Tom,

I do not doubt your faith at all. I was only pointing out that IMO it should for all of us be properly placed. <s>

Your use of the word "hope" opens a whole new discussion. Biblical hope is different than human hope. Biblical hope could also be defined as absolute confidence whereas human hope could also be defined as uncertin expectations or the uncertainty of one's expectations. Words and their definitions again.. Ugh.. <g>



>Doug;
>
>I only have faith in God. As for anything else I have "hope"! I have hope that my sprinler system will work. However, anything to do with man has imperfections and may not work as advertised. :)
>
>As a Metrology Engineer I worked with “tolerances and uncertainties”. The “tolerances” were due to the human inability to create anything that is perfect and the “uncertainties” are the lack of human ability to account for perfection.
>
>Tom
>
>
>>Tom,
>>
>>>Doug;
>>>
>>>Very interesting! I have a condensed version of the Bible. It is called Faith! :)
>>>
>>>No printing required. No one interprets for me. It is entirely my own.
>>>
>>
>>>snip<
>>
>>Bzzttt! Wrong.. <g>
>>
>>I would suggest that faith, in and of itself is absolutely and totally useless.
>>
>>Huh??
>>
>><g>
>>
>>Faith, Tom, must have two additional components:
>>
>>1) An Object
>>2) Sufficient efficacy in said 'object' as to empower the faith.
>>
>>IOW, I may have faith in my sprinler system but it sure can't help me in other life's situations. I may have faith in you or someone else but at some point your resources will run out. I may even have faith in my faith but my faith will expire at some point.
>>
>>One must place their faith in something (someone) that has the ability and interest in responding.
>>
>>IOW, your faith must be properly place and to be properly placed it must be done so with some amount of conscious thought - even if at a rudimentary level.
>>
>>Does that make sense?
>>
>>Read my bottom tag line again. <g>