Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search

Average Rating

(2 votes)

RatingRated by

You must login to vote

a question...

who can defend their faith against logic,
and on what grounds does logic stand against faith?

(oh the human psyche, such a frail thing...
I'd like to believe everyone's played this game before)


The following comments are for "nothing whatsoever"
by ghostpoisonsturgeon

Jude v.3 "I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints”

Titus 1:9 "He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it."

My comments were for those who already believe.
To encourage to be faithful in what we have received, and not let the political correctness of this world make us useless.

( Posted by: robnjop [Member] On: April 11, 2009 )

Ah yes the mine is better than yours game. A game that may have done more harm than good.
If you find the answer let me know.

( Posted by: chapter1 [Member] On: April 11, 2009 )

The GREAT Puzzle...
No one has the all the pieces to complete the puzzle and finish the big picture in clarity, not in through the physical senses and limitations of physical mind anyway, but, yes, there is a game that has been played many times over and over again, and again, NOTHING is ever what it seems in this arena.

Most excellent piece, provocative introspective thinking, leaves room for the opening of the spiritual mind.


( Posted by: TheRealKarmaTseringLhamo [Member] On: April 12, 2009 )

faith vs logic
To me, you are looking for a fight between a football team and a basketball team.

Faith is what we feel. Logic is what we think. In my readings in college, it seemed the most logical of mankind (esp Einstein) believed in a higher power.

Naturally, each person must come to their own conclusion, but I think this question you've asked is no different from the "did the chicken come first?" question...

( Posted by: scherecwich [Member] On: April 24, 2009 )

double helix base of thought
I'm not so much looking for a fight, but merely remarking on the pervasive paradox present in all teachings and all philosophy. To me, faith and logic have an equal pull as each can continually bury the other up into the highest realms of the human experience. Faith prevails because it 'feels right', though feelings differentiate from one person to the next, therefore so does what is 'right'. Logic prevails because of reasonable arguments in uncertainty, but it can also kill itself on these same grounds. In the end it is belief that matters, but only in an individual sense. Beyond the individual, all that will ultimately come of this is nothing whatsoever.

Personally I do believe in God, though not a God that can be even remotely understood or described by this frail human psyche. This is what I disagree with in organized religion. I find it ridiculous that anyone can try to tell anyone else how to communicate with, or experience, God.

Of course, my belief can be just as easily dismantled through the application of logic, as any can. But, that should never stop one from believing what one will.

( Posted by: ghostpoisonsturgeon [Member] On: April 26, 2009 )

belief dismantling?
How can you dismantle belief with logic, when the sheer nature of belief belies logic? Belief, as you said, will always win out, whether that belief is for or against the nature of god.

(side note: it is a popular topic today. The discussion between the two is even brought up in Nicolas Cages' new movie: Knowing)

( Posted by: scherecwich [Member] On: April 29, 2009 )

It's Easy
Logic and faith are synonymous as I understand you to mean them.

The following is a summation of hours of conversation:

[i]Logic[/i/] I refute your God because there are too many things that don't make sense to me in a reality governed by God.

[i]iFaith[/i/] I refute your logic because there are too many things that don't make sense to me in a reality governed by logic.

Logic How can you know you're right?

Faith Because I am. How can you know you're right?

Logic Because I am.

In both cases you're trying to prove the unprovable. Logic breaks down, faith (meaning belief in a guiding superior power) breaks down.

In the end it is just what you believe.

( Posted by: CyanideEyes [Member] On: July 14, 2009 )

You took Jude:1:3 (the proper way of citing a Bible verse incidently). I use the King James Bible because it is beautiful and because it is authoritative.

Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

This is an admonition to fight for the truth of the message (contend the faith) against defilers (ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness) within the old clergy (who were before of old ordained). It is not a call to proslytize the masses or defend the faith against the faithless (there are scriptures that say this but this ain't one of them - in context

As for Titus 1:9 it is nothing more than the flattering description of the recipient of letter by the writer. To get the full conxtext I'd have to make this twice as long and I don't want to so here is the link -

If you can't take the KJV then feel free to have the site translate to your prefered version for either reference.

I say this as a Christian.

( Posted by: CyanideEyes [Member] On: July 14, 2009 )

You are 100% correct in what you have said here, 100%.

I appreciate very much your understanding of the scriptures.

But the whole story is that this comment was an explanation of another comment I had made a day earlier to three people who were believers. This post I (probably incorrectly) believed to be a sort of rebuke to what I had discussed earlier with these three people.

And I was explaining, using these scriptures that you correctly understand, that what I had written was written only for these people. Not for the "masses" as you say.

As for Titus 1:9 being only a "flattering description of the recipient of letter by the writer", I disagree.

Perhaps I will be able to find the old posts I speak of so that you may understand the context of the whole thing.

By the way, I am robnjop, I have asked for my forgotten password to be sent a while back but it wasn't, so a new identity.

( Posted by: nativeokie [Member] On: July 16, 2009 )

Titus 1:9
You're right.

I inferred from it that Paul was commending Titus for being possesed of all of the virtues that he (Paul) makes mention of in verses 4 through 9.

On re-reading it I can see that that Paul was likely reffering to the qualities he found lacking in the Cretians and that he hoped Titus could/would instill in them .

I stand enlightenned.

( Posted by: CyanideEyes [Member] On: July 16, 2009 )

Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.