I don't think one has to suspend reality to accept the notion of Adam. I don't know why you think one has to
. And it obviously has relevance to real life for many people. Just not you, but that is fine. If you don't accept it, fine. Point being, at least make an effort to understand why others accept it instead of being arrogant and condescending.
Really, sorry, I'm not trying to be arrogant or condescending. So I read on but am just not getting very far. It's full of holes and seems to be just one big philosophical w%&k fest. Some clever club of very clever people who try to0 hard to bamboozle.
Suppose you know nothing about quantum mechanics but you do know a physicist who is both highly competent and scrupulously honest, and he tries to explain the subject to you. Suppose further that you only understand part of what he says, and even that part you understand only imperfectly. Still, you have no doubt that what he is saying is true. You trust him, because he knows what he is talking about and wouldn’t lie to you. You have faith in him, and your faith is perfectly rational. Indeed, it is grounded in reason in the sense that it is reason that tells you that he is a reliable source of information, and thus can be believed even when what he is saying is something you could not have discovered for yourself and cannot even fully understand.
No, but the physicist understands it and that's why I accept it. He is my reference point and anyone who knows more than me and tells me I'm talking rubbish, I'll point them in his direction and they can discuss it at their level. Because my faith tells me that the physicist knows fundamentally, exactly what he is talking about.
By contrast, faith in religion means a person believes in god (I am talking the Christian god here, Yahweh) And this person only has a long line of other people who believe in god to refer to all the way back to hearsay and tall tales. There is no starting point other than an old book which was altered and changed by people eager to control others.
There is no experiment and no documented results. In your world there is logic and circular reasoning resulting in a big slap on the back and all of a sudden, a truth is born. In my world, it's not so simplistic.
So there is a huge difference, but not to Mr Feser, so he continues.
That is to say, faith involves believing some proposition we could not have discovered on our own and perhaps cannot even fully understand, but which we know must be true because God, who is omniscient and cannot lie, has revealed it.
No it doesn't. It comes down to believing Feynman or Einstein, or the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Maths and science versus an old book which no-one knows who even wrote it or largely, when it was written.
In short, reason tells us that there is a God and that he has revealed such-and-such a truth; faith is then a matter of believing what reason has shown God to have revealed. In that sense faith is not only not at odds with reason but is grounded in reason.
What reason? Wtf? More back slapping and
words which prove the sum total of absolutely nothing, that's what.
Of course, how we know through reason that God exists and that He has revealed some truth is a large and complex matter.
Not for me it's not. Just show me the evidence. It really is that simple.
Is there a point continuing?
Sign up with Google
