Faith or Reason?

[Vimy_Ridge]

So what you are saying is that you merely observe and have faith? You don’t bother with reasoning (logical analysis)? It’s okay if you do, I am just asking for evidence of reasoning in this thread.

No, if I only went by my observation and experience of the world then I would have no faith in our Creator. Faith to me means trust and confidence not intellectual assent to religious doctrine.

Reason and logic are meant for day to day tasks but are useless when determining how we see our relationship with the Creator

 

[Luke65]

But these are assertions for the faithful. They display no reasoning.

So you accept these assertions on faith?

How do you arrive at that conclusion from the words “know with certainty”, you who claim to use reason?

“But they are much deceived, who think that we believe in Christ without any proofs concerning Christ.” ~ St. Augustine

 

[geometer]

Atheism doesn’t count on “faith” at all - unless you’re talking about a different definition.

Faith means trust. Atheists blindly trust that they will never encounter God. That is blind faith.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Faith means trust. Atheists blindly trust that they will never encounter God. That is blind faith.

Ah, but if you trust you will never see God…how will you prepare yourself to meet Him at the end of your life?

 

[James_S_Saint]

No, if I only went by my observation and experience of the world then I would have no faith in our Creator.

I am not differentiating in which kind of faith you have. I am asking for evidence of reasoning regardless of its application.

Faith to me means trust and confidence not intellectual assent to religious doctrine.

This is an assertion of definition and seems one merely founded on faith of what the word faith actually means.

Reason and logic are meant for day to day tasks but are useless when determining how we see our relationship with the Creator

Another assertion.

 

[liquidpele]

Faith means trust. Atheists blindly trust that they will never encounter God. That is blind faith.

Belief is not trust. Agnostic atheists don’t believe there is a god, trust and faith have nothing to do with it. At most you could say that atheists trust in their own senses and reasoning which then are the foundations for their belief. However, just as brick walls being laid on a cement foundation does not make the bricks cement, a foundation of trust does not mean that things built upon that are automatically “trusted” as well.

 

[James_S_Saint]

How do you arrive at that conclusion from the words “know with certainty”, you who claim to use reason?

Two concerns here;

1. I don’t remember claiming to be one who uses reason and that would a bit irrelevant regardless.
2. I come to that “conclusion” merely from observation that the quote merely made assertions and displayed no reasoning.

“But they are much deceived, who think that we believe in Christ without any proofs concerning Christ.” ~ St. Augustine

Nice quote, but displays no reasoning.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Faith means trust. Atheists blindly trust that they will never encounter God. That is blind faith.

Assertions.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Belief is not trust. Atheists don’t believe there is a god, trust and faith have nothing to do with it. At most you could say that atheists trust in their own senses and reasoning which then is the foundations for their belief.

Assertions.

 

[Vimy_Ridge]

Another assertion.

Maybe everything we say is an assertion even our reasons. The world seems rather irrational, is that an assertion?

But ultimately this whole debate about who is more reasonable, Atheists or Theists is a waste of time. I am not a traditional theist and people who call themselves atheists are still playing in the theist world of definitions. Woops, more assertions.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Maybe everything we say is an assertion even our reasons. The world seems rather irrational, is that an assertion?

Reasoning involves, not merely what you believe, but WHY you believe it (other than merely faith).

But ultimately this whole debate about who is more reasonable, Atheists or Theists is a waste of time. I am not a traditional theist and people who call themselves atheists are still playing in the theist world of definitions. Woops, more assertions.

Haha… ayup.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Only for those who have no faith.

Or accidentally faith in the wrong idea.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

1. I experience myself, and I experience that which is beyond myself.
2. I have the capacity to reason, and to believe.
3. I have, in addition to these capacities, a very strong will, and I cannot help but wish that the entire universe conform to my will.
4. I could either harness my beliefs to my reason (rationalism/empiricism), or harness my reason to my beliefs (fundamentalism). Thankfully, however, these are not the only options.
5. It is clear that when I have, in the past, harnessed my beliefs to my reason, I have also tended to draw logical conclusions that were convenient to my own will. This has the effect of centering the universe on my own will, because it is (it seems to me) impossible to give free reign to the intellect without silencing the soul.
6. My soul is my capacity to relate meaningful to others (including God).
7. It is also clear that when I have, in the past, harnessed my reason to my beliefs, I have tended to lose touch with reality – in other words, I would center the world of my beliefs on the satisfaction of my own will.
8. Faith is not blind belief.
9. Faith is the affirmation of meaning in the world, external to myself. God is the object of everything that is faith, whether the person who has faith knows it or not.
10. Neither belief nor reason is an acceptable starting point. But faith is the starting point.
11. He who has faith will not be centered on his own will, but rather on understanding the relationship between himself and the object of faith.
12. No one can find *reasons *nor beliefs if they do not first hypothesize that the world is the type of thing that can be understood, the type of thing that carries meaning.
13. Faith is this hypothesis.

