-->
@secularmerlin
*faith
My mistake
Vote on debate
Posts
Archived
Total:
242
-->
@Plisken
Faith is not knowledge either.
-->
@secularmerlin
Faith is not used as knowing in the way that not all rectangles are squares.
-->
@Plisken
Knowledge actually precludes faith. If you know something then faith is unnecessary.
-->
@secularmerlin
Oh? That's an interesting claim
-->
@Plisken
It is not a claim it is an observation. You do not need faith if you know something.
-->
@secularmerlin
That may be the case for you, but I couldn't honestly claim to know of anything I don't have faith in
-->
@Plisken
Perhaps we have a different definition of faith. Faith would seem to me from the claims of theists to be the reason one gives for believing in something one cannot or will not prove. In any discussion about knowledge (a discussion about scientific principles for example) the word is not generally used whatever. It is only in discussions about untestable hypothesis that the word faith begins to be used.
-->
@secularmerlin
You are probably making a simple misjudgment, that because faith isn't rational that it isn't placed in things that can be rationalized.
-->
@secularmerlin
@disgusted
That is the difference between what I am saying, and what you two are saying.
Both of you speak of self righteousness.
I am saying that God is right. The Ultimate Reality.
You can't understand what I'm saying because you project your own arrogance on to me.
If I take a break, I will be very secure in my faith.
-->
@Plisken
I am willing to consider the idea for the purposes of this conversation. Do you have an example?
-->
@Mopac
I have never mentioned self righteousness. I think it is a subjective term in any case. Perhaps you are confusing me with another poster.
Definition of faith I use from Merriam-webster..
"something that is believed especially with strong conviction"
I certainly believe The Ultimate Reality exists with strong conviction, and I would be so bold as to say that so would anyone with understanding.
-->
@secularmerlin
Not at all.
It is very evident that you lean on your own understanding, which makes you self righteous.
I very consistently have made it clear that my position is The Ultimate Reality. That is not me, or my understanding.
And you, who think they have understanding, demonstrate that you have none when you go to such lengths to deny The Truth itself, that which is truly real.
Why?
Because you don't understand it.
The fact that you think you have to understand it in order to believe it is the surest sign of your hubris.
-->
@Mopac
What does belief have to do with knowledge?
-->
@secularmerlin
What does knowledge have to do with The Truth?
-->
@Mopac
You have no knowledge, or Truth. All you have are circular definitions with no real meanings.
-->
@janesix
If you believe that "The Ultimate Reality" is meaningless, that is certainly an assessment that comes from a paradigm that renders it meaningless.
It is certainly not meaningless. Meaningless to you.
-->
@Mopac
Both of you (goldtop, secularmerlin) speak of self righteousness.
Secularmerlin: I have never mentioned self righteousness.
It is very evident that you lean on your own understanding, which makes you self righteous
Ok well that is different than saying that I speak of self righteousness. Also self righteous is a subjective opinion and is not a quantifiable measurable fact. In a debate setting I would prefer to stick to the facts.
you go to such lengths to deny The Truth itself,
I do not deny that there are true things and untrue things. You are not talking about what is true you are discussing an unknowable element. That which is ultimately true. We can only guess at what is ultimately true and yet you claim knowledge with absolute certainty about many of the attributes this ultimately true truth must have.
Mopac we are not arguing about whether there is/can be truth. We are arguing about what that truth is and whether certain beliefs about it are supportable under our current understanding of the universe and as a side conversation if our understanding of the universe can ultimately even lead to any objective truth or only observable truth which is subjective by its very nature.
-->
@Mopac
What does knowledge have to do with The Truth?
You tell me. You are the one claiming to know things about this ultimate truth. If knowledge has nothing to do with it why claim to know that the ultimate reality must be apologized too and asked forgiveness of? And what would any of that have to do with the possibly existent (and possibly fictional) human Jesus of Nazareth and his ministry (which seem on the surface at least to consider this ultimate truth as a conscious and judgemental foreskin hating being that finds cloth of mixed fibers more detestable than slavery).
I certainly believe The Ultimate Reality exists with strong conviction, and I would be so bold as to say that so would anyone with understanding.
We understand your beliefs are based on untenable word games and that you lack an understanding of the world around you. That's the difference, when one believes something, they may not necessarily understand it, but when they gain an understanding, they have no need to believe in it. This is where you fail.
-->
@Mopac
Then what does it mean? No word play please.
-->
@secularmerlin
@janesix
@Goldtop
"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."
-->
@Mopac
She did not claim that reality is meaningless only that your definition is circular and meaningless. Please read janrsix's comments with more care she is very honest about her epistemological limits when discussing her possition.--> @janesixIf you believe that "The Ultimate Reality" is meaningless, that is certainly an assessment that comes from a paradigm that renders it meaningless.It is certainly not meaningless. Meaningless to you.
-->
@Mopac
What is your preferred definition of "pure in heart"?
-->
@Mopac
Have you seen God Mopac?
-->
@Mopac
“If you truly have faith in your convictions, then your convictions should be able to stand criticism and testing.”
“When you leave reasoning & start believing than nothing is reasonable & everything is believable.”
“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”
-->
@secularmerlin
@janesix
@Goldtop
Cleanse the nous.
-->
@Mopac
I'm sorry but I don't understand your answer. If this is your preferred definition of pure in heart then I would appreciate some clarification.
-->
@Mopac
I will take that as a no then.