Penguin Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. What separates faith from wishful thinking? 1
florduh Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Mark Twain nailed it when he said, "Faith is believing what you know ain't so."
Geezer Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Faith is based on emotion not evidence. It is essentially the willingness to believe something another party tells you is true, without requiring them to provide evidence that supports their supposition. 1
mymistake Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Faith is giving your bank account number to the retired vice president of Nigeria who contacted you by e-mail. 2
Guest Furball Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - BenjaminFranklin 2
ironhorse Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle
mymistake Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle Yes, there is no empirical evidence that your God exists. The idea is without foundation. Only the people who assume it is true can delude themselves into thinking that they hear or sense God. 3
duderonomy Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle Have you met my friend Zeus? They say it's a myth, but we know the truth, don't we. ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeus
sdelsolray Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. What separates faith from wishful thinking? Based on that definition, there is little difference, if any. According to that definition, faith is two things: 1) "substance of things hoped for" - wishful thinking but limited to "things". 2) "evidence of things not seen" - faith itself (i.e., wishful thinking for things), is evidence for things not seen. Note the "things" thing again. To make sense, the expression or communication from one who holds religious faith (according to this definition) is supposed to act as evidence of things for which there is no empirical evidence. Cute, isn't it? Of course, the secular definition of "faith" is quite different.
sdelsolray Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle Imagination is very powerful. 3
FreeThinkerNZ Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle Ironhorse, Ironhorse, Ironhorse. Please, if you must quotemine instead of answering reasonable questions or engaging in meaningful discussion, at least check your sources. This quote was made by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Hodgson
ironhorse Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 FreeThinkerNZ , I am aware that the quote is from a line in one of Hodgson's poems. It is also a sentence in Madeleine L 'Engle's book A Wrinkle in Time. Finding similar verses or sentences in literature occurs.
Moderator TrueFreedom Posted March 16, 2015 Moderator Posted March 16, 2015 FreeThinkerNZ , I am aware that the quote is from a line in one of Hodgson's poems. It is also a sentence in Madeleine L 'Engle's book A Wrinkle in Time. Finding similar verses or sentences in literature occurs. That quote was not from A Wrinkle in Time. It was from Many Waters.
ironhorse Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 TrueFreedom, You could be correct. Many Waters is one of her A Wrinkle in Time books.
Fweethawt Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 What separates faith from wishful thinking? Children and adults alike always engage in harmless wishful thinking. The same can't be said about faith. 2
bornagainathiest Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle And some things that are believed are not true. Making some things believed to be seen... untrue. Faith alone offers no way to tell truth from untruth. For that you need facts and evidence.
duderonomy Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle And some things that are believed are not true. Making some things believed to be seen... untrue. Faith alone offers no way to tell truth from untruth. For that you need facts and evidence. BAA, to those that have faith, what they believe is true. Their faith is evidence of things not seen. Through faith those of faith have both truth and evidence. Isn't this logic true? Or is the evidence of faith outside of logic?
mymistake Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle And some things that are believed are not true. Making some things believed to be seen... untrue. Faith alone offers no way to tell truth from untruth. For that you need facts and evidence. BAA, to those that have faith, what they believe is true. Their faith is evidence of things not seen. Through faith those of faith have both truth and evidence. Isn't this logic true? Or is the evidence of faith outside of logic? Yep, but only those who agree with the Christian in question. All those other believes who are Muslim, Jewish, Hindu and so on . . . well their faith is misguided. No reason, it just is.
duderonomy Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle And some things that are believed are not true. Making some things believed to be seen... untrue. Faith alone offers no way to tell truth from untruth. For that you need facts and evidence. BAA, to those that have faith, what they believe is true. Their faith is evidence of things not seen. Through faith those of faith have both truth and evidence. Isn't this logic true? Or is the evidence of faith outside of logic? Yep, but only those who agree with the Christian in question. All those other believes who are Muslim, Jewish, Hindu and so on . . . well their faith is misguided. No reason, it just is. You think their faith is misguided, MM.
bornagainathiest Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 "Some things have to be believed to be seen." ~Madeleine L'Engle And some things that are believed are not true. Making some things believed to be seen... untrue. Faith alone offers no way to tell truth from untruth. For that you need facts and evidence. BAA, to those that have faith, what they believe is true. Their faith is evidence of things not seen. Through faith those of faith have both truth and evidence. Isn't this logic true? Or is the evidence of faith outside of logic? No Dude, it's not true. Those of faith believe they have both truth and evidence. That's not the same as actually having independently-verified evidence. Evidence doesn't become valid because you believe it is true. Evidence is only valid when independently confirmed by someone who DOES NOT share your faith in it. That's the acid test of evidence. Thanks, BAA. 2
duderonomy Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 BAA and MM, I agree actually, but you knew that. I was just trying to have a bit of fun with the whole Faith=Evidence thing.
mymistake Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 BAA and MM, I agree actually, but you knew that. I was just trying to have a bit of fun with the whole Faith=Evidence thing. Yeah, I get that you were joking around.
FreeThinkerNZ Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 FreeThinkerNZ , I am aware that the quote is from a line in one of Hodgson's poems. It is also a sentence in Madeleine L 'Engle's book A Wrinkle in Time. Finding similar verses or sentences in literature occurs. Well, aren't you lucky L'Engle gave you a little escape hatch from that one, then? Although I think since he was writing before she was, the quote should probably be attributed to him, but I get that you mine these quotes from apologetics websites where xian authors are going to be favoured. Interestingly, L'Engle was a xian universalist, whose books were banned by xian bookstores, libraries and schools. I wonder if Baptists were involved in that. Anyway, it's a simplistic little quote that doesn't really mean anything. I'm not even sure this poet and this author weren't being ironic in writing it. I'd have to read the poem and the book to find that out. In using this quote, you haven't addressed the OP, and I note that you haven't responded to the substantive critiques of your post by others, and you chose to instead address this side issue. Care to answer the question in the OP, this time without quotes or song lyrics?
Recommended Posts