What is the worth of "faith", when it lacks proof/evidence of a belief?
2007-07-23 08:30:31 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I believe it is a combination of faith, logic, and your own universal truths or you say you don't know and/or there is no way to know.
I think it is best to apply logic when logic gives clear answers based on premises and laws (sometimes they appear to be the same). For example math is based on basic assumption that few, if anyone, disputes such as, A+B=B+A and A*B=B*A.
And normally logic can be also applied to indisputable laws such as the law of gravity that everyone agrees with. But occasionally a law or basic assumption must be taken on faith or there is no answer when there is a good reason to question its validity.
Basically the First Law of Thermodynamics states: Matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed and the total remains constant. How is that law different than a basic assumption?
Normally, that is not in dispute until you ask the question, "Why does anything--matter, energy, time, or space--exist?" Assuming you accept the first law of thermodynamics, that leave you with three options (maybe more), two of which you must accept on faith. They are:
1. The universe always existed. But then you ask, "How is that possible?" Doesn't it seem like it would have had to come from something? A dilemma unless you have faith.
2. The universe was created by God (a creater). But then you ask, "Where did God come from?" A delemma unless you have faith.
3. I just don't know and/or it is unknowable. However, that is not satisfactory because we want to know and will search for an answer that may be impossible to find.
2007-07-23 10:05:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who informed you that the Bible is traditionally, biologically, scientifically and geographically faulty and inconsistent it is, lots, that pupils have been claiming that a huge deal of it relatively is going to likely be interpreted as symbolic literature? And contradicting in nature. You be conscious isn't adequate i want you to show me the place in the Bible is there contradictions. i'm a Biblical pupil and function by no ability discovered any contradiction. it is traditionally acceptable. it might desire to not be in chronological order yet is actual in meaning and faith, biologically and traditionally acceptable. show me the place formerly I answer the question. have you ever relatively study this e book?
2016-12-14 16:52:58 · answer #2 · answered by cegla 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I WOULD SAY FAITH BECAUSE IF SOMEONES FAITH LACKS PROOF OR EVIDENCE THAT MEANS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE WORKS BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS THAT FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD. SO I AM GOING TO HAVE FAITH WITH WORKS AND NO universal truth RUN ME SO I PICK FAITH.
2007-07-23 16:06:01 · answer #3 · answered by Rita 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I will always choose the option that allows me the right of choice. faith can move mountains with no proof could you imagine the damage it would do if it were fact?
2007-07-23 08:35:12 · answer #4 · answered by slo18 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Universal Truth and I'll never stop looking. It's my mission in life to seek.
2007-07-23 14:44:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Who gets to decide what universal truth is?
2007-07-23 08:34:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
And just what is this "Universal Truth" and where is the proof for it?
(Not asking sarcastically here, I'm actually interested in your response.)
2007-07-23 08:35:25 · answer #7 · answered by Professor Farnsworth 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I see faith as more like knowingness, rather than mere belief.
2007-07-23 08:35:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
my experience determines my belief, thank you very much.
2007-07-23 08:34:28 · answer #9 · answered by essentiallysolo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
both are BS so neither
2007-07-23 08:33:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