith as meaning "trust".

For instance, take the wave/particle duality of light. Sheer rubbish, but people are taught to look at it as if it was some sort of scientific truth, that if they were just somehow smart enough, it would make sense to them.

Not Prince Hamlet

&gt;For instance, take the wave/particle duality of
&gt; light. Sheer rubbish, but people are taught to
&gt; look at it as if it was some sort of scientific
&gt; truth, that if they were just somehow smart
&gt; enough, it would make sense to them.

A good rejoinder, but actually I've questioned that very same theory. That's the difference: when I'm confronted with something that doesn't make sense, I doubt it. When a theist is confronted with something that doesn't make sense, he makes excuses or simply chooses to overlook it.


Jeff

99Percent

Tercel: but we can accept the traditional Christian interpretation of faith as meaning "trust".

Same difference. If you trust in something it means that you are doing it from your own free will because you can also choose not trust that same something.

This is very different from knowing. Knowing does not leave with you with any other options and therefore there is no free will in knowing.

I know that God exists, atheists believe he doesn't.

You don't really know God exists, if you do, then you don't have faith or even "trust". You would just know. By your own Christian logic, this is self defeating! Atheist really know he doesn't exist because by its definition alone its existence is impossible, and therefore we don't even require the choice to not "believe" in it, or have "faith" in its nonexistence, or "trust" that we will not go to hell.

99Percent

Not a Prince Hamlet: A good rejoinder, but actually I've questioned that very same theory. That's the difference: when I'm confronted with something that doesn't make sense, I doubt it. When a theist is confronted with something that doesn't make sense, he makes excuses or simply chooses to overlook it.

As a free thinker you can afford the luxury of doubt in your pursuit of knowledge. The theist cannot have this luxury, he cannot have any doubt as doubt immediately destroys faith (or "trust"). So when confronted with its nonsensical beliefs he relies on his faith. "Oh, I don't understand it but I still have faith its true." He has to have undoubting faith precisely because he cannot understand it.

Karen M

Hello 99

I understand your point, but I think what Tercel meant by "trust" was something more along the lines of "I trust Kate; she is honest" or "I trust my cat to not scratch the chair because we have trained him to use a scratching post." In one definition, "Faith" means belief in something without any evidence, but in another definion, "faith" simply means to agree to let someone have a responsiblility(I'm not sure if I defined that well? )

Though we are used to Christians who use "faith" in the first definition to defind why they believe in a God which has the possibility of not existing, some Christians believe that God has already been proven(I don't know how, so you would have to ask one of them?) and that all you have to do is put your trust in him(these ones use "faith" to mean the second definition ).


Using the second definition, the thing not known would be whether or not God will actually save them or whether God will actually do some of the things he says he will in the Bible(which is why they believe you have to trust/have faith him because there is no real way to know if he really will take them to Heaven or not).


I hope that was at least somewhat clear

Karen


Edited because I have been corrected, and it is mainly protestants that hold the second definition of "faith," and not Catholics as I had previously thought.

[ March 06, 2002: Message edited by: Karen M ]</p>

99Percent

Hi Karen, Yeah, I see what you mean. I suppose now using the word "trust" gives "faith" a more personal tone and the added weigh of responsibility in belief. But still, "trust" involves a lack of complete knowledge and requires the intent of free will to accept what is not empirically perceived as true. Even more important, the idea God goes against reason itself and by taking the active decision to still believe in him is what makes this belief meritful in the first place (according to the twisted logic of Christianism).

If God is in fact known, like I know the sun will rise tomorrow, and that know I am typing on my computer right now, I don't need faith, belief or even trust. There is no free will involved in accepting this knowledge, its just undeniably true.

xoc

The "faith" is not to be understood as "believing God exists" as it means rather, "trusting God." The faith that the "righteous" live by("the righteous shall live by faith") is not just belief that God exists but more about what is believed about God. "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." Did Abraham not know that God existed? Apparently he knew that full well. But knowing that x exists doesn't say anything about x. The "righteousness" was credited because Abraham believed God could do what was naturally impossible, what God claimed He could and would do. The faith that is "the promise of things hoped for" is based on a hope and expectation of what God will do in the future, that God is "true" as He will keep His word etc.

It is possible to "know" that God exists, if He exists and makes Himself known. However that this Being is God, and will do as He says etc., this is the area of faith as it is based on expectation of the future rather than what we can experience now or have experienced, that which passes for knowledge.