Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you know X, then you believe X. All examples of knowledge are also examples of beliefs. The requirements for knowledge are generally accepted as being justified, true belief plus some kind of anti-luck element.
Everything I know I also believe.
Yet, you can't turn that around and say that everything you believe you also know. And you agree with that based on your statement in the OP in which you said, ''I believe things that I don't know all the time.''
Some people, even in today's world believe that the earth is flat. But they don't ''know'' that it's flat because indeed, it is not flat. It is, and can be shown to be spherical. On the other hand, I know for a fact that the earth is round and no amount of belief on the part of a person who believes the earth is flat will make it so. No matter how much a person may delude himself that he ''knows'' the earth is flat, he is wrong regardless of his belief.
Quote:
Those examples are simply muddying the water of whether we are discussing confidence in something happening or the truthfulness of a proposition. What I'm trying to ask here is whether the word "faith" can be used solely to refer to one's acceptance of a proposition, because that is how people often use it when describing their belief in god.
While faith and belief can be used synonymously, the word faith has already been shown to also have a broader meaning in that it also has the meaning of that which is believed as the Biblical examples I posted demonstrates. And so the word 'faith' is not used solely to refer to one's acceptance of a proposition.
Quote:
Then how does it mean anything other than "belief"?
Again, while the words 'faith' and 'belief' are synonymous terms, 'faith' also is used in another sense as well.
I don't believe in 'blind' faith. That is, I don't believe without some kind of evidence to support my belief. The Christian faith/Christianity is based on historical events which support my belief in God.
Quote:
If I can't say "I have faith that I am typing on City Data" even though I hold that proposition to be true, why can I say "I have faith that god exists" if I hold that proposition to be true?
I know for an absolute fact that I am typing on City Data at the moment. I know for an absolute fact that I have five fingers on each hand. I have no doubt about that.
I have faith/belief that God exists based on what I regard as valid historical evidence. But do I know for an absolute fact, beyond any doubt whatsoever that God exists based upon that historical evidence? No. God hasn't personally appeared to me or talked to me. So I can't honestly say that I know for an absolute fact that God exists. But I can honestly say that I accept as valid, the historical evidence (evidence is not proof) for God's existence.
Quote:
I'm not taking exception with the definition in the sense that I think it is incorrect. I am merely saying that is the definition that I am interested in here. As it stands, however, this usage of faith seems peculiar to me, for the reasons I've stated above.
Well, if you find this definition of faith - ''That which is believed, body of faith/ belief/ teaching'' (Readers refer to post #15) peculiar even though it has been shown to be valid in post #23, then you do. But it is valid nevertheless.
Yet, you can't turn that around and say that everything you believe you also know. And you agree with that based on your statement in the OP in which you said, ''I believe things that I don't know all the time.''
Some people, even in today's world believe that the earth is flat. But they don't ''know'' that it's flat because indeed, it is not flat. It is, and can be shown to be spherical. On the other hand, I know for a fact that the earth is round and no amount of belief on the part of a person who believes the earth is flat will make it so. No matter how much a person may delude himself that he ''knows'' the earth is flat, he is wrong regardless of his belief.
Of course. I didn't say otherwise. But for our purposes, statements like "I believe I am typing on City Data" make sense because all examples of knowledge are also examples of belief. If you know something, then you necessarily believe it. Believing X is a prerequisite for knowing X. Here is a vinn diagrams to illustrate:
Similarly, all examples of humans are also examples of mammals, even though not all mammals are humans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
While faith and belief can be used synonymously, the word faith has already been shown to also have a broader meaning in that it also has the meaning of that which is believed as the Biblical examples I posted demonstrates. And so the word 'faith' is not used solely to refer to one's acceptance of a proposition.
"Faith" actually has a narrower meaning because not all examples of belief are examples of faith, as evidenced by the fact that statements like "I have faith I am typing on City Data" don't make sense. "Faith" also can mean "confidence," but that is more like a homynym.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Again, while the words 'faith' and 'belief' are synonymous terms, 'faith' also is used in another sense as well.
Yes, absolutely. I recognize the usage of "faith" that means "confident." What I don't understand is the difference between the sense of "faith" that essentially just means "belief" and the meaning of the word "belief." When someone says they have "faith that god exists," how is that different than someone who says they "believe lions exist" or they "believe string theory is correct"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
I don't believe in 'blind' faith. That is, I don't believe without some kind of evidence to support my belief. The Christian faith/Christianity is based on historical events which support my belief in God.
Then why do you use the word "faith" in this setting but you use the word "belief" in nearly every other setting of life when referring to propositions you hold true?
My point in this is that it seems as though there are different epistemic elements to "faith" than there are to mere belief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
I know for an absolute fact that I am typing on City Data at the moment. I know for an absolute fact that I have five fingers on each hand. I have no doubt about that.
