Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Liberty1970

“Authority” and “Faith” are two different things. One can can double-check authority but one cannot double-check faith.

In other words, anyone can (if they had to) measure a mountain or the boiling point of lead, and prove to themselves the facts of reality, regardless of what authority says.

You cannot do the same for faith — the definition of “faith” is to believe without evidence, or even, despite the evidence. Water into wine? No independent evidence I know of supports that. And everything else I know about the world does not support it, either.

People believe Jesus changed water into wine based on faith — they believe it in spite of the evidence...that’s why they call it a miracle.

Faith cannot be argued against because it is argue-proof — no amount of evidence can be used against it. People believe something no matter what the evidence shows. That’s the heart of what faith means.

Authority on the subject of mountain height and boiling points can always be challenged.


5 posted on 07/05/2011 7:42:15 AM PDT by Harpo Speaks (Honk! Honk! Honk! Either it's foggy out, or make that a dozen hard boiled eggs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Harpo Speaks
You cannot do the same for faith — the definition of “faith” is to believe without evidence

The bible is full of evidence.

15 posted on 07/05/2011 7:57:59 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Harpo Speaks
Faith cannot be argued against because it is argue-proof — no amount of evidence can be used against it. People believe something no matter what the evidence shows.

Excellent point. One simply cannot argue with a "believer". Once the phrase "because I believe it to be true" enters the argument, thinking stops. From that point on, further argument is useless.

I have even observed a "believer" attempting to prove a point of biblical or moral "fact" to a non-believer by using the very book in which the other individual has no belief....the bible.

25 posted on 07/05/2011 8:36:24 AM PDT by Logic n' Reason (The stain must be REMOVED (ERADICATED)....NOW!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Harpo Speaks
“Authority” and “Faith” are two different things. One can can double-check authority but one cannot double-check faith.

Until you have _actually_ done so, you accept the authority on faith. And so, as a practical matter, you end up taking an awful lot on faith.

Your example of water into wine misfires badly, because Christians accept the historical record of this miracle precisely because of the documentary evidence that the event actually occurred. Your definition of faith as being without evidence is flatly inaccurate. I have faith in things I believe PRECISELY because I have evidence and logic to support them. Otherwise there would be no point in believing in them!

In any event historical claims cannot be directly checked, so everything you believe about past history is based on your faith in your sources - unless you have a time machine. Anti-Christians have some bizarre double-standards in how they evaluate historical data.

56 posted on 07/05/2011 9:48:19 AM PDT by Liberty1970 (For by grace are you saved through faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson