Replies

You (and perhaps betty boop and metmom, though they haven't confirmed that you speak for them) have placed your faith (in Christ?) in a central role in your life. It underlies your perception and interpretation of the world. So you assume that everyone else must have faith in something occupying a similar role in their life. And if their interpretation of the world differs from yours, you assume it must be due to whatever you've decided their faith is. But those are incorrect assumptions piled on top of incorrect assumptions.

Actually, as I read TS's posts, he does speak for me.

That said, you are partially correct. I have put my faith in Christ. However, that is not the reason why I believe that everyone puts their faith in something.

Everyone DOES put their faith in something. It's not a matter of *if* they have faith, but what their faith is in.

Everyone has something they consider to be reliable and trustworthy, reliable and trustworthy enough to influence their decision making and life choices. To hang their hat on, so to speak.

For some it's religion, for some it's science, for some it's themselves, whatever. There is a belief in the system or object as being of inherent value and constancy, enough to feel that they can count on it to be dependable for the future.

It's not a matter of *if* they have faith, but what their faith is in.... Everyone has something they consider to be reliable and trustworthy, reliable and trustworthy enough to influence their decision making and life choices. To hang their hat on, so to speak.... For some it's religion, for some it's science, for some it's themselves, whatever. There is a belief in the system or object as being of inherent value and constancy, enough to feel that they can count on it to be dependable for the future.

Outstanding observation, dear sister in Christ! And, oh so very true.

Everyone DOES put their faith in something. It's not a matter of *if* they have faith, but what their faith is in.
Everyone has something they consider to be reliable and trustworthy, reliable and trustworthy enough to influence their decision making and life choices.

To the extent this is true, it's a reflection of the multiple senses of the word "faith." Let's say I have the kind of faith in science that you and TS assert that I do. If so, it's because it has worked and continues to work; it produces results that lead to predictions of future results, which then are borne out (or the predictions are revised). It's reliable in that sense--in the sense that my Saturn is a reliable car, and I trust it will get me where I want to go.

Is that really the kind of faith you have in Christ--that He will dispense reliable results if you push the right buttons? I doubt it--if so, I'd call that (to borrow betty boop's term) a "low-quality faith."

Faith in God does not require real-world results and so is an entirely different thing than faith in science. It suits your purposes to elide that difference so you can imply that I've replaced faith in God with faith in science. But in fact, it's why the two can co-exist: one can have faith in a transcendent God who loves us and willed the universe into being, as well as faith that science is able to discover how that universe works.