English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Someone asked us to choose between faith and truth, and this is the answer I gave:

"Truth and faith are almost the same thing.

One is the substance, the other is the action. They're basically inseperable."

Let's try Webster, and see what he has to say about faith:

"Confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability."

How do you have faith in another's ability without seeing what they can do (learning the truth of their ability)?

For those of you Christians who disagree, how strong is your faith when you find out the truth compels you to abandon what you believe?

For those of you non-Christians who disagree, how can you define a faith you don't practice?

I'd be interested in knowing what everyone else thinks. What kind of faith is worth having where facts are not involved?

2007-03-06 17:23:43 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Wisdom in Faith: Just because someone asks you to avoid giving the correct answer is no reason to "cop out" on yourself and offer something else.

We're not lemmings, we're humans.

2007-03-06 17:34:22 · update #1

12 answers

You are allowing yourself to be confused by semantic ambiguity. There are several different uses of the word "faith". The Webster's definition you give has little to do with religious faith, and might as well be another word.

Faith is belief or conviction without supporting objective evidence.
Irrational faith it belief despite contrary evidence.

If you have evidence for your belief, and no contradictory evidence, it is not faith. It is not "faith" that the sun will rise in the morning. Not only is there overwhelming evidence for, and no evidence against, there is a theory that explains the evidence.

Irrational faith is harmful, and should be avoided. Rational faith (no contradictory evidence) is not harmful, but its not particularly useful either. I think you have to try to recognize when an alternate belief could also be valid given the evidence. If that is the case, then you have to consider the possibility that either or both may be wrong, and instead remain open minded, and indeed, even skeptical. That is the best way to not deceive yourself through your preconceptions.

2007-03-06 17:39:53 · answer #1 · answered by Jim L 5 · 0 0

As a christian and beliver in jesus christ my faith always comes before truth. I'm not concerned about the truth of the world because there is no truth in the world. What you think is truth
will only turn out to be lie, becuse the world is ruled by the prince of the air.

2007-03-06 17:33:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I'm going to point out that you can have faith in something that isn't true even though you presumably believe that it is, and you can not believe something that is actually true.

Obviously, though, people don't generally say, "Well, now, what an interesting lie with no supporting facts. Think that's what I'll put my faith in today."

2007-03-06 17:31:28 · answer #3 · answered by DawnL 3 · 0 0

Truth requires no faith at all. It just is. Saying you only have faith in things that are provable is really saying that you have faith in nothing. No matter what one definition of the dozen or so Webster probably provided you says.

2007-03-06 17:29:52 · answer #4 · answered by Hate Boy! 5 · 2 0

Unless you have experienced the relationship with God that real Christians experience, there is no way I or anyone else can help you to understand. We do not simply "believe" that God is real....we KNOW God is real. That happens when the Holy Spirit enters us after we are called by God. It is that Knowing that is our truth. Having the Holy Spirit living within you is like "seeing God". Faith is only the baby step one takes when he or she is beginning. That is why they call it the walk of faith. It is believing with your mind. The rest comes later and ....it is fantastic!

2007-03-06 17:34:03 · answer #5 · answered by Poohcat1 7 · 0 0

Another definition of faith:
belief that is not based on proof
i.e. No truth involved.

That is the definition that I think of when the word faith is mentioned in relation to religion, and it is the definition that most closely resembles any description of belief that christians have described to me.

2007-03-06 17:32:28 · answer #6 · answered by chaotic_n_cryptic 3 · 1 0

Faith is the belief that it is the truth, while truth is th item believed in.

For example, you have faith that the chair will not break when you sit it in. It's the truth that it did not break after you sat down in it.

2007-03-06 17:36:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think you got 9 thumbs down because the asker specifically asked that the answer you gave not be given. The asker called it a "cop out" answer.

2007-03-06 17:30:53 · answer #8 · answered by Wisdom in Faith 4 · 0 0

If you mention Ted Haggard , as an example of tolerance , you usualy get thumbs down by every fundies, then your answer is removed because it does not comply with the terms of service.
I find this interesting...

2007-03-06 20:18:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i also answer the question. and i dont know why they gave you 9 thumbs down. probably becoz you answered it "almost the same thing". could also be they dont like your answer. could also be they have their own issues about their own truth and faith..
dont take it to the heart, they're barnacles~ (^_^)

2007-03-06 17:38:49 · answer #10 · answered by farina m 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers