Let's discuss this "Faith" thing. Faith is like the single most important thing in religion and theism in general.

It is safe to say that the basis of theism is faith.

I hear Christians for example, talk about faith a lot and they say that once you have Faith a lot of things especially in the Bible begins to make sense.

Same thing with Muslims. "Faith" in Allah makes you believe that Islam is the true religion.

But my main point is this why would faith be required to know the truth?

A lot of things we recognise as facts and truths today do not require any sort of faith whatsoever.

Does anyone need faith to know that 1 + 1 = 2?

Is faith required to make an airplane glide in the air? Or a ship remain buoyant?

Does anyone need faith to know that water + clay makes mud?

Do you need faith to accept that whatever is thrown up gets pulled back down (except held up by an external force/obstacle?)

It looks like faith is needed only when believing something that cannot be demonstrated or shown to actually be true or exist.

And that is the greatest downfall of this thing called "faith." ANYONE can believe whatever they want and CLAIM it as true based on "Faith."

Christians even call it "evidence of things not seen." Then I can claim to have a dragon in my basement/backyard. And believe it on "faith."

Faith is a good way to believe in anything but is not a reliable way of determining the truth. And it is not enough to believe claims: especially those with heavy weight as god claims based on faith alone.

If you care about the truth, Faith is not enough.

What are your thoughts?

So how did you believe you are a Nigerian?

Without passport, without any proof until u were old enough... U just heard from people called your parents and you believed.

Thats faith. You who all your life you have practiced faith ignorantly, you now come here thinking you have an iota of sense and you begin to claim to question it.

Pls go and fry dodo

My thought is faith that is not tested is like a house built on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose and the winds blew and beat against that house and it fell with a great crash. While faith that has been tested and found to be true is like a house built on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.

The wise choose their foundations carefully, while the foolish don't and tremble like satan is written to tremble because their faith has a foundation that can not weather the storm.

Ladylite:
So how did you believe you are a Nigerian?

Without passport, without any proof until u were old enough... U just heard from people called your parents and you believed.

Yes, when I was a kid I had no means (of course!) of determining if what my parents were telling me where true or not.

However, as I grew older I can see how I am Nigerian. I don't need faith to believe I'm a Nigerian anymore because I can check my location on the map and see that I actually reside in Nigeria. I have lived in Nigeria long enough to actually be a Nigeria by naturalisation. So faith is no longer required to accept that I'm an Nigerian and that i am TRULY Nigerian.


It was the same thing with Christianity: When I was born and growing up, I accepted Christianity as the true religion, because there was no way for me to the verify the authenticity of the claims that it was indeed a true religion.

Until I was grew up and became honest enough to challenge my beliefs. After logical scrutiny and historical fact checking + a lot of critical thinking I found out that they were no good reasons for me to believe that the Christian faith was the true religion OR that it was even good or moral OR that it had enough evidence to warrant my belief in it's god.

Ladylite:

Thats faith. You who all your life you have practiced faith ignorantly, you now come here thinking you have an iota of sense and you begin to claim to question it.

Pls go and fry dodo

When you mean I practice faith ignorantly, it's hard to determine what you mean because I just explained Faith based on the contextual definition of it (according to religion).

Except you're saying that anyone who rejects faith as a good way of determine the truth never understood what faith really means which wood then be pointing back to the logical fallacy called the "No true Scotsman."

Read about that and why it is logically flawed

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

so I'm sorry you're going to have to do better if you want me to take your acceptance of faith as a good way of determining the truth more seriously.

budaatum:
My thought is faith that is not tested is like a house built on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose and the winds blew and beat against that house and it fell with a great crash. While faith that has been tested and found to be true is like a house built on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.

The wise choose their foundations carefully, while the foolish don't and tremble like satan is written to tremble because their faith has a foundation that can not weather the storm.

Faith doesn't like to be tested because most of the time it is not based on truth. Only what is based on truth likes to be tested.

This would explain why most religions are hostile to logical questioning and people asking questions.

If I assert that I have faith that a magical fairy in my bedroom watches over me while I sleep at night, I would become uncomfortable when someone asked me to maybe snap a photo of the fairy or something like that.

If I happened to be robbed at night for example I would look for irrational justifications to cover up my belief that perhaps the fairy was still watching over me but somehow my security got breached. Like maybe I offended it or something. (The same thing Christians do when a tragedy befalls them and they say "you let your guard down" by indulging in sin or it was "god's plan" anyway.)

Faith becomes irrelevant in the face of actual evidence because Faith has nothing to do with the truth. if anything, faith makes people care less about the truth because they can now fully believe lies based on Faith alone. And they can now justify that belief in the wrong because they accept it based on faith and claim it is sufficient.

Bacteriologist:


Faith doesn't like to be tested because most of the time it is not based on truth. Only what is based on truth likes to be tested.

The faith of some might not want to be tested. When I build a bridge based on my faith that it would carry you across the river, it better carry you across the river or it would be the last bridge I build.

budaatum:

The faith of some might not want to be tested. When I build a bridge based on my faith that it would carry you across the river, it better carry you across the river or it would be the last bridge I build.

It would also probably be the last bridge I cross. Except perhaps if I could swim.

I would rather cross a bridge that was indeed built using verified standards of construction engineering than take my chances with one built on faith.

Bacteriologist:


It would also probably be the last bridge I cross. Except perhaps if I could swim.

I would rather cross a bridge that was indeed built using verified standards of construction engineering than take my chances with one built on faith.

Oh, but mine is built on faith that all my learning about bridge building is correct and that my model and calculations works. That is testing of my faith, which I better do before sinking millions into the ground.

Faith isn't just the untested religious sort. The building on rocks is vigourously tested faith.

budaatum:

Oh, but mine is built on faith that all my learning about bridge building is correct and that my model and calculations works.

If all you have to ascertain that your learning about construction is correct is FAITH. Then it is not enough to conclude that your knowledge about construction is true or false. It would only mean that YOU believe that YOUR knowledge about construction is correct.

Your belief usually does not have anything to do with the truth. Faith does not determine or influence the truth.

budaatum:

That is testing of my faith, which I better do before sinking millions into the ground.

