by tec 210 Replies latest jw friends
Peace!
You have stated (and others have agreed and stated the same) that faith is not based on evidence, or it is not faith to begin with.
May I ask you, then, if you think the apostles and early disciples, who walked with Christ, had faith?
Peace,
tammy
Faith: Pretending to know something that you don't know.
If you can offer more than your pretend knowledge, make it public & I will gladly watch it on CNN & BBC.
Hebrews 11 New Living Translation (NLT) 11 Faith is the confidence that what we hope for will actually happen; it gives us assurance about things we cannot see. 2 Through their faith, the people in days of old earned a good reputation. Hebrews 11:1 King James Version (KJV) 11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Defined by your own book, he is right. Assuming that a historical yeshua was real and a demigod, they have the proof, so their faith was based on evidence. Take care, Ismael ex·cuse /ik'skyo?oz/ Verb Attempt to lessen the blame attaching to (a fault or offense); seek to defend or justify. Noun A reason or explanation put forward to defend or justify a fault or offense. Synonyms verb. pardon - forgive - justify - absolve - remit - condone noun. pretext - apology - plea - justification - pretence An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of FACTS which clarifies the causes, context, and consequences of those FACTS. This description may establish rules or laws, and may clarify the existing ones in relation to any objects, or phenomena examined. The components of an explanation can be implicit, and be interwoven with one another. An explanation is often underpinned by an understanding that is represented by different media such as music, text, and graphics. Thus, an explanation is subjected to interpretation, and discussion.
Thanks for asking, TEC.
We need to ask, what does FAITH support?
One's BELIEFS, whether that belief requires being able to trust in the existence of the other party, before you can trust in the PROMISES made by the other party, be it Jesus, God, or a store owner.
Beliefs can be based on direct observation, where tangible evidence is offered which can be perceived by the sensory organs (leading to KNOWLEDGE), OR our past experiental KNOWLEDGE of our prior tangible interactions with them (i.e. their past track record), or solely by a reliance which isn't discernable by sensory experience (FAITH). But notice how BELIEFS can be based upon both KNOWLEDGE (sensory) AND FAITH (not sensory).
'Faith' is a legal term that implies being able to have confidence in the other party to perform as promised, eg if someone doesn't negotiate in 'good faith', it means they never intended to do what they promised, and deceived the other party since they had no intent to perform as promised (usually in order to rip off the other party).
EG, if you buy a refrigerator from a store and you don't have a truck, they're going to give you a receipt with additional paperwork recording their PROMISE to deliver it on a certain date; if they DON'T (i.e. they fail to fulfill their legal OBLIGATION to deliver), the purchaser can take them to small-claims court and sue them to get a judgment and recover their money. The confidence in the buyer's ability to purchase items and have them delivered is assured, NOT necessarily by the store (although any store that cares to stay in business is NOT going to rip off customers!), but by the consumer's UNDERLYING confidence in the LEGAL SYSTEM, an independent 3rd party, where the consumer knows they can take their case to an unbiased court and have confidence that the scammer will be punished, and they can recover their money via a judgment. Commerce is BASED on faith, and the courts ASSURE it, since commerce comes to a screetching halt if confidence in the system is lost.
However, the consumer has to present VISIBLE PROOF of the transaction in court to a judge, eg the receipts containing the promise to deliver on a certain date. The delivery person asks the buyer to sign the receipt stating the item was delivered and installed free from damage, etc. If the consumer CANNOT present verifiable evidence of their PROOF of buying the item, they're usually out of luck.
So that receipt is analogous to FAITH: it ISN'T the refrigerator itself, but is a visible SYMBOL that can be shown to OTHERS that serves as your proof of being ENTITLED to possess it, the RIGHT to possess the promised item it represents (i.e. the refrigerator).
