They do very much disagree about that. That is the very essence of what everyone disagrees about. "Faith" is about *guessing* what we *think* truth is not asserting that we *know for certain* what truth is.
As Christians we have faith that Christ died for our sins. We don't know for absolute certain that Christ died for our sins the way my doctor can know for absolute certain from looking at my brain scan that I have epilepsy.
I just have to disagree. Faith is about gaining certainty. I have far more certainty in my faith in Christ than I do in the educated opinions of human experts. I often have difficulties but never doubts.
He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
ORIGIN OF FAITH
1
First recorded in 1200–50; Middle English feith, from Anglo-French fed, Old French feid, feit, from Latin fidem, accusative of fidēs “trust,” derivative of fīdere “to trust”
You can easily argue yourself into a corner on this topic. There's always a leap of faith in that we cannot be absolutely certain of anything. You cannot be absolutely certain of your doctor's diagnosis, but you trust it based on your faith in his expertise. He may be wrong, however.
I am saying that we can have a greater certainty with our faith because God is telling us we can.
But Alec, which particular faith we choose matters. And we can't always choose subjective faith over objective science.
If I chose to have "greater certainty" in faith than in science and medicine than that could have meant choosing to rely on priests, pastors, and exorcists to pray for me and try to cast out demons instead of doctors and neurologists to do brain scans and give me medicine based on what they found.
Exorcists and priests chanting to try and heal diseases - that's what faith alone gave the world for thousands of years and untold numbers of people perished because we didn't have modern medicine and modern science which could provide actual objectivity beyond subjective faith. Surely that's not what you're advocating. ;-)
In that last exchange, we were discussing whether we can have certainty about our faith. My point, perhaps too brief, was that we make leaps of faith with everything in our physical life, such as trusting in our doctors' expertise. We trust that the medication we are taking will not be poison, and that the sun will rise as usual the next morning. We don’t know for certain any of those things—the doctor could be faking his credentials; the pill factory may have accidentally added a harmful chemical; and the sun may go supernova at any moment. Nonetheless, we are reasonably certain we are correct in trusting these things based on the evidence.
I am asserting that there’s no difference between trusting these things and trusting in our faith in God as Christians. We can be reasonably certain as to the truth of the faith based on the evidence, which includes historical and trustworthy witness accounts, science-based evidence (theology and philosophy are sciences, but also other sciences such as archeology), and a host of other things, just like any other field of study.
And, attempting to address the spiritual aspect of our leap of faith, I asserted that we can have greater certainty of our faith as Christians because we are placing our trust in God himself, not just another human being (like a doctor) or our limited physical senses.
But Alec, don't you see? Both faith and science have failed me repeatedly since I was a teenager. I have learned to be skeptical of both. I don't trust in many doctors' expertise. I was misdiagnosed many times. I was given medication that caused me to become more suicidal than I already was.
Faith-wise I was led to believe for many years that the vast majority of the world was going to hell - including my own mother and the Jewish family friends that I loved - and that it was my responsibility to persuade everyone to become an Evangelical Christian. Having lost faith in that religious system of belief, I have yet to have comparable level of belief in another. I still have faith in Christ, the Bible, God, the existence of angels and demons, the truth of mystical experiences, and so forth, but no specific Judeo-Christian theology seems to me to be absolute, objective truth that I can completely trust. I have faith in God, but not faith in man, in "the Church" or in my own ability to know 100% what is True or what is Good or what is Evil.
If I may, I think it's been a journey with your medical issues. The past failed diagnoses while wrong, helped to rule out the other possibilities and zero in on the right diagnosis and strategy.
I hope your faith journey can continue in the same way! If I may again, since you trust in God, ask him for help in your journey to the truth. He will help you.
Thanks, Alec. But here's the thing: if not for my own skepticism then I probably wouldn't even see the previous diagnoses as wrong. I would still be where I was 20 years ago, just having "faith" in the first medical authority figure who told me I had Bipolar II. And I'd still be miserable, if I'd even still be alive. I was the one who challenged that. Just as I was the one who challenged my youth minister's idea that all non-Christians went to hell and that if I didn't believe that then I might cause people to go to hell.
I've gotten seemingly closer to the truth more gradually not just by submitting to faith and certainty in it, but by perpetually challenging it. But there's been real personal consequences for all this. People got really mad at me for challenging my youth group. And my family got really mad at me for challenging my Bipolar II diagnosis and trying to find different medication to get me better. They only stopped arguing with me when the new psychiatrist confirmed I was right, that I didn't have Bipolar II and that I did have PTSD.
And of course people still get really mad at me for challenging and questioning Left-Right political assumptions... as you know...
They may disagree about many things, but not about whether we can know the truth in this life--that's what I was addressing.
They do very much disagree about that. That is the very essence of what everyone disagrees about. "Faith" is about *guessing* what we *think* truth is not asserting that we *know for certain* what truth is.