No, you would need to test your knowledge about buildings not test your faith. You would need to, for example, take exams and quizzes, experiment with your knowledge on a micro scale or using simulations and use that to determine if indeed what you know about bridge building is correct.

Testing your faith would mean building a real bridge first then **HOPING** that your knowledge and the manner you built the bridge in is the right one. For all we know, it may well not be. And that would be putting a lot of people at risk for their lives. So thank you for proving my point that faith can and often is flawed.

budaatum:

Faith isn't just the untested religious sort. The building on rocks is vigourously tested faith.

No, we build on rocks because we have EVIDENCE to support the fact claim that building on rocks is better than building on the air or mere sand. That's not faith. It's a rigorously tested and verified epistemic process of building stuff.


I understand that faith could very well mean things other than the definition I originally used. But that would be outside the scope of this discussion.

Bacteriologist:


If all you have to ascertain that your learning about construction is correct is FAITH. Then it is not enough to conclude that your knowledge about construction is true or false. It would only mean that YOU believe that YOUR knowledge about construction is correct.

You belittle all the work I did to acquire that learning which I now have faith in. I do not believe. My faith is so much that I know!

Bacteriologist:

Your belief usually does not have anything to do with the truth. Faith does not determine or influence the truth.

I agree. Belief is crap I create in my head and claim to is true. I tend not to have faith till I've tested and know for certain.

Bacteriologist:
No, you would need to test your knowledge about buildings not test your faith. You would need to, for example, take exams and quizzes, experiment with your knowledge on a micro scale or using simulations and use that to determine if indeed what you know about bridge building is correct.

I don't think you build bridges! I use my knowledge to write equations and build models which I vigourously test. It is only after so doing that I have a foundation for my faith.

Bacteriologist:
Testing your faith would mean building a real bridge first then

No! There is absolutely no way I would spend so much money (which likely isn't mine!), building a real bridge just to test my faith when I can test my faith with models and simulations and equations that cost a whole lot less!

Bacteriologist:
No, we build on rocks because we have EVIDENCE to support the fact claim that building on rocks is better than building on the air or mere sand. That's not faith. It's a rigorously tested and verified epistemic process of building stuff.

That, my friend, is tested rock foundation faith.

Bacteriologist:
I understand that faith could very well mean things other than the definition I originally used. But that would be outside the scope of this discussion.

So you know there is faith that is not limited to "your scope of discussion"?

Discussion is when you alone don't discuss, otherwise you are clapping with one hand.

budaatum:

So you know there is faith that is not limited to "your scope of discussion"?

Discussion is when you alone don't discuss, otherwise you are clapping with one hand.

You do understand that words do have other meanings depending on the context right?

So next time you're having a discussing about the fans of a football club. You can start talking about hand fans and electric fans. Since sticking to a particular contextual definition of a word is "clapping with one hand."

Bacteriologist:


You do understand that words do have other meanings depending on the context right?

So next time you're having a discussing about the fans of a football club. You can start talking about hand fans and electric fans. Since sticking to a particular contextual definition of a word is "clapping with one hand."

In a discussion, one person does not set context unless one wishes to discuss with oneself. A discussion is a careful consideration of the views of one one discusses with. And if you checked my first response on this thread you'd see I clearly set the context of two types of faiths. A sand one, and a rock one.

Faith is not just the lack of evidence sort of faith. I bet you have faith that you will eat today because you will work for you food.

budaatum:

In a discussion, one person does not set context unless one wishes to discuss with oneself.

Yes..so when a discussion is going on about fans of a music star...you can talk about electric fans and ceiling fans because context cannot be set by a single person, especially the OP.

Also, when they're talking about iron in context of chemistry, you can go about talking about iron for pressing clothes.

And then we can see how good your logic is...

budaatum:

A discussion is a careful consideration of the views of one one discusses with. And if you checked my first response on this thread you'd see I clearly set the context of two types of faiths. A sand one, and a rock one.

Yes!! How many more thing are you going to assume I don't know about discussions and faith..so you can teach me...

budaatum:

Faith is not just the lack of evidence sort of faith. I bet you have faith that you will eat today because you will work for you food.

Yes...I knew that.. but thank you for reminding me..Ohhh and also thank you for assuming I didn't have the slightest idea what I was talking about so that you can go on and rant about your own contextual definition of faith... lol

Bacteriologist:


Yes..so when a discussion is going on about fans of a music star...you can talk about electric fans and ceiling fans because context cannot be set by a single person, especially the OP.

So, rock faith and sand faith is "electric fan and ceiling fan"?

Enjoy you "discussion".

All this wannabe nairaland atheists. You claim God does not exist but yet you scream about Him all night.

OK lets go

Bacteriologist:
Let's discuss this "Faith" thing. Faith is like the single most important thing in religion and theism in general.

It is safe to say that the basis of theism is faith.

I hear Christians for example, talk about faith a lot and they say that once you have Faith a lot of things especially in the Bible begins to make sense.

Same thing with Muslims. "Faith" in Allah makes you believe that Islam is the true religion.

You are not far from the truth uncle. Faith is tested and trusted.

Bacteriologist:
But my main point is this why would faith be required to know the truth?

A lot of things we recognise as facts and truths today do not require any sort of faith whatsoever.

Faith is believing in the truth until the truth reveals itself.

Faith is me traveling with peace airline without first testing the accuracy of the pilot and the engine because I know they have always delivered and customer service is satisfactory.

Faith is me eating my mother's meal after receiving serious scolding from her without any any fear of food poisoning.

Faith is me believing all the stories of cyanophyta, algae, thallophyta, bryophtha taught by Prof. Bacteriologist without first carrying out my own laboratory experiment to prove if he is right or wrong.

Faith is me believing that Williams Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet without actually witnessing it.

REMEMBER FAITH IS BELIEVE IN THE TRUTH UNTIL THE TRUTH REVEALS ITSELF. IF IT DOESN'T THEN IT IS NOT THE TRUTH OR IT IS NOT FAITH.

Bacteriologist:
Does anyone need faith to know that 1+1=2?