As it pertains to one's belief in God/Jesus, FAITH isn't the unseeable item it represents (i.e. the spiritual realm, God, Jesus, Heavenly hope, etc), but is a visible SYMBOL that can be demonstrated to OTHERS that supports your claim of the EXPECTATION to receive the other promised item. That's exactly why the Bible says, "faith without works is dead": it's via one's VISIBLE works that one demonstrates their FAITH to OTHERS, where their actions assure their hope.
Faith ISN'T the HOPE (of going to Heaven itself), or the experiential perception of hearing Jesus' voice, or even vast crowds watching him perform miracles in 30CE with their own eyes: the former is UNSEEABLE, and the latter examples are NOT means to build faith, but DIRECT EVIDENCE to support belief. Jesus pointed out how FAITH is much more effective in supporting beliefs than direct experience, which is WHY the Bible places FAITH above seeing signs, etc. since his disciples showed their lack of faith EVEN AFTER watching him miraculously feed the crowds. Jesus was saying that watching miracles (signs) does NOT support one's BELIEFS by faith, but via KNOWLEDGE, a DIRECT OBSERVATION of the promised quantity. That's exactly WHY Doubting Thomas earned the chastizing nickname: he demanded to SEE PROOF. He's the example of the folly of those who are weak in their faith, and for a good reason.
(As I've said in the other thread, it's pretty convenient that Jesus would conclude that, since it's the exact OPPOSITE of the scientific method: science doesn't operate on HOPE and FAITH, but on independently-verifiable OBSERVABLE evidence. Thomas was the hold-out, the skeptic, and he's treated as if HE'S the fool for constantly demanding proof, as if it's a BAD thing. Typical "up is down" paradoxical logic of the NT, again.)
It bears remembering that faith is only needed UNTIL the promised quantity is delivered: it's like keeping the 'promise to deliver' receipt AFTER the item has been delivered: it's not needed at that point, since the item it secures has been delivered. You don't NEED faith any longer, since the item HAS been delivered.
Hebrews 11:1 is arguably the least-understood scripture in the Bible, and the most important TO understand, since it defines FAITH.
Understanding Paul's original intent is complicated by the handling of various translations of the Greek word, 'hypostasis', a legal term in common use at the time, so if you miss it's subtle implied meanings, you're going to miss the boat.
Here's a compeling analysis and example of hupostasis:
From:
http://hopefaithprayer.com/faith/faith-is-hebrews-111-hupostasis/
Kenneth Wuest has the following to say about hupostasis in Hebrews 11:1 in his Wuest Word Studies
The Title-Deed to Answered Prayer – “FAITH is the substance of things hoped for” ( Heb. 11:1 ). The Greek word translated “substance” had a technical meaning in the business world of the first century. It referred to one’s property or effects. It was used in such expressions as “Out of this estate I declare that my husband owes me,” or, “more land than I actually possess,” the italicized words being the translation of the word. It was also used to refer to “the whole body of documents bearing on the ownership of a person’s property, deposited in the archives, and forming the evidence of ownership.” Moulton and Milligan in their “Vocabulary of the Greek Testament” say of these uses, “These varied uses are at first sight somewhat perplexing, but in all the cases there is the same central idea of something that underlies visible conditions and guarantees a future possession.” Thus, they translate “Faith is the title-deed of things hoped for.”
To substantiate this usage, there is in “Living Yesterdays,” a delightful brochure by H. R. Minn, the story of a woman named Dionysia. She is described as “a woman of set jaw and grim determination.” It seems that she had lost a case in a local court over a piece of land to which she laid claim. Not satisfied with the decision of a lower court, she determined to take her case to a higher court in Alexandria. She sent her slave to that city, with the legal documents safely encased in a stone box. On the way, the slave lost his life in a fire, which destroyed the inn where he had put up for the night. For 2,000 years, the sands of the desert covered the ruins of the inn, the charred bones of the slave, and the stone box.