As Christians we have faith that Christ died for our sins. We don't know for absolute certain that Christ died for our sins the way my doctor can know for absolute certain from looking at my brain scan that I have epilepsy.
I just have to disagree. Faith is about gaining certainty. I have far more certainty in my faith in Christ than I do in the educated opinions of human experts. I often have difficulties but never doubts.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/faith
noun
confidence or trust in a person or thing:
faith in another's ability.
belief that is not based on proof:
He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
ORIGIN OF FAITH
1
First recorded in 1200–50; Middle English feith, from Anglo-French fed, Old French feid, feit, from Latin fidem, accusative of fidēs “trust,” derivative of fīdere “to trust”
https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/faith_1#:~:text=%2Ffe%C9%AA%CE%B8%2F,do%20what%20has%20been%20promised
trust in somebody’s ability or knowledge; trust that somebody/something will do what has been promised
See what I mean?
To *trust* that Christ rose from the dead to atone for our sins is not to *know* objectively that it happened.
Just as to *trust* that murder is evil is not to *know* objectively that murder is evil.
You can easily argue yourself into a corner on this topic. There's always a leap of faith in that we cannot be absolutely certain of anything. You cannot be absolutely certain of your doctor's diagnosis, but you trust it based on your faith in his expertise. He may be wrong, however.
I am saying that we can have a greater certainty with our faith because God is telling us we can.
But Alec, which particular faith we choose matters. And we can't always choose subjective faith over objective science.
If I chose to have "greater certainty" in faith than in science and medicine than that could have meant choosing to rely on priests, pastors, and exorcists to pray for me and try to cast out demons instead of doctors and neurologists to do brain scans and give me medicine based on what they found.
Exorcists and priests chanting to try and heal diseases - that's what faith alone gave the world for thousands of years and untold numbers of people perished because we didn't have modern medicine and modern science which could provide actual objectivity beyond subjective faith. Surely that's not what you're advocating. ;-)
In that last exchange, we were discussing whether we can have certainty about our faith. My point, perhaps too brief, was that we make leaps of faith with everything in our physical life, such as trusting in our doctors' expertise. We trust that the medication we are taking will not be poison, and that the sun will rise as usual the next morning. We don’t know for certain any of those things—the doctor could be faking his credentials; the pill factory may have accidentally added a harmful chemical; and the sun may go supernova at any moment. Nonetheless, we are reasonably certain we are correct in trusting these things based on the evidence.
I am asserting that there’s no difference between trusting these things and trusting in our faith in God as Christians. We can be reasonably certain as to the truth of the faith based on the evidence, which includes historical and trustworthy witness accounts, science-based evidence (theology and philosophy are sciences, but also other sciences such as archeology), and a host of other things, just like any other field of study.
And, attempting to address the spiritual aspect of our leap of faith, I asserted that we can have greater certainty of our faith as Christians because we are placing our trust in God himself, not just another human being (like a doctor) or our limited physical senses.
But Alec, don't you see? Both faith and science have failed me repeatedly since I was a teenager. I have learned to be skeptical of both. I don't trust in many doctors' expertise. I was misdiagnosed many times. I was given medication that caused me to become more suicidal than I already was.
Faith-wise I was led to believe for many years that the vast majority of the world was going to hell - including my own mother and the Jewish family friends that I loved - and that it was my responsibility to persuade everyone to become an Evangelical Christian. Having lost faith in that religious system of belief, I have yet to have comparable level of belief in another. I still have faith in Christ, the Bible, God, the existence of angels and demons, the truth of mystical experiences, and so forth, but no specific Judeo-Christian theology seems to me to be absolute, objective truth that I can completely trust. I have faith in God, but not faith in man, in "the Church" or in my own ability to know 100% what is True or what is Good or what is Evil.
If I may, I think it's been a journey with your medical issues. The past failed diagnoses while wrong, helped to rule out the other possibilities and zero in on the right diagnosis and strategy.
I hope your faith journey can continue in the same way! If I may again, since you trust in God, ask him for help in your journey to the truth. He will help you.
Thanks, Alec. But here's the thing: if not for my own skepticism then I probably wouldn't even see the previous diagnoses as wrong. I would still be where I was 20 years ago, just having "faith" in the first medical authority figure who told me I had Bipolar II. And I'd still be miserable, if I'd even still be alive. I was the one who challenged that. Just as I was the one who challenged my youth minister's idea that all non-Christians went to hell and that if I didn't believe that then I might cause people to go to hell.
I've gotten seemingly closer to the truth more gradually not just by submitting to faith and certainty in it, but by perpetually challenging it. But there's been real personal consequences for all this. People got really mad at me for challenging my youth group. And my family got really mad at me for challenging my Bipolar II diagnosis and trying to find different medication to get me better. They only stopped arguing with me when the new psychiatrist confirmed I was right, that I didn't have Bipolar II and that I did have PTSD.
And of course people still get really mad at me for challenging and questioning Left-Right political assumptions... as you know...