Amos

But the opinion held is still only an opinion.

Bumble Bee Tuna

A freethinker is someone who thinks rationally for themselves in regards to religion. Faith is irrational, so a faith-based theist cannot be a freethinker. Some like to call themselves one, because they're too deluded to realize they aren't. This is why I avoid using the term at all, because theists are just incapable of understanding it anyway.

-B

livius drusus

notMichaelJackson -

Here is an article from the Secular Web library by on the topic. In it, Jeffrey Jay Lowder quotes the Campus Freethought Alliance definition which specifically excludes theists: Lowder, however, posits that it is in fact possible for a theist to have come to his beliefs through a diligent application of critical thinking, rare though that circumstance may be. And it is certainly possible for a nontheist to not be a freethinker. For a Bible-believing xian, however, there are multiple strictures against the diligent application of critical thinking. Lowder quotes Proverbs and Corinthians as examples of the Bible's authoritarian insistence on unquestioning belief.

In other words, even if Gemma did in fact conclude that Catholicism was accurate after much research and the diligent application of critical thought, since she now believes the Bible is the word of God and to be followed to the best of her abilities, she is bound by the rules of her faith to renounce all doubt and questioning of scriptural and ecclesiastical authority and can therefore no longer make any claim to the title of freethinker.

Gemma Therese

I can't think freely?

Interesting.

Thank God no one told this to Thomas Aquinas (whose Feast is today).

Gemma Therese

braces_for_impact

Posted by Amos:

Actually an opinion and a fact are two different things.

For instance, it is an opinion that Christianity (or any other religion) is the truth, as this is not verified in reality, and cannot be demonstrated. If it were, then faith would not be required!

livius drusus

That is equivocation. A Freethinker is not someone who "thinks freely" (whatever that means). It means someone who applies critical thought to every belief they hold and are willing to discard any and all of them should they encounter contradictory evidence. Thomas Aquinas was an apologist, Gemma. He believed first, attempted to justify belief later. That is not Freethought. I will take this opportunity to remind you yet again that many people have offered to debate you on the Summa and you have yet to respond to any one of them. See my post to you here to refresh your memory.

Edited to add link

Amos

You are absolutly correct and prior to our liberation from thinking both faith and doubt must be annihilated through understanding.

This is made clear when "Thomas the doubter" (who was the twin of "Peter the faither)" was convinced (overcome) to leave Peter stranded without the cloak of faith as recorded on their next fishing trip.

braces_for_impact

Dr. Evil impersonation/ Rrrriiiiight..../

Amos

Aquinas was a Freethinker (capital F) and therefore an apologist who can justify faith as a prerequisite of freethought achieved through faith seeking understanding.

livius drusus

I think you will find, notMichaelJackson, that this thread will be far more productive to you if you simply nod sagely at Amos' dysentery of metaphor and move right along.