Those in nursery school and Montessori needs faith to know that 1+1=2 until they discover it for themselves by bringing together many bottle crowns and start doing the mathematics at home. Or after series of failures.

But this is just one side of the story.

On the other side, how can we verify that 1+1=2? Is it because we were taught in school or because it is generally accepted by all?

By the way who was the first person to postulate that 1+1=2?

Can you please help me Prof. Bacteriologist?

Bacteriologist:
Is faith required to make an airplane glide in the air? Or a ship remain buoyant?

Orville and Wilbur Wright believe their own special metal can fly even when it seems impossible for metals to fly. But When all necessary skills and tools were put into work their metal actually flew.

So you see faith is believing in the qualities of that metal until the metal prove itself.

Same principle for the ship.

Bacteriologist:
Does anyone need faith to know that water + clay makes mud?

By faith I believe water plus clay makes mud because I believe my chemistry teacher in secondary school even if I haven't verified it myself.

Bacteriologist:
Do you need faith to accept that whatever is thrown up gets pulled back down (except held up by an external force/obstacle?)

I won't risk throwing anything up if I don't believe it will come down.

Bacteriologist:
It looks like faith is needed only when believing something that cannot be demonstrated or shown to actually be true or exist.

Please I want you to demonstrate the working of the Human Mind and I want you to actually show me the mind and where it exists in the body like other body parts.

Bacteriologist:
And that is the greatest downfall of this thing called "faith." ANYONE can believe whatever they want and CLAIM it as true based on "Faith."

Christians even call it "evidence of things not seen." Then I can claim to have a dragon in my basement/backyard. And believe it on "faith."

Dinosaurs were not real until paleontologist started discovering fossils.

Do not be in a hurry brother, just wait for the dragon episode to unfold.

Bacteriologist:
Faith is a good way to believe in anything but is not a reliable way of determining the truth. And it is not enough to believe claims: especially those with heavy weight as god claims based on faith alone.

You don't use faith to determine truth. You use faith to draw to the truth or wait for the truth until it exposes itself. I want you to get this clarification bro.

Bacteriologist:
If you care about the truth, Faith is not enough.

of course bro faith without work or logic is dead.

That's why God has not sealed our brains and freewill because He wants us to investigate Him not only by faith but also by Logic. And up till now God is correct and with the way things are He will not be found guilty of all His claims and actions.

I agree with you on this one, if you care about the truth, faith is not enough. In other words faith without works is dead.

Bacteriologist:
What are your thoughts?

These are my thoughts prof. Bacteriologist. But I know this will be another circle of argument but be careful because I don't do insults.

Do make sure to respond with sentences that ends with a question mark(?) as I'm open to learning, corrections and suggestions.

Thanks.

God bless.

CaveAdullam:
All this wannabe nairaland atheists. You claim God does not exist but yet you scream about Him all night.

"Wannabe." you have barely got through the first line of your comment and I get an insult. Even though you're someone who "doesn't do insults."

Lol...you haven't even got off from the start and your dishonesty is hanging out in the air like a thread. Smh

so perhaps if religious people stopped trying to control the lives of non-religious people we would be happy to let them ride down their mythology and fairy talish god to the moon and back.

god is not real but religions are and religion will never stop trying to impose its own views of morality on even people who don't accept it(Blasphemy laws, Homophobia, Anti-abortion etc) . So that is why we must talk about it.

Also, I don't see doctors not talk about cancer because they don't have cancer.

So the fact that we don't practice religion doesn't mean we can't talk down against it. So... AGAIN RIGHT up FROM the START we have got a whole lot of fallacies and strawmans to deal with..lmao but hey it is something I expect from virtually every theists out there. Grabbing at straws.

CaveAdullam:

OK lets goYou are not far from the truth uncle. Faith is tested and trusted.

Wrong. You don't need faith to believe things that are tested and trusted. You don't need Faith to believe that an electric bulb that has been "TESTED and TRUSTED" will start working immediately it is plugged in.

How difficult is that?

Think about that for a second dude.

CaveAdullam:

Faith is believing in the truth until the truth reveals itself.

yeah so now even if you just contradicted the statement you made up^^ there you're now starting to get the gist. Faith is believing in something that has no reason whatsoever to justify itself as true. So again you're proving my point, with faith you can believe in ANYTHING you want.

There's this thing? Yes.
Does it have evidence? No.
Can it be tested? No.
Can it be trusted? No.
Is it the truth? We don't know yet.
Then can we believe it and claim it as true? Yes ONLY by faith.

There is absolutely NOTHING that cannot be believed on Faith grounds...and this is what I've classified as the biggest downfall of faith. So you might want to go through my original post again to avoid making me repeat myself unnecessarily.

CaveAdullam:

Faith is me traveling with peace airline without first testing the accuracy of the pilot and the engine because I know they have always delivered and customer service is satisfactory.

No... actually on the flight you can ask for the authenticity of the pilots to fly plane. You can demand EVIDENCE that the pilot is indeed qualified to fly the plane. That is not Faith. Faith is RECOGNISING that there is NO EVIDENCE for something and still believing it anyway.

So you asked for the evidence that the pilot is able/qualified to fly the plane. And he cannot provide it. But you board it anyway. That is FAITH.

Dude take ALL the time you need to internalise that.

CaveAdullam:

Faith is me eating my mother's meal after receiving serious scolding from her without any any fear of food poisoning.

That faith is entrusted in the knowledge that your mum has been serving the food right after scolding you and she never for once poisoned it. That is the evidence you need to warrant the trust that she's not going to poison your food the next time she gives you one.


The real faith would be having a mother who reportedly poisons people after scolding them i.e you have NO REASON to justify that she's not going to poison your food (because she has done that a lot of times in the past) and you still go on to eat that food right after scolding you. That's faith. Hmm.... Is it difficult?


Again take ALL the time you need to understand this.

CaveAdullam:


Faith is me believing all the stories of cyanophyta, algae, thallophyta, bryophtha taught by Prof. Bacteriologist without first carrying out my own laboratory experiment to prove if he is right or wrong.

