That's not true tho. Not even someone with a reductive, Humean account or reason would accept that. Reason can work out consequences of hypotheses without affirming them.
-
-
Replying to @QuasLacrimas @ptcarlo and
Actual acceptance of
#reason, of course, which is any reason in actual use, does require#faith.#Pascal is right.2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
your position conflates faith (pistis) and opinion (doxa) in a dangerous way
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @QuasLacrimas @ptcarlo and
Not at all. We cannot be saved by
#doxa, but we are saved by grace through#pistis. But further discriminations can be made.2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Exactly, I agree with you. But the propositions used by reason under ordinary circumstances ("in actual use", as you say) are doxa, not pistis
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like
(And as anyone who has read Locke's "The reasonableness of Christianity" has seen, if like Locke you confuse doxa and pistis, you pollute Holy Scripture with the perversions of the unregenerate mind)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.