If you know something for a fact, then you believe it. That's a requirement for knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Well, if you find this definition of faith - ''That which is believed, body of faith/ belief/ teaching'' (Readers refer to post #15) peculiar even though it has been shown to be valid in post #23, then you do. But it is valid nevertheless.
If it is valid, then why can't we say things like "I have faith I am typing on City Data"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn
They are neither faith or belief based...you know these things.
Questions like:
I believe the sun with come up.
I have faith the sun will come up.
I know the sun will come up.
To me, are worthy of dissection.
Again, not trying to cause trouble here!
Cuz, I'm hoping that chair over there will hold me in a minute!
See my post above. If you know X, you also believe X. Humans: Mammals::Belief:Knowledge.
That sociopaths are fully human may be in question, but it is not a question of having the "right feelings," the capability for empathy is a requirement for the Christian faith, and commitment IS an emotional response...how else? As for eternity, that is a possible background for change; without the possibility of change you are just talking about revenge...a very primitive idea, having nothing to do with belief or faith.
Try to distinguish between evidence and proof: there may be no absolute proof of a proposition, but one lacking evidence is just fantasy.
Sociopaths aren't human? Where on earth did you get that idea?
So if a person is incapable of empathy, they can't be a Christian? Why on earth, then, would god have created sociopaths?
Of course. I didn't say otherwise. But for our purposes, statements like "I believe I am typing on City Data" make sense because all examples of knowledge are also examples of belief. If you know something, then you necessarily believe it. Believing X is a prerequisite for knowing X. Here is a vinn diagrams to illustrate:
Similarly, all examples of humans are also examples of mammals, even though not all mammals are humans.
"Faith" actually has a narrower meaning because not all examples of belief are examples of faith, as evidenced by the fact that statements like "I have faith I am typing on City Data" don't make sense. "Faith" also can mean "confidence," but that is more like a homynym.
I already explained what I meant by faith having a broader meaning than belief. Not only is the word faith used in the sense of belief or believing in someone or something, but it also is used in the sense of what is believed. In the Bible faith is also used for the body of teaching that is the Christian faith. I posted four different verses which demonstrate this.
The various religions are referred to as faiths. The Jewish faith, the Muslim faith, etc. In that sense, faith is the object. It is that which is believed.
Quote:
Yes, absolutely. I recognize the usage of "faith" that means "confident." What I don't understand is the difference between the sense of "faith" that essentially just means "belief" and the meaning of the word "belief." When someone says they have "faith that god exists," how is that different than someone who says they "believe lions exist" or they "believe string theory is correct"?
Those are apples and oranges and pears.
You believe that lions exist and have the empirical proof that they exist. You know that lions exist. You have assurance that lions exist.
You may believe that string theory is correct, but while there is much to suggest that it may indeed be true, we as yet are unable to confirm that it is correct. Therefore, if you believe string theory is correct your belief is based on an incomplete and as yet unproven theory. You believe, but you don't know for sure if the theory is correct. You don't have assurance that it is correct.
You have faith or believe that God exists. The existence of God can't be proven scientifically. Some people try to build a case for the existence of God on philosophical grounds, but I believe that the case for the existence of God is best based on historical evidence on God inserting Himself into human history.
Quote:
Then why do you use the word "faith" in this setting but you use the word "belief" in nearly every other setting of life when referring to propositions you hold true?
By 'you' I assume you mean people in general. The Bible uses both terms for trusting in God. As for which word is used in other contexts it's a matter of what is being talked about and the context that is involved.
Going back to what I said before, I have no problem, if I were asked, with answering, 'I have faith that the brakes on my truck are able to bring it to a stop' or by answering, 'I believe the brakes on my truck work well enough to bring it to a stop. In that case, either 'faith' or 'believe' are suitable. In other cases I might be inclined to use one word over the other.
Quote:
My point in this is that it seems as though there are different epistemic elements to "faith" than there are to mere belief.
Here I simply point you back to the definitions for both 'faith' and 'believe' provided by BDAG in post # 15.
Quote:
If you know something for a fact, then you believe it. That's a requirement for knowledge.
That's already been addressed.
Quote:
If it is valid, then why can't we say things like "I have faith I am typing on City Data"?
There is no 'if' about it. Again, I posted four verses from the Bible in which what we today call Christianity is referred to as 'the faith.'
And in giving it some thought, while it sounds funny to say ''I have faith that I am typing on City Data,'' technically it's perhaps not really improper to say it. After all, faith is a high degree of trust or confidence in something or someone, and therefore, if you are confident that you are engaging in the act of typing, then while it sounds odd, why not state it that way if you are of a mind to? We get used to certain ways of saying things, and when someone comes along and says a thing in a different way, it may sound strange to the ear even though it may be a valid though uncommon way of saying it. Equally, if I have a high degree of confidence in the brakes on my truck than I have faith that they will perform as they should. And I find nothing funny in saying ''I have faith in my brakes.' But maybe that's just me.