AGAIN.....DUDE the EVIDENCE FOR the classification of plants is readily available upon demand. You can go out there and ask a botanist why plants are classified like they are lol.(and oh...microbiologists don't teach about plant life so you're also wrong there. But I understand your ignorance about science).

CaveAdullam:

Faith is me believing that Williams Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet without actually witnessing it.

Wrong again. Not actually witnessing something doesn't make it automatically false. we will still need to investigate, look for records, historical findings that points to the fact that William Shakespeare did write the books even though we didn't see him do it.

You do not get to automatically conclude that you have Faith when you have not even looked for the evidence that William Shakespeare did write those books and you did not find it.

Faith would be not finding any evidence to justify that he did write those books and still going on to believe that William wrote those books.

How many times have I defined faith now?

Keep that in füčking mind.

CaveAdullam:


REMEMBER FAITH IS BELIEVE IN THE TRUTH UNTIL THE TRUTH REVEALS ITSELF. IF IT DOESN'T THEN IT IS NOT THE TRUTH OR IT IS NOT FAITH.

I am interested in how you can believe the "truth" when the "truth" is yet unknown??

so how did you know that it is the truth when this truth has not revealed itself? FOR FüçK SAKE DUDE how could you conclude that you're believing in the truth when you, yourself just admitted that the truth has not revealed itself?

HOW CAN I EVEN REMOTELY KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH LOOKS LIKE OR WHAT THE TRUTH SOOOOOUNDS LIKE WHEN I HAVE ZERO IDEA WHAT THE TRUTH IS?

NAIRALAND WHERE'S THE FACE PALM EMOJI?

Dude you need to learn logic. Its going to be a total waste of time continuing this discussion because I cannot believe you just said that bullshït up there. For god füčking sake

CaveAdullam:

Those in nursery school and Montessori needs faith to know that 1+1=2 until they discover it for themselves by bringing together many bottle crowns and start doing the mathematics at home. Or after series of failures.
But this is just one side of the story.

Yes, we tell them first then we SHOW them EVIDENCE 1+1=2. We DEMONSTRATE it. We PROVE it. God dude! So that they can now believe based on evidence and not Faith. because we know very well that FAITH is NOT a reliable past to knowledge or truth. FOR FÜÇKS SAKE DUDE

CaveAdullam:

On the other side, how can we verify that 1+1=2? Is it because we were taught in school or because it is generally accepted by all?

Jesus FÜÇKING CHRIST!! YOU JUST ADMITTED THAT WE VERIFY HOW 1 + 1 = 2 FOR KIDS

AND

YOU COME BACK TO ASK ME HOW WE CAN VERIFY THAT 1+1 = 2?

Ok...Cave...go ask the kids. Because they now definitely are more intelligent than you.

CaveAdullam:

By the way who was the first person to postulate that 1+1=2?

Can you please help me Prof. Bacteriologist?

Why would that be important to the fact that FAITH is NOT required to believe mathematical equations that have evidence and can be proved?,

Jesus what's your IQ..11??

CaveAdullam:

Orville and Wilbur Wright believe their own special metal can fly even when it seems impossible for metals to fly. But When all necessary skills and tools were put into work their metal actually flew.
So you see faith is believing in the qualities of that metal until the metal prove itself.

Now this is the closest thing to a statement of logical reasoning that you have said throughout your reply.

The Wright brothers believed that a metal shaped in a particular kind of way could fly. They had faith in it and then went on to prove it. And so faith was no longer required. They put in work to prove their claims and that is why it is accepted by sane minds. BECAUSE FAITH IS NOT ENOUGH.

CaveAdullam:


Same principle for the ship.

By faith I believe water plus clay makes mud because I believe my chemistry teacher in secondary school even if I haven't verified it myself.

SO let me guess you're living in Antarctica and that is why you have never seen clay and water get mixed to form mud

Folks this is why religion is a cancer. Can you imagine the level of dishonesty and a logical reasoning from this guy. Claims to never have seen clay mix with water. Smh

I am basically laughing my ass off right now.

CaveAdullam:
[s]
I won't risk throwing anything up if I don't believe it will come down.

Please I want you to demonstrate the working of the Human Mind and I want you to actually show me the mind and where it exists in the body like other body parts.

Dinosaurs were not real until paleontologist started discovering fossils.

Do not be in a hurry brother, just wait for the dragon episode to unfold. [/s]

Dude YOU ARE SICK.

CaveAdullam:

You don't use faith to determine truth. You use faith to draw to the truth or wait for the truth until it exposes itself. I want you to get this clarification bro.

of course bro faith without work or logic is dead.

I'm NOT YOUR BRO. Yes, faith can be useful when there's NO truth. When there's NO evidence.

I do get the clarification. It is YOU who is throwing words around sheepishly to look cool and justify your obvious ingenuity.

CaveAdullam:

That's why God has not sealed our brains and freewill because He wants us to investigate Him not only by faith but also by Logic. And up till now God is correct and with the way things are He will not be found guilty of all His claims and actions.

I am pretty much certain that your brain is sealed mate.

CaveAdullam:


I agree with you on this one, if you care about the truth, faith is not enough. In other words faith without works is dead.

Oh finally you get to agree with me on something.

Faith without works is dead.

But works without faith is not dead.

Faith - Works = Dead. Nothing. Zero. Zilch.

Works - Faith = Not Dead.

Faith = 0
And works >0

Therefore faith is useless.

So faith is useless.

CaveAdullam:

These are my thoughts prof. Bacteriologist. But I know this will be another circle of argument but be careful because I don't do insults.

Oh Hallelujah! can't believe I've come to the end. I felt like I lost like 10 IQ points trying to reason with you. You can be very sure that will never happen again.

I don't do insults but right off the bat of your reply comes an insult. Got to love.your godly honesty and humility right there...innit dude...lmao

CaveAdullam:


[s]
Do make sure to respond with sentences that ends with a question mark(?) as I'm open to learning, corrections and suggestions. [/s]

You do not have the right to tell people what you think they should and their sentences with. and I certainly wouldn't be taking orders from you because if anything you have justified the fact that you need a lot of studying to do.

CaveAdullam:


Thanks.

God bless.

You gave me a good laugh replying to you nonsensical post. But I loved it anyway.

