Reasonable Faith.

Many times I see people use the argument of faith for their belief in God. I see that as completely unreasonable, but I wanted to know what people had to say.

NOTE: I erased what I originally posted here. I was incredibly vague and people got confused as by what I was asking.

'Faith' can cover experience if I do not consider experience evidence or where I do not believe the person with whom I am conversing considers experience evidence

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence.

Click to expand...

Your definition of faith may be different from other people's.

faith (f th)n.1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs

here are a few options hopefully it will help people

As we can see from definitions 1,3,4,5 and 6 there are plenty definitions of faith that can also hold onto logical or material proof.

Here's how Hebrews 11:1 puts it: Weymouth New Testament
Now faith is a well-grounded assurance of that for which we hope, and a conviction of the reality of things which we do not see.

So, I look at it like this; if I have seen someone's work many times in the past, or have come to trust a person to live up to their word, my faith in them grows when it comes to believing that they will do something in the future. It is based on their track record.

So,even though I haven't 'seen' that of which they speak, I have faith they will fulfill that of which they speak.

It is like a guarantee of sorts. To simplify it, imagine you ordered something from Amazon. You would get a confirmation that you would receive your order. You would then have faith that you would receive, even though you obviously do not have the item in your hands yet. Based on the fact that Amazon have a track record of being faithful to their word you would have faith in them. Ie, they will deliver as promised.

And so, with faith in God, based on his track record in the Bible, on say, his protection of his people, I have faith that he will protect his people today when he says he will.

Isaiah 41:10
'Do not fear, for I am with you; Do not anxiously look about you, for I am your God. I will strengthen you, surely I will help you, Surely I will uphold you with My righteous right hand.'

tellme said:

And so, with faith in God, based on his track record in the Bible, on say, his protection of his people, I have faith that he will protect his people today when he says he will.

Click to expand...

Ummm, did you miss the flood?

I do not use the word "faith" like you do.
Faith would not come first in my thinking.
Beliefs would be the first thing I would consider.
I turn to my beliefs in how I consider and are a reference point to the "ways" of how I respond. They effect the perception I associate with in the outside world due to my thinking.
Faith is in the trust of my beliefs!
A understanding that in them it grants me a objectivity to support my world inside in out that let's me live in a good way.

mr black said:

Ummm, did you miss the flood?

Click to expand...

That's a good example of protecting his people, no?

Youtellme said:

That's a good example of protecting his people, no?

Click to expand...

Ahh no, he killed them

elmarna said:

... Faith is in the trust of my beliefs!...

Click to expand...

That's what I mean. Your belief is that God will live up to his word and your faith reassures you of this.

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence. But some people say it is reasonable. I realize this topic has been discussed a lot.
So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

don't you get tired of banging the same old drum?

I thought you had been put to rights on the other thread or do you just refuse to believe in the possibility of God on principle?

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence.

Click to expand...

As Tarasan pointed out, that's not the only definition.

So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

And that's not ANY definition. Faith is a type of belief, not a means of discovery.

nnmartin said:

don't you get tired of banging the same old drum?

I thought you had been put to rights on the other thread or do you just refuse to believe in the possibility of God on principle?

Click to expand...

Come on, seems like a legit question to me and his tone was reasonable too. Let's see where it goes eh?

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence. But some people say it is reasonable. I realize this topic has been discussed a lot. I just always get confused and wanted a centralized place to talk about it. Also thought it would make for great discussion.

So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

The faith of Abraham doesn't refer to his beliefs, but to his acting on his beliefs. His righteousness didn't come from believing God, it came from acting on those beliefs. The world is full of "believers", but for the most part they are believers in false precepts and dogmas. If they act on their false beliefs, they remain unrightous. Abraham was deemed righteous because he acted on beliefs that were instilled by Spirit of God. Apart from the Spirit of Revelation, one has no internal guide between truth and a lie. Because Abraham did God's will by following the Spirit of God within him, he became a child of God, and therefore a brother of Yeshua.

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence. But some people say it is reasonable. I realize this topic has been discussed a lot. I just always get confused and wanted a centralized place to talk about it. Also thought it would make for great discussion.

So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

People can "reason away" anything they want. It's not about reason, really - never has been. It's about want.

connermt said:

People can "reason away" anything they want. It's not about reason, really - never has been. It's about want.

Click to expand...

The explanations of faith from the faithless never fail to amuse me.

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence. But some people say it is reasonable. I realize this topic has been discussed a lot. I just always get confused and wanted a centralized place to talk about it. Also thought it would make for great discussion.

So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

The irrationality of faith-based beliefs often isn't in the logic, but in the assumptions. This is why it is often hard for people who hold unsubstantiated beliefs to see them as such. They get confused and think that their assumption is actually their conclusion.

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence. But some people say it is reasonable. I realize this topic has been discussed a lot. I just always get confused and wanted a centralized place to talk about it. Also thought it would make for great discussion.

So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

Reasonable faith covers things that are probable but possibly not true.

For example say my son went out and it is 1 in the morning and he hasn't shown up. I could assume all kinds of things and they could all be rational and logical but ultimately there is only one truth as to why whether its a friends, the hospital, jail etc.

I might even argue it could still be rational if probability is low but that would be pushing it and happens a lot with religious faith. If the probability is low does that make it unreasonable?

Daviso452 said:

I'm a bit confused. Faith by definition is without evidence. But some people say it is reasonable. I realize this topic has been discussed a lot. I just always get confused and wanted a centralized place to talk about it. Also thought it would make for great discussion.

So please explain why you use faith to determine what you believe.

Click to expand...

The line between 'faith' and 'fideism' seems to have been lost today. Faith is not necessarily beliefs without any evidence. Evidence and logic can be used to determine what is most likely (in your opinion). Then, since you think but do not know for an absolute fact, it takes faith to believe. Fideism is believing something against logic or with no concern for logic or evidence. That is actually what most people mean today when they say 'faith'.