Is knowledge the enemy of faith? (My response)

[kx000]

Meaningless drivel.

Haha

 

[Dywyddyr]

Haha

Nope. Fail.
Posting crap doesn't help.

 

[SciWriter]

Faith is the knowledge of faith.

Stop trying to change it and give it up. Of course someone knows they have faith, but that is not what is being debated.

 

[kx000]

Stop trying to change it and give it up. Of course someone knows they have faith, but that is not what is being debated.

 

[SciWriter]

Yes, your posts seem confused and not having any meaning, and I'm not the only one noting this. Hope it helps somehow.

 

[kx000]

Yes, your posts seem confused and not having any meaning, and I'm not the only one noting this. Hope it helps somehow.

You are trying to understand something you claim has no possible way of being understood, so your post are the meaningless ones.

 

[John99]

Faith is the worng term to use. There is no way around that.

He (OP) never used or heard the phrase "i have faith in you"? etc. etc. etc ad infinitum.

Now regarding the flood as alluded to in OP:

The surface of the Earth is around 75% water coverage. Could this water been from the flood?

If not where did this water come from? There is no water on any other planets we know of.

Before peole get excited: This is only a question.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

I posted this on another forum but wanted to see what you guys (and gals) think.

Is knowledge the enemy of faith, as the old saying goes?

Say for example that one is taught to believe that the flood of Noah actually happened and that this belief was a part of their faith. Then all of the sudden the world's geologists all agree that there is no evidence of a literal global flood and that this biblical tale is false.

This knowledge discredits their faith in that it proves it wrong. Now, sure, you could still have faith that the worlds scientists are wrong and that it did still happen, but that is also the definition of stupidity - an intellectual incapability or an unwillingness to properly consider the relevant information.

So, with faith can come stupidity. However, one can also be stupid and knowledgable. In other words, they can be aware of and understand the truth, but just not accept it as true - hence again, the definition of stupidity.

So, upon reflection, and from analyzing the dichotomy of ignorance and stupidity in relation to faith, we are then able to understand that knowledge is in fact not the enemy of faith simply because one can choose not to have faith in that knowledge but would rather have faith in faith. Woah! Now we're getting into circular reasoning. But I won't go too much further into that.

If anything is the enemy of faith, it is - by its very definition - intelligence.

Lastly, one can also be intelligent and ignorant - ignorance meaning the simply lack of knowledge; in other words, having never been exposed to that knowledge.

So, what do you think? Agree or Disagree?

I disagree because knowledge can be fictional and intelligence doesn't guarantee someone will value truth over how you feel. The enemies of faith are people who value truth over how they feel.

 

[nietzschefan]

Yes the earth was once totally submerged and under ice...it was a few billion years ago though.

 

[SciWriter]

You are trying to understand something you claim has no possible way of being understood, so your post are the meaningless ones.

Word definitions are universal. 'Faith' is not of a known or it wouldn't be faith.

 

[kx000]

Word definitions are universal. 'Faith' is not of a known or it wouldn't be faith.

What would you call the knowledge of faith?

 

[Dywyddyr]

Faith is the worng term to use.

Why?

There is no way around that.

Wrong.

The surface of the Earth is around 75% water coverage. Could this water been from the flood?

No.

If not where did this water come from? There is no water on any other planets we know of.

Stupid question.
Where did the water come from even if it was from the Flood?

 

[Dywyddyr]

What would you call the knowledge of faith?

There is none.
That's why it's called faith and not knowledge.

 

[Enmos]

Where did the water come from even if it was from the Flood?

Duh! From God of course!

 

[Big Chiller]

Not all Abrahamic faiths mention a global flood.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

I think water on the moon . Yeah !! Earths Moon . I also think there is water on some of Jupiter Moons . Maybe one of Saturn's Moons too . Neptune would not surprise Me either. One Of the Moons that is . I am thinking Mars has some water too. At the Poles or in the soil . I think water might be abundant in the universe actually . If Comets are mostly water , who knows ?

 

[spidergoat]

The surface of the Earth is around 75% water coverage. Could this water been from the flood?

If not where did this water come from? There is no water on any other planets we know of.

Except Mars.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Now regarding the flood as alluded to in OP:

The surface of the Earth is around 75% water coverage. Could this water been from the flood?

If not where did this water come from? There is no water on any other planets we know of.

Before peole get excited: This is only a question.

Hydrogen and oxygen are 2 of the 5 most common elements in the entire universe, they would have been a part of the cloud which formed the Earth billions of years ago. Furthermore there is water elsewhere in the universe. Europa is entirely encased in ice, many kilometres thick. Mars has small amounts of water, as does the Moon. The clouds of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune include water molecules. They certainly include Hydrogen and Oxygen in other compounds. We've observed VAST stellar clouds of ethanol and even an amino acid, which includes lots of Hydrogen and Oxygen in the form of -OH components of the molecules. Comets are formed of water ice and Carbon Dioxide ice. It's been suggested in centuries to come we might divert comets into the Martian surface to help add more water to the planet. Bombardment by comets in the early solar system likely provided some of the water here on Earth.

There's plenty of water outside of Earth, as well as many other chemicals commonly associated with extremely basic pseudo-organic chemistry. The whole "The only place with water is Earth!" thing is commonly peddled by ignorant (and I mean really ignorant) creationists who can't accept they aren't the centre of the universe.

 

[Arioch]

@John99 --

The surface of the Earth is around 75% water coverage. Could this water been from the flood?

No, it couldn't. Even if you were to take all of the water on the planet, including the water which is locked up in the poles and inside animals, you still wouldn't have enough to flood the entire planet, in fact you'd only have about a third of what you'd need. So the question to ask isn't "could this have been the water from the flood?" The proper question to ask is "if the flood happened then where did all of the excess water go?"

Besides, every single piece of evidence we have available argues against a global flood. There are some parts of the planet that haven't seen so much as a drop of rain in millions of years.

If not where did this water come from? There is no water on any other planets we know of.

Except for the water we recently found on the moon(using a very cool impacter), oh and the ice caps on Mars, and don't forget the trace amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere of Venus. There are so many places that we know of outside our planet that have water, such as comets and the moon Europa(which may even have liquid water).