Please try to read something other than the Bible. You DEFINITELY need it.

CaveAdullam:
Faith is believing in the truth until the truth reveals itself.

Faith is me traveling with peace airline without first testing the accuracy of the pilot and the engine because I know they have always delivered and customer service is satisfactory.

Faith is me eating my mother's meal after receiving serious scolding from her without any any fear of food poisoning.

Faith is me believing all the stories of cyanophyta, algae, thallophyta, bryophtha taught by Prof. Bacteriologist without first carrying out my own laboratory experiment to prove if he is right or wrong.

Faith is me believing that Williams Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet without actually witnessing it.

REMEMBER FAITH IS BELIEVE IN THE TRUTH UNTIL THE TRUTH REVEALS ITSELF. IF IT DOESN'T THEN IT IS NOT THE TRUTH OR IT IS NOT FAITH.

Faith is what you use when you have no evidence to back your claims.

The fallacy you are using is called, an EQUIVOCATION FALLACY.

Equivocation happens when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to confuse, deceive, or mislead by sounding like it’s saying one thing but actually saying something else.

Your faith is nothing like the trust we have, based on experience and data.

More bullshit from a theist.

CaveAdullam:
Orville and Wilbur Wright believe their own special metal can fly even when it seems impossible for metals to fly. But When all necessary skills and tools were put into work their metal actually flew.

So you see faith is believing in the qualities of that metal until the metal prove itself.

Oh my, you just stepped into my wheelhouse. The Wright brothers did not use any faith, in fact, they studied their predecessors, they rigorously tested everything about flight before attempting to do so. They built and tested their own engine. The built a wind tunnel to verify the aerodynamics, they built and flew kites, and the entire process was one of checking and verifying everything before moving onto the next step.

CaveAdullam:
That's why God has not sealed our brains and freewill because He wants us to investigate Him not only by faith but also by Logic. And up till now God is correct and with the way things are He will not be found guilty of all His claims and actions.

You seem to know a lot about the qualities of your god. I have a question, why do some innocent children suffer horribly and die from cancer?



E/ FYI, Shakespeare was actually an Italian immigrant called Crollalanza. Shakespeare is just the English translation of that name. Why do you think so many of his plays are set in Italy?

But your example is silly in any case. It's like the tired old canard trotted out by creationists to "prove" that evolution never happened because nobody was there to see it. We can know about the past without faith simply by studying and interpreting the evidence.

Faith is earned. We gain faith in people when they keep their promises, help us in times of need, and never betray our trust. By that criterion, your imaginary friend is completely unworthy of faith. Every prayer has gone unanswered. Good people and innocent children have been abandoned to die of disease and disasters. All the money donated to god's churches goes straight into the pockets of priests and preachers.

I knew it another circle of arguments.

Yawns.

Bacteriologist:


"Wannabe." you have barely got through the first line of your comment and I get an insult. Even though you're someone who "doesn't do insults."

Lol...you haven't even got off from the start and your dishonesty is hanging out in the air like a thread. Smh

if wannabe sounds offensive to you, I'm sorry bro. No pun intended.

Bacteriologist:
so perhaps if religious people stopped trying to control the lives of non-religious people we would be happy to let them ride down their mythology and fairy talish god to the moon and back.

god is not real but religions are and religion will never stop trying to impose its own views of morality on even people who don't accept it(Blasphemy laws, Homophobia, Anti-abortion etc) . So that is why we must talk about it.

Also, I don't see doctors not talk about cancer because they don't have cancer.

So the fact that we don't practice religion doesn't mean we can't talk down against it. So... AGAIN RIGHT up FROM the START we have got a whole lot of fallacies and strawmans to deal with..lmao but hey it is something I expect from virtually every theists out there. Grabbing at straws.

And it is our duty also to turn the eyes of you and your likes to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Bacteriologist:
Wrong. You don't need faith to believe things that are tested and trusted. You don't need Faith to believe that an electric bulb that has been "TESTED and TRUSTED" will start working immediately it is plugged in.

How difficult is that?

Think about that for a second dude.

Faith is believing in the electric bulb to bring out light even when it has not be tested by you.

If you have no idea of light why did you purchase it?

Bacteriologist:
yeah so now even if you just contradicted the statement you made up^^ there you're now starting to get the gist. Faith is believing in something that has no reason whatsoever to justify itself as true. So again you're proving my point, with faith you can believe in ANYTHING you want.

There's this thing? Yes.
Does it have evidence? No.
Can it be tested? No.
Can it be trusted? No.
Is it the truth? We don't know yet.
Then can we believe it and claim it as true? Yes ONLY by faith.

There is absolutely NOTHING that cannot be believed on Faith grounds...and this is what I've classified as the biggest downfall of faith. So you might want to go through my original post again to avoid making me repeat myself unnecessarily.

I am still waiting for the evidence of the Human Mind that has been demonstrated, proven to be actually true like other parts of the body.

Bacteriologist:
No... actually on the flight you can ask for the authenticity of the pilots to fly plane. You can demand EVIDENCE that the pilot is indeed qualified to fly the plane. That is not Faith. Faith is RECOGNISING that there is NO EVIDENCE for something and still believing it anyway.

So you asked for the evidence that the pilot is able/qualified to fly the plane. And he cannot provide it. But you board it anyway. That is FAITH.

Dude take ALL the time you need to internalise that.

And in your mind a proselyte cannot forge the qualifications of a pilot.

Mtcheeeeew.

Bacteriologist:
That faith is entrusted in the knowledge that your mum has been serving the food right after scolding you and she never for once poisoned it. That is the evidence you need to warrant the trust that she's not going to poison your food the next time she gives you one.


The real faith would be having a mother who reportedly poisons people after scolding them i.e you have NO REASON to justify that she's not going to poison your food (because she has done that a lot of times in the past) and you still go on to eat that food right after scolding you. That's faith. Hmm.... Is it difficult?


Again take ALL the time you need to understand this.





[quote author=Bacteriologist post=85962860] AGAIN.....DUDE the EVIDENCE FOR the classification of plants is readily available upon demand. You can go out there and ask a botanist why plants are classified like they are lol.(and oh...microbiologists don't teach about plant life so you're also wrong there. But I understand your ignorance about science).

if you say so.

