Comments on: Faith and Force: The Destroyers of the Modern World http://blog.nicholascloud.com/2008/04/21/faith-and-force-the-destroyers-of-the-modern-world/ Balancing the signal-to-noise ratio. Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:15:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: ncloud http://blog.nicholascloud.com/2008/04/21/faith-and-force-the-destroyers-of-the-modern-world/comment-page-1/#comment-426 ncloud Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:47:22 +0000 http://blog.nicholascloud.com/?p=184#comment-426 The problem is that "faith" and "belief" are not the same thing. You can believe something to be true, even if you have not proven it yourself empirically (for example, most people believe we landed on the moon, although we have not personally gone to the moon to verify that this is so). This belief *could* be empirically verified, however, meaning that if I really wanted to go to the moon to prove we landed there, I could build a rocket and lob myself into space (or just get a super high-powered telescope and look for the flag). Faith, on the other hand, is belief that *cannot* be backed by empirical evidence, but instead relies on anecdotal or circumstantial evidence, which directly proves nothing. The Bible is very clear that empirical evidence and faith are contradictory -- if this were not so, Jesus would have endorsed reason as the means of belief, but instead choose a method that, by definition, precludes certainty. This is precisely why faith is supposedly virtuous -- because a man (or woman) who has faith must act contra reason, i.e., contra their own nature, the difficulty of which is elevated to virtue (if something is difficult it must be good, right?). The Bible is absolutely correct in identifying Abraham as the "father of faith", because everything he did was not only contrary to reason, but contrary to previously established Biblical laws (Genesis 9 -- no killing innocents!). It is the absolute, unquestioning, unprovable belief, which admits no criteria for being true other than the supposed virtue of believing the impossible, that fuels the violence of religious zealots. The Islamic terrorists that commit atrocities in the name of Allah are the most visible example of this in modern times. The problem is that “faith” and “belief” are not the same thing. You can believe something to be true, even if you have not proven it yourself empirically (for example, most people believe we landed on the moon, although we have not personally gone to the moon to verify that this is so). This belief *could* be empirically verified, however, meaning that if I really wanted to go to the moon to prove we landed there, I could build a rocket and lob myself into space (or just get a super high-powered telescope and look for the flag).

Faith, on the other hand, is belief that *cannot* be backed by empirical evidence, but instead relies on anecdotal or circumstantial evidence, which directly proves nothing. The Bible is very clear that empirical evidence and faith are contradictory — if this were not so, Jesus would have endorsed reason as the means of belief, but instead choose a method that, by definition, precludes certainty.

This is precisely why faith is supposedly virtuous — because a man (or woman) who has faith must act contra reason, i.e., contra their own nature, the difficulty of which is elevated to virtue (if something is difficult it must be good, right?). The Bible is absolutely correct in identifying Abraham as the “father of faith”, because everything he did was not only contrary to reason, but contrary to previously established Biblical laws (Genesis 9 — no killing innocents!).

It is the absolute, unquestioning, unprovable belief, which admits no criteria for being true other than the supposed virtue of believing the impossible, that fuels the violence of religious zealots. The Islamic terrorists that commit atrocities in the name of Allah are the most visible example of this in modern times.

]]> By: iCloud http://blog.nicholascloud.com/2008/04/21/faith-and-force-the-destroyers-of-the-modern-world/comment-page-1/#comment-425 iCloud Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:24:04 +0000 http://blog.nicholascloud.com/?p=184#comment-425 interesting... though is there not the ability for "faith" and "reason" to coincide? ultimately, we all have faith in something... for we can never know everything... ? interesting… though is there not the ability for “faith” and “reason” to coincide? ultimately, we all have faith in something… for we can never know everything… ?

]]>