How new atheist mischaracterize the nature of faith (VIDEO)
- Thread starter valet
- Start date
Fillerguy
Veteran
They're talking about different kinds of faith. That fat dude knows damn well religious faith, Christian faith, is different than faith in general. Its much more than trusting God/Jesus. We can have faith in people, clean air and the Knicks but that faith isnt analogous to Faith in God. Its a lifestyle, a world view, an acceptance of certain "truths" about the world we live it. Christian faith isnt some inclination, its something you do...........or thats how many outside onlookers and theologians define religious faith.
Laypeople use faith/belief as if it they the same word when they really arent.
Laypeople use faith/belief as if it they the same word when they really arent.
I agree with fillerguy.
There are different contexts in which people will use faith. Say, for example, you question a Christian on the validity of the Noah's Ark story, they might say they realize its highly improbable that Noah collected two of each type of animal, and there was a world-wide flood, but they have faith that the story is true.
What they mean by faith there is completely different than what Dawkins might have meant when he said he had faith in his wife or faith in scientists in other fields. It's important to understand the difference.
See, Dawkins faith in his wife is based on the fact that he's known his wife for years... he knows her character. His judgement that she isn't cheating on him is based on a reasonable assessment of his experiences with her. His faith in scientists in other fields is based on his understanding on the scientific process. How there's constant critique and review of new hypotheses and ideas, so not every "theory" (in the laymens sense) is not just accepted as fact. It has to be supported by evidence. Not only that, but we have centuries worth of evidence of how this process of scientific peer review is the single most reliable tool humans have to determine what's true about the universe. Dawkins' faith is supported by actual evidence.
But when you talk about a Christian's faith that, say, Moses parted the Red Sea, there's no real reason to think such a thing did or could have happened. The only reason I can come up with as to why someone would do this is they've already decided that the Bible is a reliable source of information, so they are willing to believe the ridiculous bits as well, just cause.
There are different contexts in which people will use faith. Say, for example, you question a Christian on the validity of the Noah's Ark story, they might say they realize its highly improbable that Noah collected two of each type of animal, and there was a world-wide flood, but they have faith that the story is true.
What they mean by faith there is completely different than what Dawkins might have meant when he said he had faith in his wife or faith in scientists in other fields. It's important to understand the difference.
See, Dawkins faith in his wife is based on the fact that he's known his wife for years... he knows her character. His judgement that she isn't cheating on him is based on a reasonable assessment of his experiences with her. His faith in scientists in other fields is based on his understanding on the scientific process. How there's constant critique and review of new hypotheses and ideas, so not every "theory" (in the laymens sense) is not just accepted as fact. It has to be supported by evidence. Not only that, but we have centuries worth of evidence of how this process of scientific peer review is the single most reliable tool humans have to determine what's true about the universe. Dawkins' faith is supported by actual evidence.
But when you talk about a Christian's faith that, say, Moses parted the Red Sea, there's no real reason to think such a thing did or could have happened. The only reason I can come up with as to why someone would do this is they've already decided that the Bible is a reliable source of information, so they are willing to believe the ridiculous bits as well, just cause.