"faith-based" sucks as a term and we need to purge it from the mainstream
rather, it conflates the concept of "a faith", which is a term referring to the Christian religion (or some type of it) with "faith" - trust. Thus "faith based" is often ambiguous in misleading ways. Is it implying something is 'not true but held on trust' or 'of a religion'?
-
-
as for "not true but held on trust" it's easy to see that things which have yet to pass fall into this category (they are not facts; they cannot be as they have not yet come to pass!) Yet misapplying this to things which have already happened gives the impression of fallacy.
-
There are different senses of the word, but not what I'm getting at; human action in the world (again, save mere survival) is always based on a pre-rational, religious mode of being called faith (even when the object of said faith is not God).
-
this isn't the problem, I think. It's claiming that these things are not based on truth, but on belief, which has never been the classical Christian claim. It's not because we believe, but because it is true - we believe it because it is true.
-
That the object of out faith is the One True God is the classical Christian claim, not that we know him other than by his self-revelation in history, and in the Church, which we know by faith. There are other false gods which are the objects of false faiths.
-
it's the truth Nathan! If isn't true, then our faith is useless - which is what "faith based" is all about. Fuzzy aspirations towards feelings. It matters not whether our grasp of the facts (what has happened) relies on faith - this is not what is at hand!
-
? I just said it was true.. "the one true God." We agree, Christianity is true. Was that ever a point of contention?
-
what I mean is that retreating into "well everything is held by faith" isn't really hitting the point. Then we're basically saying "well sort of nothing is really true" - there are obviously different senses of "faith" being used and this is actually making the ambiguity greater.
-
No, exactly the opposite. It exposes a) that faith and truth are not actually opposed and b) the hubris of those who claim to operate by some faithless mode of knowing. The humanists have a faith; so do the materialists etc. They are false faiths, though.
- 11 more replies
New conversation -
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.