Bacteriologist:
Wrong again. Not actually witnessing something doesn't make it automatically false. we will still need to investigate, look for records, historical findings that points to the fact that William Shakespeare did write the books even though we didn't see him do it.

You do not get to automatically conclude that you have Faith when you have not even looked for the evidence that William Shakespeare did write those books and you did not find it.

Faith would be not finding any evidence to justify that he did write those books and still going on to believe that William wrote those books.

How many times have I defined faith now?

Keep that in füčking mind.

Faith is first believing he wrote those books then work is then needed to acertian if this is the real truth.

So again faith without work/logic is dead.

Bacteriologist:
I am interested in how you can believe the "truth" when the "truth" is yet unknown??

The same way you believe in the woman who you mother even if you didn't witness your delivery from her womb.

Right from childhood you have believed her to be your mother which is faith, based on your works/logic/common sense I guess you have proved it to be the truth.

Bacteriologist:
so how did you know that it is the truth when this truth has not revealed itself? FOR FüçK SAKE DUDE how could you conclude that you're believing in the truth when you, yourself just admitted that the truth has not revealed itself?

HOW CAN I EVEN REMOTELY KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH LOOKS LIKE OR WHAT THE TRUTH SOOOOOUNDS LIKE WHEN I HAVE ZERO IDEA WHAT THE TRUTH IS?

NAIRALAND WHERE'S THE FACE PALM EMOJI?

Dude you need to learn logic. Its going to be a total waste of time continuing this discussion because I cannot believe you just said that bullshït up there. For god füčking sake

Truth is already there, it is not unknown, it is left for you to discover it yourself. You use faith to draw to the truth in your works. If it not what it proclaims after doing necessary work and holding good faith then it was never the truth.

I can't explain this any further if you are unable to comprehend.

Bacteriologist:
Yes, we tell them first then we SHOW them EVIDENCE 1+1=2. We DEMONSTRATE it. We PROVE it. God dude! So that they can now believe based on evidence and not Faith. because we know very well that FAITH is NOT a reliable past to knowledge or truth. FOR FÜÇKS SAKE DUDE





Jesus FÜÇKING CHRIST!! YOU JUST ADMITTED THAT WE VERIFY HOW 1 + 1 = 2 FOR KIDS

AND

YOU COME BACK TO ASK ME HOW WE CAN VERIFY THAT 1+1 = 2?

Ok...Cave...go ask the kids. Because they now definitely are more intelligent than you.

Listen to the two sides of my claim.

Bacteriologist:
Why would that be important to the fact that FAITH is NOT required to believe mathematical equations that have evidence and can be proved?,

Jesus what's your IQ..11??



Now this is the closest thing to a statement of logical reasoning that you have said throughout your reply.

The Wright brothers believed that a metal shaped in a particular kind of way could fly. They had faith in it and then went on to prove it. And so faith was no longer required. They put in work to prove their claims and that is why it is accepted by sane minds. BECAUSE FAITH IS NOT ENOUGH.

My stance still remains faith and work. If you know you know.

Bacteriologist:
SO let me guess you're living in Antarctica and that is why you have never seen clay and water get mixed to form mud

Folks this is why religion is a cancer. Can you imagine the level of dishonesty and a logical reasoning from this guy. Claims to never have seen clay mix with water. Smh

I am basically laughing my ass off right now.

you are laughing hysterically about this fact because you think you have evidences or my claims are false. You believe it even if you don't know me except on this forum. This is Faith. But you need work in order to prove if it is the truth.

Bacteriologist:
Dude YOU ARE SICK.



I'm NOT YOUR BRO. Yes, faith can be useful when there's NO truth. When there's NO evidence.

I do get the clarification. It is YOU who is throwing words around sheepishly to look cool and justify your obvious ingenuity.




I am pretty much certain that your brain is sealed mate.




Oh finally you get to agree with me on something.

Faith without works is dead.

But works without faith is not dead.

Faith - Works = Dead. Nothing. Zero. Zilch.

Works - Faith = Not Dead.

Faith = 0
And works >0

Therefore faith is useless.

So faith is useless.

Your headache.

Bacteriologist:
Oh Hallelujah! can't believe I've come to the end. I felt like I lost like 10 IQ points trying to reason with you. You can be very sure that will never happen again.

I don't do insults but right off the bat of your reply comes an insult. Got to love.your godly honesty and humility right there...innit dude...lmao



You do not have the right to tell people what you think they should and their sentences with. and I certainly wouldn't be taking orders from you because if anything you have justified the fact that you need a lot of studying to do.




You gave me a good laugh replying to you nonsensical post. But I loved it anyway.

Please try to read something other than the Bible. You DEFINITELY need it.

A fool is always wise in his own eyes. A proverb and not intended to be an insult.

Good day bro.

Have you taken a DNA test to prove that your father is actually your father? lf you do not look so much like him for example, then why do you believe he is your father? lt is because you also operate by faith.
Without faith, so many things would be impossible even science.

Daejoyoung:
Have you taken a DNA test to prove that your father is actually your father? lf you do not look so much like him for example, then why do you believe he is your father? lt is because you also operate by faith.
Without faith, so many things would be impossible even science.

Another pitiable case of false equivocation fallacy.

Is the DNA test the only way in the world to know for certain that I am the true Son of My father?

No. I actually look like him. So I don't operate by faith. But even if I didn't, there will be certain characteristics/behaviour that is common to the both of us and that I can use as a reference point to determine my paternity.

But that still would be by the way. My main point would be:

The fact that there's a DNA test means that there is an objective method by which I can undoubtedly verify and ascertain the belief that my father actually conceived me.

Faith ON THE OTHER HAND is the only basis for people to hold beliefs that have no objective means of verifying such beliefs/claims to be true or justifiable. It is a smokescreen to believe nonsense mythology and mythical claims, accept them as true and even get others to accept those claims as true by preaching. I am not going from house to house telling people how my father is undoubtedly the one that conceived me.

There's no objective method of determining that god exists OR that the Bible is from him OR that Jesus existed and did the things the Bible claims he did OR that Christianity is true OR any other religion for that matter is true.


