Illogical world

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

Um... that's really what faith is.

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

[anonymous attributes]

The Legendary Guest

Dieu des hommes

The Herald of War

It isn't just faith, especially not in the religious sense, if you have other reasons.

I think he's just a troll.

Same feeling here. He just deleted a post he made quoting me saying that God would be a source of moral absolutes. Maybe he doesn't want to give away his true intentions so soon, probably wants to brew everything a bit more and bring in more people. Definitely stinks of some kind of religious troll.

anonymous attributes
Join date: 09.22.14
Posts: 12
Friends: 0

I say it's a Poe, engaging in inane solipsistic burbling.

My argument is about atheists and what atheism logically amounts to. I argue from the atheistic perspective "logically"

Unfortunately, everyone who says those kinds of things like you did haven't made an argument or if they did, they lost because they aren't being logical.

If you had anything to say in regard to the actual conversation, you would say it. Ive seen you in other forums making arguments. You're capable of making arguments just like any other, but it doesn't mean you have an answer as to the truth of the matter.

I challenge you to disprove my OP or my arguments.

I also will be making another forum post in the future showing all the illogical reasoning and lies behind atheist and the "scientific" community. I have quotations on "scientific" because that word ought to mean a certain thing, but it really is a fluctuating word that means what ever you need it to be at the time as far as atheism goes.

It will be fun, look out for my upcoming forum posts in the future because I look forward to having you there and debating with you. Take care now. smile

[Divine_Malevolence]

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

You're implying that there's any belief that isn't based on proof when it comes to rationality.
Hint:
There isn't any.

[anonymous attributes]

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

Um... that's really what faith is.

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

If the object or subject is unknown for certain, then it is neither proven true, nor is it faith either, as you say, since you must have complete trust or confidence in it for it to be so called faith.

And who has complete utter faith in something? not even Christians can claim that, the bible says that no one is perfect, even in that respect. Christians die for their faith, Islamists die for theirs, atheists die in theirs. On what basis is something considered complete utter faith? when they die for it? Dont tell me people haven't died for these, or die in them not willing to believe anything else. That would be intellectually dishonest.

You would be saying that religious folk have no doubts. Everyone has doubts no matter what their belief is. That definition is false and no definition can prove true without an absolute truth, such as God.

Who decides if someone has complete faith in something? the very definition is deceiving!

You guys crack me up, always trying to be inbetweeners, and get away with it all.

It sounds like its really just a religion without a deity like Buddhism.

[anonymous attributes]

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

You're implying that there's any belief that isn't based on proof when it comes to rationality.
Hint:
There isn't any.

Rationality is subjective in the atheistic community, you have no absolute truth or God to tell you what is rational or not.


WHO decides what is rational? your own fallible subjective opinion?

One man says, its rational to believe this, another says its not rational to believe it, while another says, it could be rational in the future.

Again, WHO decides what is rational? your own fallible subjective opinion?

[The Herald of War]

Suicidesoldier#1

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

Um... that's really what faith is.

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

But you can have evidence. Not absolute proof, but that doesn't mean the belief isn't based on proof at all.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

You're implying that there's any belief that isn't based on proof when it comes to rationality.
Hint:
There isn't any.

Uh... no, I'm implying you can't know anything for sure, and thus we all use faith in our lives for everything.

In the immortal words of Socrates "All I know, is that I know nothing."

[Suicidesoldier#1]

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

Um... that's really what faith is.

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

But you can have evidence. Not absolute proof, but that doesn't mean the belief isn't based on proof at all.

Evidence which is equally to any other evidence, including nothing. It can seem reasonable, but what is reasonable is based on our perceptions which are equally relative and easily distorted. Not to say we should be dismissive of evidence, but it's still clearly in many situations not concrete.

The evidence might just be wrong or there may some flaw we glossed over initially with it; believing it to be true is the problem, less so the issue of whether or not that evidence is even valid. Even if we ignore the over-all idea of being in the matrix or a dream or what have you.

[The Herald of War]

Suicidesoldier#1

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

Um... that's really what faith is.

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

But you can have evidence. Not absolute proof, but that doesn't mean the belief isn't based on proof at all.

Evidence which is equally to any other evidence, including nothing.

Justify that it's equal to nothing.

Quote:

It can seem reasonable, but what is reasonable is based on our perceptions which are equally relative and easily distorted. Not to say we should be dismissive of evidence, but it's still clearly in many situations not concrete.

And yet it is still evidence. Thereby meaning the definition doesn't apply.

Quote:

The evidence might just be wrong or there may some flaw we glossed over initially with it; believing it to be true is the problem, less so the issue of whether or not that evidence is even valid. Even if we ignore the over-all idea of being in the matrix or a dream or what have you.

I don't see anything in the definition of faith that says 'And no evidence can ever be right'.

[Divine_Malevolence]

Suicidesoldier#1

Uh... no, I'm implying you can't know anything for sure, and thus we all use faith in our lives for everything.

In the immortal words of Socrates "All I know, is that I know nothing."

Except you don't.
Not knowing something doesn't mean you need faith.


At all.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

Divine_Malevolence

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

But you can have evidence. Not absolute proof, but that doesn't mean the belief isn't based on proof at all.

Evidence which is equally to any other evidence, including nothing.

Justify that it's equal to nothing.

Quote:

It can seem reasonable, but what is reasonable is based on our perceptions which are equally relative and easily distorted. Not to say we should be dismissive of evidence, but it's still clearly in many situations not concrete.

And yet it is still evidence. Thereby meaning the definition doesn't apply.

Quote:

The evidence might just be wrong or there may some flaw we glossed over initially with it; believing it to be true is the problem, less so the issue of whether or not that evidence is even valid. Even if we ignore the over-all idea of being in the matrix or a dream or what have you.

I don't see anything in the definition of faith that says 'And no evidence can ever be right'.

Um... the definition of faith is irrelevant to this, but, I'm saying everything is based on faith. You have faith that the evidence is accurate, but ultimately it could be wrong. Therefore your evidence is interesting, but it doesn't make it any more right. It's something you have faith in, which you build on to improve your argument or position, but there's still the faith in it being accurate, which you don't really know for sure.

At the end of the day, it still comes down to what you believe. The definition of faith, in the vague sense of doing something without evidence, still maintains the fact that the evidence needs to concrete, solid, factual. Because you can't prove that, the evidence is just conjecture. Believing something with crappy proof for instance is still based on faith, since you have faith in the evidence.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Divine_Malevolence

Suicidesoldier#1

Uh... no, I'm implying you can't know anything for sure, and thus we all use faith in our lives for everything.

In the immortal words of Socrates "All I know, is that I know nothing."

Except you don't.
Not knowing something doesn't mean you need faith.


At all.

You're right, not knowing something means I don't need faith to not know something.

But you do need it to think you know something. xp

[The Herald of War]

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

Quote:

Um... the definition of faith is irrelevant to this,

Haha, yeah, sure, whatever. Ignore what I first commented on.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

Quote:

Um... the definition of faith is irrelevant to this,

Haha, yeah, sure, whatever. Ignore what I first commented on.

Ignore the rest of my comment. emo

But the definition of faith is a matter of semantics, with a variety of different definitions for it, so it's kind of more or less irrelevant what the exact definition is, which was the original point of my post.