You still it wrong. Sorry to say.
That's ok. I wouldn't learn if you agreed
You cannot believe what you don't trust. We use trusts, sometimes in place of believe. You can trust anyone you don't know based on instinct or first contact. Your believe is actually base on fore knowledge. While your faith is the highest.
Hmm, I like your assumption in that first statement, but you are assuming I am some logical reasonable person however who cannot believe the impossible, and that by believing a thing necessarily makes it so. Have you considered that I may be wrong in my trust of a person whom I have only just met for the first time? After all, the fact that i trust a person does not mean that person is trustworthy!
The very notion that I merely believe is rather indicative of the fact that my trust is incomplete or baseless. If I were to base my belief on instinct or first contact, as you say, I am afraid I can't see how that amounts to "fore knowledge". It does sound like the judging of a book by its cover to me, if you see what I mean, though I can see how you call it "having faith". I may have faith, as you say however, but even that, in this instance is not based on any evidence, for if it were, why I am not asserting that I am absolutely certain, which by saying "I believe", I most definitely am not?
Many times we claim to have faith falter at the slightest sight of obstacle. Saying I believe I can fly is in order. You have to back it up with action before your faith can be felt.
I agree with your first statement. For it is such that if I had faith in my belief, and met an obstacle, my faith flounders. Would you not then claim that my faith was groundless therefore, however much of it I had before I faltered? And is this not the type of faith I alluded to having but hit the ground as soon as I attempted to fly out that window, some kind of untested faith based on an ill-conceived belief?
Since you have never fly before, it remain just BELIEF. If you truly have faith in your ability to fly, you would demostrate it at the slightest opportunity.
You are jumping a stage here Ola (may I by the way?). Of course if I did have faith in my ability to fly, I would fly. But I could have faith only because I have evidence or something that makes me believe I can fly. The fact still remains that I may attempt to fly, and still not be able to fly at all, and I may not know this having never tried flying. The point is whether I have faith or belief, I can most definitely not fly, and no amount of believing or faith will change that fact whether I try it or not. And if I were to jump out that window, well.
Faith is the highest level in conviction. By FAITH, men achieve extraordinary. People who faith in their ability don't recite the I CAN DO mantra. They act once opportunity present itself.
"I have done", is the highest level of conviction Ola, after that comes "I can", and way back in third would come, "I believe I can fly". But do please recognise that I am not saying what is, or must be for everyone, but what is for me. I do agree with you though that most things we do, we do because we have the faith that the result will be as we believe it will be. We have never done them before, but believe that if we did, the result would be as we desired.
This is however not always the case, as many have believed in the utter improbable. I think it is for this reason that it is written, which I give in Yoruba, that should "ma se da owo le oun koun lai ko ro be igbehin re yio ti ri" (which in my coloq translates to "do not put your hands on anything without first considering how it will turn out"). The implication of the statement is that one should not just believe anything without first, at least, considering it.
In religion, we talk of BELIEVERS and FAITHFULS. The TRUST is not used as often because religion demand utmost conviction.
Yes, I know that religious people use such language. I however have personally wondered why they do not claim to be more certain than mere believers. Take for instance the quote from the Bible, "For God so loved the world, that he gave His only begotten Son. . . . . ". Many people who read that sentence will claim to believe that it is true, but ask them how it is true, or what the next line means, and its rather easy to see how they do not even know what it is they mean by what they claim to believe. Or is something much more not meant by the expression "Whosoever believeth in him shall live eternal life"?
Still, from a religious point of view, you are most absolutely correct in your analysis, and my painting can only be called wrong as such. I would say that it is not so much that my picture is wrong, but that it is a wrong picture as far as you are concerned. I am sure we would iron out the differences, if there are any, as we engage in other topics though.
Thank you for painting for me. You paint a most beautiful picture. :-*