Any truth believed by reason, can not be in conflict with fact, and any truth believed by faith can not be in conflict with fact or reason. Not sure what that makes me. — Rank Amateur
Not really about Anselm's ontological argument... — jorndoe
they say that one should never do today what may be put off till tomorrow — someone
It seems to me the 3 things do indeed conflict at times. — DingoJones
1. If God has 100% knowledge of our choice, he calculated it from the factors affecting it.
2. Our choice can be pre-calculated in every situation, by the set of factors.
3. You only have one “choice” in every situation (from 2). — Yajur
Think you are missing my point.
so lets say, i say I believe by faith the world is flat. That just makes me a fool, it does not make faith itself foolish, and it is not the faith making me foolish - it is my ignoring facts that makes me a fool. — Rank Amateur
Let's next say - by faith alone I won't get a vaccination for something. There is very very reasonable evidence that this vaccination is 99% effective in preventing this illness. That just makes me a fool, it is not faith itself that is foolish, and it is not faith that is making me unreasonable. It is my ignoring reason that makes me a fool. — Rank Amateur
So my definition of faith is a basis to believe something is true and can not be in conflict with fact or reason.
If you believe something that is conflict with fact or reason - the problem is you - not faith. — Rank Amateur
You should rethink this. People have faith in all sorts of irrational things. Suggestion: accept what you know by faith AS LONG AS it does not conflict with reason. God's non-existence cannot be proven, so you're position is safe. Philosophers of religion puzzle through various aspects of God, and sometimes change their opinions after rational analysis. If they simply had faith in their view of God, there would be no role for rational analysis.So my definition of faith is a basis to believe something is true and can not be in conflict with fact or reason.
If you believe something that is conflict with fact or reason - the problem is you - not faith. — Rank Amateur
-DingoJones“My foreknowledge doesnt effect your decision, the factors of the choice do.”
First, to clarify. I believe that in your arguments, foreknowledge means: “having true knowledge of a future action, event, outcome. God’s omniscient foreknowledge would be having knowledge of all future events, actions, or outcomes” If this is incorrect, please let me know. — Abecedarian
I believe that you are mistaking predictions with knowledge of future actions. In your example of the firing squads, you state that you have knowledge that the man will choose the meal and that it is obvious that he would do so. However, this is not representative of knowledge of his choice. You simply would have some knowledge of the person’s possible results and the desires and characteristics of that person. You then are making a prediction about what they will choose. However, no matter how likely your prediction is and regardless if your prediction comes true, it does not constitute of actual knowledge of someone’s choice. Predicting someone’s action, no matter how likely, is not foreknowledge and would not constitute the omniscience that is being referred to. — Abecedarian
The omniscience of God excludes other actions other than the one that He knows you are going to take. — Abecedarian
Suggestion: accept what you know by faith AS LONG AS it does not conflict with reason. G — Relativist
-Dingo JonesI think this is clear unless you think omniscience transcends time and space, which I take it you do?
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.