----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 7:48 AM
Subject: RE: Numbers, Machine and Father Ted

Brent Meeker writes:

> >
> Seems like "faith" to me - belief without or contrary to evidence.  What 
> is the "x" you refer to?

There is a subtle difference. It is possible to have faith in something 
and still be consistent. For example, I could say that I have faith that God
will answer my prayers regardless of whether he has ever answered any
prayers before in the history of the world. However, I think most religious
people would say that they have "faith" that God will answer their prayers
because that it what God does and has done in the past. In so saying, they
are making an empirically verifiable claim, at least in theory. They can be 
to come up with a test to support their belief, which can be as stringent as 
like; for example, they might allow only historical analysis because God 
not comply with any experiment designed to test him. I suspect that no such
test would have any impact on their beliefs because at bottom they are just
based on blind faith, but given that they do not volunteer this to begin 
with, it
shows them up as inconsistent and hypocritical.

Stathis Papaioannou

 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to