| Faith Some More. |
|
I've recently been thinking about Faith. Actually, I hope one day to sit down and do a major analysis of it. A philosophical analysis. There hasnt been much on the NET that I've been able to find - Atleast from a philosophical perspective.Anyhue, Here are my thoughts. Oftentimes, I've come across this charge from people, that You cant not have Faith(F). That is to say, One either has faith in something or has faith in something else.
Here's an example:
"I dont have any Faith." Standard response:
"Its not a matter of either having F or not having F, ... really its a matter of having F in something or having F in something else. So You allways have F." My thoughts on this: Something funny is going on with this arguement, and I've been finding it very difficult to characterize exactly what. To help myself think this through, I've been trying to create thought experiments to understand the problem better. Here's one thought experiment: (B) "If you flip a coin, either you get a side or you dont." The Analogous Response: (B') "You cant not have sides, when you flip a coin ! You always get a side. Either you have one side, or another side, but not a side or no side." And here's where my problem is: Suppose a person says: (C) "I lack F in the Existence of G (EOG)." He might get a response of the (A') or (B') types. This is an inadequate response, because... She is not discussing (F) or ~(F), but (F in Something) or (~F in Something). There is a subtle difference. Take a look at the response and see if You can sense the distinction. First take a look at the (A'/B') style responses: (C') "You cant not have F in the Existence of G. Either You have F in something else(SE) or you have F in the EOG. " and the response to (C'): (D') "If I have F in SE, isnt that tantamount to having ~(F) in EOG. So I can be in a state of not having F, however its a F in something. Like with the coins, what I am saying, is that I have ...
Finish later...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Rr One more thought: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Hebrews 11:1 So faith is the substance of things hoped for. Lets think about something else: I hope that the sun will rise tommorow. Why ? The suns past record. It has never failed to shine. Lets look at the definition of faith in this context. What is the substance of the hope that the sun will shine tommorow ? The suns past record. I mean the reason why I hope that the sun will shine tommorow is that sun has shined in the past. So the suns past record is the substance of things that I hope for. No. Not working. I dont get it. If I hope for something, the hope is not empty. Its backed up by a number of things. I call these things substance. Now, one of the things constituting substance is the suns past record. { Reminds me of God and essence and his attributes. God has a number of attributes that comprise his essence - omniA, omniB, etc... } Another way to think:
Huh ??? |