Archaeologists have recently uncovered these remains. In the box, they found the legal documents. They read the note, which this woman had sent to the judge in Alexandria, “In order that my lord the judge may know that my appeal is just, I attach my hupostasis.” That which was attached to this note, she designated by the Greek word translated “substance” in Heb. 11:1 . The attached document was translated and found to be the title-deed to the piece of land, which she claimed as her own possession, the evidence of her ownership.
What a flood of light is thrown upon this teaching regarding faith. The act of exercising true faith as one prays, or as one leans on the resources of God, is itself the title-deed or evidence of the sure answer to our prayer or the unfailing source of the divine supply. It is God’s guarantee in advance that we already possess the things asked for. They may still be in His hands, awaiting the proper time for their delivery, but they are ours. If the answers to our prayers are not forthcoming at once, let us rest content with the title-deed, which God has given us, namely, a Holy Spirit energized act of faith. We may be absolutely certain that our God will honor this title-deed at the right moment.
When you own property, you are given a ‘title-deed’ to prove your ownership . . . it is yours, and no-one can take it from you. Your ‘faith,’ is a title-deed that God holds on your behalf, His promised land. No-one can take this from you . . . there is no persuasion or pressure that can change your ‘stance.’. . . because of its ‘substance’ . . . He stands under you. You can own something that you do not see, and it is no less yours.
BTW, I'd go with Hebrews 11:1 being translated as, "faith is the UNASSURED (or UNSECURED) expection of things hoped for...." since as I've pointed out before, Paul's definition of faith really boils down to one's hopes being secured ONLY by one's wishes and hopes: it truly is a circular definition which IS tantamount to "blind faith", since that which cannot be seen is NO evidence at all, and that which is secured ONLY by a promise is an UNSECURED PROMISE (eg rent a home, and the landlord MAY demand a SECURITY DEPOSIT in case the tenant bails and vacate the premises without giving proper notice. There is no security deposit offered if you live a virtuous life in service to God, and die, and become worm food since it's all based on a lie).
And as you say, faith is NOT transferrable, or, it really shouldn't be (which is what Paul claimed, in saying that one's faith could be built by reading the accounts of the heroes of faith in the OT). Instead, every individual has the OBLIGATION to conduct their own due diligence, conducting their indepenent background investigation of the other party, in order to not be the next victim of a scam.
Adam
LOL... it was a simple question!
I have some things to do around the house, and then i will read what you wrote. Hopefully, you answered the actual question I asked in that ; )
Peace,
tammy
I'm dying to know what adamah does for work. Documentation writer? Research assistant? Noted essayist? Phonebook transcriptionist? :-)
No, in all of that, you didn't answer the question.
I already know what you think faith is, and what you think Paul thought faith was, so that conversation has already taken place. Though we could do it again, but that was not my intent.
Could you answer the question that I actually asked now, lol?
Peace,
tammy
I think that this is out of topic, but... This is an extract of a letter addressed to Peter Carr, in the letter you can read the writer addressing the differences between facts and faith and challenging (encouraging) his nephew to do some thinking and research. Religion. Your reason is now mature enough to examine this object. In the first place, divest yourself of all bias in favor of novelty & singularity of opinion. Indulge them in any other subject rather than that of religion. It is too important, and the consequences of error may be too serious. On the other hand, shake off all the fears & servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear. You will naturally examine first, the religion of your own country. Read the Bible, then as you would read Livy or Tacitus. The facts which are within the ordinary course of nature, you will believe on the authority of the writer, as you do those of the same kind in Livy & Tacitus. The testimony of the writer weighs in their favor, in one scale, and their not being against the laws of nature, does not weigh against them. But those facts in the Bible which contradict the laws of nature, must be examined with more care, and under a variety of faces. Here you must recur to the pretensions of the writer to inspiration from God. Examine upon what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong, as that its falsehood would be more improbable than a change in the laws of nature, in the case he