 

[James_S_Saint]

1. I experience myself, and I experience that which is beyond myself.
2. I have the capacity to reason, and to believe.
3. I have, in addition to these capacities, a very strong will, and I cannot help but wish that the entire universe conform to my will.
4. I could either harness my beliefs to my reason (rationalism/empiricism), or harness my reason to my beliefs (fundamentalism). Thankfully, however, these are not the only options.
5. It is clear that when I have, in the past, harnessed my beliefs to my reason, I have also tended to draw logical conclusions that were convenient to my own will. This has the effect of centering the universe on my own will, because it is (it seems to me) impossible to give free reign to the intellect without silencing the soul.
6. My soul is my capacity to relate meaningful to others (including God).
7. It is also clear that when I have, in the past, harnessed my reason to my beliefs, I have tended to lose touch with reality – in other words, I would center the world of my beliefs on the satisfaction of my own will.
8. Faith is not blind belief.
9. Faith is the affirmation of meaning in the world, external to myself. God is the object of everything that is faith, whether the person who has faith knows it or not.
10. Neither belief nor reason is an acceptable starting point. But faith is the starting point.
11. He who has faith will not be centered on his own will, but rather on understanding the relationship between himself and the object of faith.
12. No one can find *reasons *nor beliefs if they do not first hypothesize that the world is the type of thing that can be understood, the type of thing that carries meaning.
13. Faith is this hypothesis.

Wow, and I was SO expecting to see reasoning in that eventually… sigh.

Can you point out even one line in there that displays reasoning rather than merely beliefs?

 

[Vimy_Ridge]

Reasoning involves, not merely what you believe, but WHY you believe it (other than merely faith).

Okay here is one reason why I believe in Christianity. One day I bought two books, one was a copy of the ‘Satanic Bible’ and when I recieved my change it was $6.66, there was no way that the guy in the bookstore could have done it on purpose. Not really philosophical, just weird.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Okay here is one reason why I believe in Christianity. One day I bought two books, one was a copy of the ‘Satanic Bible’ and when I recieved my change it was $6.66, there was no way that the guy in the bookstore could have done it on purpose. Not really philosophical, just weird.

Haha… hmm… I guess I’ll have to give that a bit of credit for containing “reasoning”, but wow, I have to seriously stretch. Good thing reasoning is measured on a curve.

To reword it;

I believe in Christianity BECAUSE, I saw evidence in the form of a money exchange that implied the existence of Satan.

Such as it is, it at least very slightly displays a touch of reasoning, coherent or not. I didn’t specify “good” reasoning, I guess.

 

[Vimy_Ridge]

Haha… hmm… I guess I’ll have to give that a bit of credit for containing “reasoning”, but wow, I have to seriously stretch. Good thing reasoning is measured on a curve.

To reword it;

I believe in Christianity BECAUSE, I saw evidence in the form of a money exchange that implied the existence of Satan.

Such as it is, it at least very slightly displays a touch of reasoning, coherent or not. I didn’t specify “good” reasoning, I guess.

I don’t know man. I’m just trying to stay in contact with something sacred and I do it through the Christian tradition. What are you looking for?

 

[James_S_Saint]

I don’t know man. I’m just trying to stay in contact with something sacred and I do it through the Christian tradition. What are you looking for?

Well, I thought I made that clear in the OP, but i guess not.

I have asked for evidence of people using reasoning for the reasons that I expressed in the OP.

 

[Luke65]

Two concerns here;

1. I don’t remember claiming to be one who uses reason and that would a bit irrelevant regardless.
2. I come to that “conclusion” merely from observation that the quote merely made assertions and displayed no reasoning.

Nice quote, but displays no reasoning.

Just because you are unable to put two and two together, doesn’t mean there is no reasoning there. Seek and you will find.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Just because you are unable to put two and two together, doesn’t mean there is no reasoning there. Seek and you will find.

An assertion.

And I AM seeking. I am seeking anyone who uses reasoning at the moment.