Good to know… I’ll look for the DVD
My comments were based loosely on what the “Secular” world states about Knowledge and faith. *** for the people you point out, they were all learned men. I especially admire Augustine because he was a convert from a somewhat hedonistic lifestyle.
These quotes came up in our class as well from another student and I thought they were worth mentioning.
In his book, Dear Agnos, Arlie J. Hoover stated that “…faith, by standing between knowledge and ignorance, certainty and credulity, in a sense partakes of the essence of both. It has some evidence, which relates it to knowledge, yet it has some uncertainty, because the evidence is indirect” (1976, p. 28). Roy F. Osborne has suggested that “faith of any sort is based on probability… In a world of fallible beings, imperfect senses, and partial experience, absolute certainty is only a theoretical concept” (1964, p. 132).
If these writers are correct, faith is something based on little substantive proof, or, for that matter, no proof at all. Faith also allows men to “act like” they know something when, in fact, they do not. Further, at best faith is a probability proposition that may, or may not, have anything to do with truth. And, faith is seen as an entity composed of a small amount of knowledge and a big dose of uncertainty. Is it any wonder then that there is so much confusion in today’s world regarding the concept of faith and its relationship to knowledge.
Your thoughts…
First, the caveat: I am not a scholar. But I have done my best to find ways to explain why I remain a Catholic. If I write incorrectly or misleadingly, I trust others will speak up.
God’s ways are far above man’s ways. Faith is a gift from God. Many of us got that gift very early in life; some got it later, some not yet, and some have rejected it. None of us has complete understanding as we are not in Heaven yet. Yet many have a much better understanding than we do and they are trying to teach us, if we but choose to listen and try to learn.
Developing a stronger Faith does take effort and sometimes we get confused and have to find our way back to the path. We may learn much, but there will still be areas where we just have to TRUST that, based on what we already know, the area is indeed TRUE even if we cannot explain it.
There is much more than “little substantive proof or no proof at all.” If one doubts or rejects the reports of Jesus Christ, then one must also reject the reports of George Washington as we have seen neither man, we have only reports of them. If one doubts or rejects God then one should also reject air as we have seen neither, but only their effects.
I have not studied Hoover. He has placed FAITH between knowledge and ignorance. I am not sure at all that that is Faith’s proper place. He has put it there to make his point. God transcends everything including knowledge and ignorance. So, for me, Faith in God cannot be placed between knowledge and ignorance, but rather above knowledge. Faith is suported by knowledge and knowledge chases out ignorance.
Likewise, Osborne’s “absolute certainity is only a theoretical concept” seems an attempt to make another point that may be misleading. What about 2+2=4? Absolute certainity here only a theory? We also have scientific LAWS that are so well proven as to transcend theory. So I think there are absolute certainities. Whether an individual accepts these or not depends on his personal knowledge and his free will to accept the Truth or not.
Yet, I think it is also true that none of us has absolute complete knowledge of God. But we do have enough of God’s revelation in words and deeds (miracles) to be absolutely certain that God does exist and He wants to have a loving relationship with each of us if we but choose to accept His offer.
If I go to bed and wake up the next morning to see 6 inches of snow that was not there the night before, I am absolutely certain it snowed even thought I did not see it snow. I may be ignorant of why and how it snowed, but I have reliable evidence.