Dont “trust” me,trust your senses. Do you see God? No.Â Do you see things ( animals,sunsets,lightning that strikes and kills people) in nature ? Yes. Thats real.Â Why should I believe fables told by ignorant sheep herders from three thousand years ago? They were utterly,literally dumb about how nature works. A seven year old child today knows more about the world than all of these story tellers combined. Do you think they could explain what caused the wind to blow? No.They would says angels did it or God was blowing the air from his huge,mighty,invisible lungs. Most humans just dont want to let go of their fear that life is random and meaningless and its all about sex and death really. If mankind is the ultimate achievement of God,what a sad showing for God.Â First he makes angels and then one of them rebels. He then makes people and they eat an apple he told them not to eat. He makes a devil that has powers just like himself. Instead of just making Lucifer non-existent after having a war in heaven of all places,he lets him traipse around in his Paradise.Â This is one confused creator who cant seem to get it right. Its such a fairy tale that it is actually funny
You miss my point, which is simply that you do not know what you debunking.Â I mean that respectfully.Â In any debate or discussion, it is helpful to define terms.Â When you talk about “faith,” you ought to know how your opponents use that term.Â The dictionary and encyclopedias may be helpful, but not always.Â You need to know how a term is being used in a given context.Â You have to know your enemies better than your friends in argument.Â Try playing Axis and Allies with no knowledge of the opposition, their economies or military capabilities.Â You would not do well.Â Let’s look at what you said:
“If this biologist ( I cant remember his name but I saw him promoting his book about faith and science on BookTV) is so smart,why doesnt he see the paradox of ID? Because of his “faith”,thats why. He knows that ID contradicts itself,so he goes the “faith” route and throws logic into the wind. I have no respect for that.”
You are equivocating on the word "faith."Â In your first and second usage you use the word as a noun, or at least it appears so.Â Faith here, in the sentence, seems to point to a codified set of doctrines.Â So someone can hold to the religious faith of Islam, for example.Â In your second example, you point to “faith” as a verb where the scientist, whoever he or she is, no throws all reason away and simply has, or exercises, faith.
When I asked you should I trust you, I was simply saying, should I have faith in you.Â Why?Â Because that’s all faith means.Â It means trust in the context of believing.Â While I agree there are nuances surround the word and its use in given missive, at its base it simply means believe, trust.Â So again, should I trust you?Â Your answer does not matter.Â It proves my point; namely, that you do not understand what the word means to those who use it intelligently.Â To you it always means blind faith, blind trust, no mind.
Taking that a little further.Â Do you trust your senses?Â Yes, up to a point you do.Â Do you trust your car will get you to where you are going and do you put faith in the designers and engineers who created the car (as well as the line staff workers)?Â If a parent says, "I’ll be there at six o’clock to pick you up."Â Do they have faith in that person?Â Probably.Â And I bet if that person wants a ride home. They’ll be there.Â One more example is an airplane.Â I believe that airplanes can fly and I believe people can fly them well, but when I get on the airplane I am really trusting this is all true and putting my faith in a pilot.
These examples illustrate what faith is.Â It is not some blind, unreasonable thing that just the dummies have, people that can’t reason properly.Â Faith can be reasonable and reasonably applied.Â A reasonable faith not unheard of.Â You do it every single day.Â Incidentally, this is not even touching on God, the Bible, dumb nomadic sheep herders or anything religious.Â It is simply defining a term, even though I admit it certainly has religious connotations.
What you ought to debate is the object of someone’s faith, and the reasons for that faith, not faith itself.