Re: ATHEISTS .... explain
My point can be illustrated by asking question; How does faith differ from
reason? from a somewhat different perspective.
Consider this question: Why does the theist employ two concepts, reason and faith, to designate different methods of acquiring knowledge, instead of just using the concept of reason by itself?
In other words, why is it necessary for the thiests to introduce the idea of faith at all? What purpose does it serve that is not served by reason?
The answer is obvious: the thiests wishes to claim as knowledge beliefs that have not been (and often cannot be) rationally demonstrated, so he posits faith as an alternative method of acquiring knowledge. Faith permits the thiests to claim the status of truth for a belief even though it cannot meet the rational test of truth.
Thus, the thiest is forced to defend the position that there are two methods by which man can arrive at knowledge: by reason and by faith.
Faith is required only if reason is inadequate; if reason is not deficient in some respect, the concept of faith becomes vacuous.
The thiest creates the need for faith by denying the efficacy of reason. Without this element of denial, faith is stripped of its function; there are no gaps of knowledge for it to fill.
If reason is comprehensive, if no sphere of reality is exempt from its scrutiny, there are no grounds on which to posit faith as an alternate method of cognition. If reason can tell us anything there is to know, there is no longer a job for faith.
The entire notion of faith rests upon and presupposes the inadequacy of reason.
This explains why discussions in favor of faith are always accompanied by references to the limits of reason. The thiests must use this procedure in order to prepare the necessary groundwork for faith. Without this preparation, he will be in the position of advocating the use of a concept for which there is no use.
As an advocate of reason;
Is reason provides man with knowledge of reality; yes.
Is reason vital to man's existence; yes.
Man's rational capacity is his distinguishing characteristic but some aspects of existence cannot be comprehended by man. Some facts are closed to rational understanding.
Reason is fine as far as it goes, but it is limited. And here faith makes its grand entrance. Faith is called upon where reason is said to fail, and faith is represented as a supplement to reason, not an enemy. In the other words, faith "perfects" reason.
A theist may claim that reason cannot fulfill the psychological and emotional needs of man, or that reason is limited in its application, or that reason is defective in some respects but, regardless of the details, reason must be pushed aside to accommodate faith.
I find every sect, as far as reason will help them, make use of it gladly: and where it fails them, they cry out, It is matter of faith, and above reason.
It's just my opinion.