nPeace
Veteran Member
So?No, not exactly. I will agree that the definitions is a bit vague in my opinion, but I do think they cover it fine enough.
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
But the reason is that, even though I might have complete trust or confidence in someone or something, doesn't mean that it is true or correct. I can be completely confident in me being able to walk a rope 30 feet above the ground without falling. However that doesn't mean that I can actually do it, simply that I believe I can.
This makes no sense.That is not really how science works, for it to be true, using the same example, despite being a bit weird. we would say that its true if I actually did walk the rope and could keep repeat doing it. Meaning that I can demonstrate my ability to do it.
What you seem to be saying is that every scientific study is directly demonstrated to be true, and that's totally false.
Hence why nothing is proven
You don't.We don't simply trust science, they have to demonstrate that it is actually true.
You don't trust science. Say it again.
Try worming your way out of it, and see where you end up.
What do you mean by we don't have proof, and give me an example of proof say for example, in evolution theory, so that I get you clearly.2. Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.
I don't think this is wrong as this part obviously covers the religious aspect of faith. And its difficult to deny that we simply do not have proof of God and the supernatural.
I'll stay the course.In regards to the bible and the demons as you quoted:
The Bible says the demons believe, but they do not have faith.
I don't see anything wrong with this in regards to the definition, obviously the demons believe that God exist, but have no trust/confident (faith) in God.
So im sorry, I still don't see what that other faith is suppose to be?
Awaiting your response.