All right. Okay. I've spent more time on this then I intended to, so I am going to leave it here. I stand by what I've said in my posts on this thread whether you agree with it or not.
The New Testament gives its own definition of faith:
Hebrews 11:1
I also think it means trust. Those of us who are Jesus followers trust our Lord and follow His lead in interacting with those around us. In other words, we do not condemn the lost as lost, nor do we praise churchgoing brethren without seeing faith in action, as another poster indicated, because faith in action shows trust.
So you're saying it makes sense to say "I have faith this chair will hold me" when I sit down or "I have faith my brakes will work as I stop my car?" This just seems peculiar to me. We never talk like that in the real world.
As I said to the above poster, justification for our beliefs seems sufficient to explain why we take actions on beliefs.
In effect yes, the difference is Faith is acting not on what we want, but on what God wants. It is specific to a few things, not acts of everyday life activities that are not an issue with Him.
Our actions do not justify our faith, it demonstrates it. How do you justify sitting in a chair? You don't you believe it will hold you and demonstrate that belief by sitting in it.
No justification involved unless, a challenge has been made to your belief that the chair will hold you. Then you the results justify your belief and faithful act. The chair holds you.
Do you think the following belief-that statements make sense when the word "faith" is used?
I have faith that I am typing on the City Data forum.
I have faith that I am in my home state right now.
I have faith that mammals give live birth.
Well in the first your faith is the actof typing.
In the second faith in the State must be demonstrated in some way. A better example would be faith in a candidate is demonstrated by voting for them. Saying someone has faith in the State does not show they actually do.
On mammals, your belief is that they will give birth if they breed, faith would be having your pets breed.
Belief is something you have confidence in and Faith is the actions that demonstrate that belief, not just the words.
Someone who say I believe in Jesus and does nothing to show it, does not necessarily believe anything. They may just be trying to make their mate, children, pastor etc happy. Their faith the is that thw words will impact the people, but it has nothing to do with a real belief in Jesus.
I was a Christian for nearly twenty years, and I routinely used the word "faith" just like everyone else. But I never actually thought about what the difference is between faith and belief. What do you think it is?
Personally, I think faith is simply a belief that is not entirely sensitive to the evidence. Consider the following:
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to situations where we have belief but don't have knowledge. I believe things that I don't know all the time, and I simply call that "belief."
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to beliefs about things that can't be seen. I have beliefs about oxygen, chemistry, nuclear forces, etc. that I wouldn't describe as faith.
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to beliefs that exist in situations that could go "either way." In nearly every other scenario, I just call these beliefs "beliefs".
Just to be clear, "belief" simply means something I hold to be true. I believe that I am typing on the City Data forum right now, and I believe my wife thinks I'm good-looking. Anything we hold to be true, whether justified or not, is a belief. If you hold the tenets of Christianity to be true, why do you call it a matter of faith?
The only explanation that seems plausible to me is that "faith" refers to beliefs that we arrive at through alternative epistemological routes. In other words, we don't arrive at faith simply by analyzing the evidence, as we do in most cases of belief. If that is true, why is faith a good thing? Shouldn't we aim for ordinary belief?
I've generally defined faith in the religious context as "living as though what you believe is true, while acknowledging that it might not be." By taking the evidence and reasonable inferences as far as I can, I've reached a conviction - belief - that Christianity as I understand it is true. I don't think I've arrived at my religious beliefs through an alternative epistemological route at all; I simply acknowledge that I can't know the truth of metaphysical beliefs in the same way I can know things that are entirely within my human frame of reference. Acting upon my beliefs, living as though they were true, is faith. Since an atheist cannot know to a certainty that there is no God, I would say that by living as though there is no God an atheist demonstrates equivalent faith. An atheist may be affronted by the term faith, so perhaps we could substitute trust. For some reason, every time I post this definition on a Christian forum it receives a cold shoulder, as though it were a completely inadequate understanding of faith. Many Christians seem to equate faith with "freedom from doubt" or something like that.
The most commonly cited Bible verse, Hebrews 11:6, is confusing in this regard: "And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him." Is belief equivalent to faith? Is faith belief to the elimination of all doubt? I don't think so. I think faith is simply living out your beliefs while acknowledging you lack certainty they are true.
Interesting. Could you explain? Did you have faith in X even if you didn't believe X? If so, did you act on X at the time? I can't imagine acting on a premise I didn't even believe to be true.
My belief is faith doesn't require proof, belief does. Often in life we are required to have faith in others, this is also true with god.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