Religions are called "faiths" because all they have is FAITH(which fails miserably).


So You fail at making "faith" sound like what everyone does. Try harder next time with your "whataboutism."

[quote author=Tamaratonye1 post=85964020]

Oh my, you just stepped into my wheelhouse. The Wright brothers did not use any faith, in fact, they studied their predecessors, they rigorously tested everything about flight before attempting to do so. They built and tested their own engine. The built a wind tunnel to verify the aerodynamics, they built and flew kites, and the entire process was one of checking and verifying everything before moving onto the next step.

But the wright brothers already believed their work could result in something that can fly, and then they took action. What the wright brothers did is what Hebrews 11 as a whole described, it gives you examples of heroes of faith, who believed something and took bold actions that were life changing because they looked forward to and had faith in the coming of a better kingdom or what we can call a new society.
l don't believe you are against faith in itself, Tamaratonye1, rather l think you are against religious faith in particular. But religious faith is not all terrible, rather such a faith must also be tested by its fruits.

[quote author=Daejoyoung post=85965737][/quote]

Religious faith is the worst form of faith.

Religious faith:

1. Claims to know the truth without proof

2. Tries to spread falsehood as truth based on faith.

3. Turns around and condemn (some kill) people who reject it's claims because it cannot be verified but only based on feeble faith.

4. Passes laws and "moral standards" on its followers and non-followers based on claims on faith they could not even be shown to be true in the first place.

And you lot turn around and say Faith does like to be questioned. **Eyeroll**

Bacteriologist:


It would also probably be the last bridge I cross. Except perhaps if I could swim.

I would rather cross a bridge that was indeed built using verified standards of construction engineering than take my chances with one built on faith.

everything that was created started with a belief and even when the plan of that which was to be created fails it was revived and fueled by same belief/faith. including the airplane you mentioned earlier and the mathematical calculations too.
faith likes to be tested and faith works only when truely tested (not the cowardly doubt you displayed when budaatum talked about building a bridge that could cross you over), just like the bible says" faith without work is death".

read histories of men who truely brought into existence things that existed only in thier imaginations..e.g electric bulb, airplane...(even to determine the correct shape of the earth started with the belief of a man).
find your stand...you need one.

[quote author=Bacteriologist post=85965662]

The fact that there's a DNA test means that there is an objective method by which I can undoubtedly verify and ascertain the belief that my father actually conceived me.

So when there was no science of DNA test, people had no real scientific method of testing paternity, they had to believe in the testimony of their mother and they had to look for signs that made them truly believe they are children of their father. So we agree then, you don't just believe in christ and stop, you have to study it's teachings also and then test them by their fruits, in other to believe them. l think you are misunderstanding something here.

Faith ON THE OTHER HAND is the only basis for people to hold beliefs that have no objective means of verifying such beliefs/claims to be true or justifiable. It is a smokescreen to believe nonsense mythology and mythical claims, accept them as true and even get others to accept those claims as true by preaching. I am not going from house to house telling people how my father is undoubtedly the one that conceived me.

Your definition of faith is too simple. The closest to what you are saying would be like a child who believes in superman stories even though they are myths, but the child becomes very optimistic and thinks he/she also could become a hero like superman some day. Now that is the purpose of myth, myth does not always equate to falsehood in its spirit.

Daejoyoung:
Have you taken a DNA test to prove that your father is actually your father? lf you do not look so much like him for example, then why do you believe he is your father? lt is because you also operate by faith.
Without faith, so many things would be impossible even science.

And another mythology fanboy fails to understand the distinction between faith, which is nothing more than uncritical acceptance of unsupported assertions, and inference from insufficient data. The latter involves reliance upon data, even if the data is incomplete, and therefore has NO relation to "faith".

Oh, and by the way, those of us who had a proper science education, conducted experiments to verify that the postulates we were being taught were something other than the product of someone's rectal passage.

Tamaratonye1:

And another mythology fanboy fails to understand the distinction between faith, which is nothing more than uncritical acceptance of unsupported assertions, and inference from insufficient data. The latter involves reliance upon data, even if the data is incomplete, and therefore has NO relation to "faith".

Oh, and by the way, those of us who had a proper science education, conducted experiments to verify that the postulates we were being taught were something other than the product of someone's rectal passage.

ok tell me, do you believe in this statement of human rights:
We hold this truth to be self evident, that all humans are created equal

This is quoted by many liberals today. But tell me what data did they rely on to come to this conclusion?

Do you believe society could be better? why do you believe this?

l have more questions for you, but l know you have answers for these ones, so be my guest.

Truthsbitter:

everything that was created started with a belief

Prove it.

Truthsbitter:

and even when the plan of that which was to be created fails it was revived and fueled by same belief/faith.

Wrong. You're just ignorant about the scientific method. when it comes to scientific discoveries, the failed experiments are as important as the ones that worked. Because we now know what doesn't work so we cross it off the list and move on to other models and hypothesis.

Most inventions were not necessarily completed by the people who started them. A lot of them were abandoned and were only completed by people in subsequent generations.

and lastly this sort of faith is different from that of religious faith.

Truthsbitter:

including the airplane you mentioned earlier and the mathematical calculations too.
faith likes to be tested and faith works only when truely tested (not the cowardly doubt you displayed when budaatum talked about building a bridge that could cross you over),

If Faith did love to be tested the Christian church would not have murdered millions of people because they questioned the church doctrines of faith at the time.

Also, blasphemy laws would not occur in Muslim countries where people are killed for questioning the prophet Muhammad.

We also know how you loving Christians love to threaten Atheists with hell when we call out the fallacies and inconsistencies in your religions.

So contrary to what you love to say, frequent occurrences here have shown that faith does not like to be questioned. If anything it becomes hostile and violent upon questioning.

Truthsbitter:

Just like the bible says" faith without work is death".

Faith without works is death. But works without faith often brings results. So it seems like the actual useless thing here is faith.

Truthsbitter:

read histories of men who truely brought into existence things that existed only in thier imaginations..e.g electric bulb, airplane...(even to determine the correct shape of the earth started with the belief of a man).
find your stand...you need one.

