Jac, if you want to appeal to the Webster's definitions to say doubt and belief do not coexist shouldn't those definitions at least read "total absence of belief" instead of "uncertainty of belief" and "absolute refusal to believe in the slightest degree" instead of "inclination not to believe"?
In the real world, a judge in a criminal trail (standard of proof = beyond a reasonable doubt) will often instruct the jury along the following lines: If you believe the accused committed the crime, but you still have a reasonable doubt left, then you must acquit.
....it would seem a good number of us think doubt and belief can and do coexist
.
.
.
when you were looking at Webster's did you check the definition for "subjective" as it would seem that you and I aren't using the same one. From Webster's:
3 a : characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind
how does one separate one's belief from one's mind so that it becomes independent of one's mind so that it is not subjective?
Webster doesn't do it for you? How about the twelve volume Oxford's dictionary, which defines doubt as "to be undecided in opinion or belief"?
We can play semantics all you like. If you don't like the terms I'm using, then define put whatever label you want on what I am talking about. I'm just using the word as defined by the English vocabulary.
As for the definitions of "subjective" and "objective" . . . it is true that the former can mean "that which relates to the subject." Grammatically, that would be a nominative usage. However, we are using a personal usage, which Webster defines as, "arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes ." This is compared to "objective" which means "or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects , conditions, or phenomena" or again "expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations."
My belief, or lack there of, is an objective reality. The fact that it is measured by direct access of the mind doesn't make that any less true. If it were possible to invent a machine that would scan brain waves and thus tell us what we "believe," then this what tell me the objective fact that I believe in Jesus for my salvation, just as it would tell me the objective fact that I believe 1 + 1 = 2, and
just as it would tell me the objecte fact that I once believed in Santa.
Against this, I know
subjectively that I am in proper fellowship with God, because I see certain things that I
interpret as such (i.e., my love for Him, the fruit of the Spirit, etc.).
So, again, you can define or redefine these terms however you like. If you don't like my usage of them, then feel free to disagree with or claim different usages from the dictionary and tell me how you would label the concepts I'm talking about. Call these foo and yock, for all I care.
Now, as for belief and doubt co-existing, since FFC has brought it up as well:
We have already defined "doubt" as "to be undecided . . . on belief." Uncertainty is an obvious aspect of doubt. However, looking at "believe":
1 a : to have a firm religious faith b : to accept as true, genuine, or real <ideals> <believes>
2 : to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something <believe>
3 : to hold an opinion : THINK
transitive verb
1 a : to consider to be true or honest <believe> <you>
2 : to hold as an opinion : SUPPOSE
Notice that, with exception to believe as it relates to opinion, to believe something is to regard it as true. Uncertainty is not allowed.
Thus, I believe that a person cannot doubt something and at the same time affirm that they believe it. It violates the law of non-contradiction. In fact, this goes back to the discussion I was having with Felgar and Byblos. Let's continue the religious aspects of "believe" and "doubt." I cannot say, "I believe that Jesus has saved me, but I don't know that I am saved." If you do not know that Jesus has saved you, then you have not believed in Him to save you. Why? Because you have not believed (considered to be true) His promise, but instead, you doubted (undecided as to belief or opinion).
With all this in mind, we do know that doubt and belief comingle in human beings all the time. How is this so, given what I have said above? First of all, we should note that there is no such thing as "levels of belief." It is logically impossible to "sort of" believe something. You either do or you do not. If you only sort of believe something, then you don't actually believe it. You almost do, but you do not. So, when it comes to the Gospel, the question is, "Have you believed?" That is an objective question.
Secondly, we should see that there are two distinct aspects of information processing. In the first stage, we receive it, be it by sight, sound, smell, or direct access (i.e., to our own thoughts). The second stage is to process that information. We then come to conclusions about how reliable it is. So, when a person hears the Gospel, the receive it and process it. They come to the situation described earlier, which is where they determine what the chances are of this being true. Once this is completed (not forgetting the role of the HS), they decide whether or not to act on it. In this case, the action is to trust Christ for everlasting life. You see, then, that they have believed without doubt, because
they decided to regard the words of Christ as true. They were no longer in a state of indecision regarding belief or opinion.
Now, they only "know" they are saved to the extent that they know the promise is true. Thus, they can be progressively more confident that their knowledge is not fallicious, but that does not change the fact that it is, in fact, knowledge. By way of example, most children believe in Santa at some point. They are absolutely sure he exists. However, this knowledge (which is what it is), is based only on their parents words and their interpretation of Christmas morning. These two things strengthen their reasons to believe. If they could go to the North Pole and actually meet Santa, they would be even more assured. Thus, their faith is now substantiated.
The same is true with Christian belief. We can choose to trust or believe Christ without all the answers. And there may be many things we do not understand. However, as we go through life, our faith becomes more and more substantiated, which allows us to reach even greater hights of faith - not that our faith is "bigger," because there is again no such thing as "sort of believing," but rather that we are capable of believing bigger things!
That is why you see belief and doubt comingled in human beings. They choose to believe certain things, but they are not capable of believing others. How does that all translate here? We are called to present the Gospel and ask people to take Christ at His word to save them from Hell. Given the ministry of the Holy Spirit, these people now decide whether or not to accept the offer of salvation.
Again, doubt and belief cannot coexist at the same time on the same subject, because to doubt means to not belief, and to believe means not to doubt.
God bless
).