relates. For example, in the book of Joshua, we are told, the sun stood still several hours. Were we to read that fact in Livy or Tacitus, we should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of statues, beasts, &c. But it is said, that the writer of that book was inspired. Examine, therefore, candidly, what evidence there is of his having been inspired. The pretension is entitled to your inquiry, because millions believe it. On the other hand, you are astronomer enough to know how contrary it is to the law of nature that a body revolving on its axis, as the earth does, should have stopped, should not, by that sudden stoppage, have prostrated animals, trees, buildings, and should after a certain time gave resumed its revolution, & that without a second general prostration. Is this arrest of the earth's motion, or the evidence which affirms it, most within the law of probabilities? You will next read the New Testament. It is the history of a personage called Jesus. Keep in your eye the opposite pretensions: 1, of those who say he was begotten by God, born of a virgin, suspended & reversed the laws of nature at will, & ascended bodily into heaven; and 2, of those who say he was a man of illegitimate birth, of a benevolent heart, enthusiastic mind, who set out without pretensions to divinity, ended in believing them, and was punished capitally for sedition, by being gibbeted, according to the Roman law, which punished the first commission of that offence by whipping, & the second by exile, or death in fureâ. See this law in the Digest Lib. 48. tit. 19. §. 28. 3. & Lipsius Lib 2. de cruce. cap. 2. These questions are examined in the books I have mentioned under the head of religion, & several others. They will assist you in your inquiries, but keep your reason firmly on the watch in reading them all. Do not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear of its consequences. If it ends in a belief that there is no God, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise, and the love of others which it will procure you. If you find reason to believe there is a God, a consciousness that you are acting under his eye, & that he approves you, will be a vast additional incitement; if that there be a future state, the hope of a happy existence in that increases the appetite to deserve it; if that Jesus was also a God, you will be comforted by a belief of his aid and love. In fine, I repeat, you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and neither believe nor reject anything, because any other persons, or description of persons, have rejected or believed it. Your own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you are answerable, not for the rightness, but uprightness of the decision. I forgot to observe, when speaking of the New Testament, that you should read all the histories of Christ, as well of those whom a council of ecclesiastics have decided for us, to be Pseudo-evangelists, as those they named Evangelists. Because these Pseudo-evangelists pretended to inspiration, as much as the others, and you are to judge their pretensions by your own reason, and not by the reason of those ecclesiastics. Most of these are lost. There are some, however, still extant, collected by Fabricius, which I will endeavor to get & send you. Letter to Peter Carr Jefferson's letter to his nephew, from Paris, August 10, 1787. Take care, Ismael
Actually I'm pretty sure he did answer you. It's in here. (Pasted below)
As it pertains to one's belief in God/Jesus, FAITH isn't the unseeable item it represents (i.e. the spiritual realm, God, Jesus, Heavenly hope, etc), but is a visible SYMBOL that can be demonstrated to OTHERS that supports your claim of the EXPECTATION to receive the other promised item. That's exactly why the Bible says, "faith without works is dead": it's via one's VISIBLE works that one demonstrates their FAITH to OTHERS, where their actions assure their hope.
Faith ISN'T the HOPE (of going to Heaven itself), or the experiential perception of hearing Jesus' voice, or even vast crowds watching him perform miracles in 30CE with their own eyes: the former is UNSEEABLE, and the latter examples are NOT means to build faith, but DIRECT EVIDENCE to support belief. Jesus pointed out how FAITH is much more effective in supporting beliefs than direct experience, which is WHY the Bible places FAITH above seeing signs, etc. since his disciples showed their lack of faith EVEN AFTER watching him miraculously feed the crowds. Jesus was saying that watching miracles (signs) does NOT support one's BELIEFS by faith, but via KNOWLEDGE, a DIRECT OBSERVATION of the promised quantity. That's exactly WHY Doubting Thomas earned the chastizing nickname: he demanded to SEE PROOF. He's the example of the folly of those who are weak in their faith, and for a good reason.
So in that... then... is Adamah saying, no, the apostles did not have faith?
Peace,
tammy