I fail to see how imagination translates to Faith in my original post. It seems you lot are now shifting the goalposts to make faith look like having a creative thought.

That is not the definition of religious faith. I have said it a hundred times on this thread alone!!

Religious faith is having no reason to believe in something and still going ahead to believe in that thing and preaching that thing as true.

Surely the early scientist didn't go about telling people that they had to believe what they were imagining was true until they proved it worked and was so.



So it is you füčking christians that need to get your act together and understand my stand.

Provide evidence for your ridiculous claims because faith is simply not enough.

Tamaratonye1, faith is simply the substance of things hoped for.
We hope for a better society someday and therefore we do things to achieve that, even when it logically seems like there's no reason to.

Bacteriologist:

Prove it.



Wrong. You're just ignorant about the scientific method. when it comes to scientific discoveries, the failed experiments are as important as the ones that worked. Because we now know what doesn't work so we cross it off the list and move on to other models and hypothesis.

Most inventions were not necessarily completed by the people who started them. A lot of them were abandoned and were only completed by people in subsequent generations.

and lastly this sort of faith is different from that of religious faith.





If Faith did love to be tested the Christian church would not have murdered millions of people because they questioned the church doctrines of faith at the time.

Also, blasphemy laws would not occur in Muslim countries where people are killed for questioning the prophet Muhammad.

We also know how you loving Christians love to threaten Atheists with hell when we call out the fallacies and inconsistencies in your religions.

So contrary to what you love to say, frequent occurrences here have shown that faith does not like to be questioned. If anything it becomes hostile and violent upon questioning.




Faith without works is death. But works without faith often brings results. So it seems like the actual useless thing here is faith.



I fail to see how imagination translates to Faith in my original post. It seems you lot are now shifting the goalposts to make faith look like having a creative thought.

That is not the definition of religious faith. I have said it a hundred times on this thread alone!!

Religious faith is having no reason to believe in something and still going ahead to believe in that thing and preaching that thing as true.

Surely the early scientist didn't go about telling people that they had to believe what they were imagining was true until they proved it worked and was so.



So it is you füčking christians that need to get your act together and understand my stand.

Provide evidence for your ridiculous claims because faith is simply not enough.

Are you now the one to define religous faith for us? lt seems you already came to this discussion table with your own assumptions and you would not have it any other way? isn't that the definition of closed mindedness which some accuse religious people of?

Daejoyoung:


So when there was no science of DNA test, people had no real scientific method of testing paternity, they had to believe in the testimony of their mother and they had to look for signs that made them truly believe they are children of their father. So we agree then, you don't just believe in christ and stop, you have to study it's teachings also and then test them by their fruits, in other to believe them. l think you are misunderstanding something here.

Not so. We had other tests but they were not as accurate as the DNA testing. We had like blood testing for example. So it wasn't really dark back then.

But also that will be my point that as science continues to grow Faith becomes less necessary. Because we are always bent on providing evidence for every claim we make. There are people are always working to make sure that we are able to provide evidence for the things we claim. Because we know that faith is Not enough.

Religion on the other hand wants people to have more faith. You can go to any church and one of the key messages is to keep having Faith. Religion propagate faith and faith is often flawed.

For the last time! FAITH IS NOT A RELIABLE WAY OF DETERMINING TRUTH.

Daejoyoung:


Your definition of faith is too simple. The closest to what you are saying would be like a child who believes in superman stories even though they are myths, but the child becomes very optimistic and thinks he/she also could become a hero like superman some day. Now that is the purpose of myth, myth does not always equate to falsehood in its spirit.

No, YOU THINK my definition of faith is too simple. Thankfully, what you think doesn't change the actual definition of faith according to religion.
Lol even the definition of faith according to the Bible is simple? Being an evidence for things not seen? ot proven?

And yes I would liken faith in God to faith in Spider-Man or Superman. I mean what's the difference?

You would have to show that the spirit is real before you can make any claims based on the spirit. The last part of your comment can be rightfully discarded.

Daejoyoung:

Are you now the one to define religous faith for us? lt seems you already came to this discussion table with your own assumptions and you would not have it any other way? isn't that the definition of closed mindedness which some accuse religious people of?

No. It seems I'm not going to define faith according to what YOU THINK the definition of faith is.

In the original post I specifically highlighted the definition of faith in the Bible and used it as an explanation.

Thankfully what you like to think are not fact. And will not alter the definition of facts.

Bacteriologist:

Prove it.



Wrong. You're just ignorant about the scientific method. when it comes to scientific discoveries, the failed experiments are as important as the ones that worked. Because we now know what doesn't work so we cross it off the list and move on to other models and hypothesis.

Most inventions were not necessarily completed by the people who started them. A lot of them were abandoned and were only completed by people in subsequent generations.

and lastly this sort of faith is different from that of religious faith.





If Faith did love to be tested the Christian church would not have murdered millions of people because they questioned the church doctrines of faith at the time.

Also, blasphemy laws would not occur in Muslim countries where people are killed for questioning the prophet Muhammad.

We also know how you loving Christians love to threaten Atheists with hell when we call out the fallacies and inconsistencies in your religions.

So contrary to what you love to say, frequent occurrences here have shown that faith does not like to be questioned. If anything it becomes hostile and violent upon questioning.




Faith without works is death. But works without faith often brings results. So it seems like the actual useless thing here is faith.



I fail to see how imagination translates to Faith in my original post. It seems you lot are now shifting the goalposts to make faith look like having a creative thought.

That is not the definition of religious faith. I have said it a hundred times on this thread alone!!

Religious faith is having no reason to believe in something and still going ahead to believe in that thing and preaching that thing as true.

Surely the early scientist didn't go about telling people that they had to believe what they were imagining was true until they proved it worked and was so.



So it is you füčking christians that need to get your act together and understand my stand.

Provide evidence for your ridiculous claims because faith is simply not enough.

At the proposal of many inventions the ideas of most sciencetist was frowned at by the common men for they lacked the right belief.

i will leave it at this for i have seen your stand ...soon all your logic would probably be broken if you continue the search.
good luck