There is a phenomena I've observed (not here, but recent discussions here have triggered the memory). It works like this, someone spouts a "word salad" and many people react with "Gee I didn't understand any of that, it must be BRILLIANT!"
A case in point; Hebrews 11:1
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
OK, lets break that apart ....
... faith is the substance ...
In my experience, things of substance have physical weight .... how much does any amount of faith weigh?? .....
..... of things hoped for .....
OK, it is the substance of things "hoped for" .... but do not necessarily exist?? ... so I guess that can make sense. Faith is the substance of things that don't exist even if you wish they did.
... evidence of things not seen .....
OK, well at that time, there were no devices to measure things like wind and atmospheric pressure that we can not see. .... but I suspect that's not what this faith is supposed to be evidence of .... I suspect faith is supposed to be evidence of ghosts and bogeymen that sumsuchitch .....
So did the guy writing this actually believe this trollup or was he crafting something that said nothing. So that later he and the early times equivalent of a liar's club could sit around drinking beer and laughing about???
Thoughts???
The βguy writing thisβ was not a guy.
It was a species.
These words are condensed from at least a hundred and fifty thousand years of oral storytelling which has been submitted to the same evolutionary pressures our bodies have, and has proven to be a culturally stabilizing influence on human fitness... or we wouldn't know anything about them today.
Pit any group of hopeful and faithful humans against any group of disheartened and distrustful humans and see who prevails. It's not ultimately a matter of whether the thing hoped for is literally, or even figuratively true. Humans will try harder when they are expecting a generous reward than when they believe their efforts are in vain.
No one guy is smart enough to see the wisdom of having faith and then to write stories that embody that wisdom so well that they are elevated to the most sacred knowledge of an entire species for thousands of years.
Only evolution can do that.
Would you like Ranch or Thousand Island on that?
Naah I just called it Word Salad.
IMO obfuscation is a Huge tell-tale!
Bullshit is perhaps more descriptive!!
"Breaking it apart" is something I find best to understand the overall context, but It looks like you broke off too much. Let me show you:
Faith is the substance of things hoped for.
Hope is joyful expectation.
If I told you I was going to give you a 100 dollar bill. Even though, you had not yet recieved the 100 dollar bill, it is you "faith". It is the thing you are hoping for because I said I would give it to you.
The word faith is also tied to or has connotations of confidence. So to say, you have confidence that I will give you 100 dollar bill.
Using other context from the biblical text, it says "Faith comes from hearing the [old testiment laws and wisdoms]" Faith has a knowledge connection.
Evidence of things not seen ... proving you have knowledge of something like a skill.
If you are a brain surgeon, I could not just look at you to see your skills of knowledge in brain surgery. BUT, your evidence that you have skills of knowledge of brain surgery is that you can preform the brain surgery as evidence you have the skills.
Faith in another context ties faith to knowledge such as proving faith by showing good deeds:
But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. James 2:18
Faith has strong connections to knowledge of things to do that would be considered good, moral, helpful or skillful things to benefit others.
If it can be proved there is no reason to have faith, as you are no longer hoping for it. Basically there's nothing there (evidence or experience wise) so long as faith is required. In short, you can't tie faith to knowledge because once you have knowledge (evidence or experience), no faith is required.
@Normanbites I don't know for sure where you get your faith, I cannot say I have really heard of it. I have just explained the usage and meaning that it appears to be defined according to context that it is written in.
Do you have some sort of documentation context on your definition of faith?
I actually think that it makes a lot more sense than some word salads I have heard. It is basically saying that faith is what people use when they don't have evidence. Which actually works better in some ways as an anti-religious statement than as a pro-religious one.
Though you are of course using the King James, which can be so badly garbled and far from the original that it becomes meaningless as a representation of the original biblical authors meanings.
I go with @racocn8 . If it is not amenable to a rigorous semantic analysis then it is nothing but nonsense.
Listen to Deepak Chopra. Spiritual word salads devoid of substance or truth; really more like diarrhea.
Deepak is like a saner drump.......
@AnneWimsey
...and he has his audience in the west where the housewives who have nothing much to do are smitten with him and making him rich too!
Why is there air and other marvelous things?.... Bill cosby