Why is a faith a virtue.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Post by _Tarski »

asbestosman wrote:
Tarski wrote:Is there any example of someone gaining detailed clear knowledge (expressed in ordinary language) about something by purely spiritual means that was then independently verified later by objective means? Ever?

I'm sure you're aware of such stories being told by many a member about how they were prompted to do X and later found out why that was a good thing.


Well, if these little "found my keys after praying" anecdotes are all there is in the whole history of science and religion then I think that makes my point and demolishes Elder Oaks even without pointing out the episitemological absurdity of the idea gaining warrant for beliefs about the world by simply taking note of some good feeling or voices that are in ones head (or heart).

And you know what? It is almost as if people like Elder Oaks know that it can't work becuase they never ever ever tell us something that can be checked. It is always something like "God exists and loves us" or "spirit is matter".
Well, actually the Book of Abraham astronomy can be checked but they just claim is is metaphor or some other dodge.

It reminds me of the hysterically blind. They suspiciously bump into things far more often than a real blind person does which means they must be able see after all.
The prophets and seers never tell us anything clear and checkable like "there will be an attack on the World Trade Center tommorrow".
Or "the earth is X years old" (Oh wait! I forgot about the D&C)

They seem to purposefully avoid definiteness. Suspicious. I think they know deep down.
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie

yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

Tarski wrote:They seem to purposefully avoid definiteness. Suspicious. I think they know deep down.

The reason, as I understand it, is that proof denies faith. I just never understood why we want to preserve faith when we could have proof instead. They say something about agency, but I really don't think the arguments are that solid especially if Satan had enough agency to fall away despit having knowledge instead of faith. Nobody ever really explains why that could work.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
Post Reply