A
azirtsed
Guest
which really goes first???/
“TOO SEE IS TO BELIEVE!” or " TO BELIEVE IS TO SEE!"
“TOO SEE IS TO BELIEVE!” or " TO BELIEVE IS TO SEE!"
It’s a matter of perspective, and thus relative to the person asking the question. Essentially, belief is a mental agreement to accept something, and thus the person in question must decide what their requirements for belief are.which really goes first???/
“TOO SEE IS TO BELIEVE!” or " TO BELIEVE IS TO SEE!"
I’m going to say, “To believe is to see!”which really goes first???/
“TOO SEE IS TO BELIEVE!” or " TO BELIEVE IS TO SEE!"
I think I agree with you completely here. “Not seeing is believing” is much truer (though of course, not everything unseen is believed … but whatever). If you “see,” that is generally meant that you “know.” Belief is accepting the existence of something but not knowing it. As soon as you know it, though, you no longer believe it … you know it (which is preferable). This is what Plato would say too.Neither.
Believing is accepting something as true even though you do not see it to be true. Hence, it is something that you could not accept.
Too see something is essentially the same as knowing something. You cannot deny that it is true because you can plainly see that it is true. It is not possible that you not accept it.
If you can see that something is true, that means you can no longer believe it to be so. Certain knowledge takes the place of belief. As this is applied to the Catholic Faith which is something we believe in, we can only “have faith” and “believe” while we until we attain the Beatific Vision, at which point we will see the truth of the Faith and know it, no longer “believing.” This is why the theological virtues of Faith and Hope cannot exist among the saints, because both virtues involve something unseen.
I think I agree with you here too. In fact, yes. Well said.If you are thinking about Christ’s exchange with the Apostle Thomas, I would suggest that seeing and believing have two different antecedents in Christ’s discourse. What is seen is a miracle, what is believed is Christ’s identity. Thus, blessed are they who believe me without having witnessed a miracle, etc. Having seen a miracle, however, does count as having “seen” the truth to which the miracle is evidence. Thus, having seen Christ’s resurrected body does not mean that the Apostles “saw” that Christ was/is God. It still required Faith and belief.
=azirtsed;5565092]which really goes first???/
“TOO SEE IS TO BELIEVE!” or " TO BELIEVE IS TO SEE!"
Yet, it is possible to believe in what one does not see.A baby sees things before it believes or knows anything. Beliefs arrive subsequently…