Knowledge is something you can rationally and logically demonstrate to others. If you cannot demonstrate the truth of your belief, then it can't be considered knowledge.
Sure. But from what basis? Using what assumptions? Everyone has to make assumptions.
Your statement implies assumptions, such as that it's even
possible to demonstrate something rationally and logically to someone else. You're
assuming rationality and the existence of logic. Why is that a thing? Why should I believe that there are categories such as clear or unclear terms, true or false propositions, and valid or invalid arguments? (I do, by the way.)
If you don't believe in a Creator, and thinking or consciousness is merely the moving around of electrons in the brain, then there is no basis for authority whatsoever. So, for example, if you say that "Knowledge is something you can rationally and logically demonstrate to others." why should I believe that? That statement is merely the result of electrons moving around in your brain. Why is the moving around of electrons in
your brain any better than the moving around of electrons in anyone else's brain? Perhaps most telling: why does the moving around of electrons in
your brain have more authority than the moving around of electrons in the brain of someone
diametrically opposed to you?
Materialism has no epistemology at all. As science has told us again and again, science cannot arrive at truth, it can only approximate it. Moreover, science cannot ever tell us the "oughtness" of anything. Science cannot tell us why embryonic stem cell research is evil: science only judges the ethics of a behavior by the possibility of that behavior. Can we do it? Then we should. Under materialism, no one can know anything at all, there is no meaning, and you might just as well kill yourself.
The Christian epistemology is very different. God the Holy Spirit convicts us that the Bible is true. What is truth? The set of all statements that correspond to reality
as God sees it. Now we have a foundation on which we can build. The Bible assumes logic: logic is rooted in the very character of God. Why do we have consciousness? Because we are made in the image of God, and God has consciousness. Why are there absolute truths? Because God created the universe, He is utterly logical and never contradicts Himself, which implies that the statement "There are no absolute truths" contradicts itself. (Is it true for everyone? Then it's false!)
Faith is about beliefs, not knowledge.
Beliefs are not "throw yourself off the cliff" types of statements. As in, "go out on a limb and believe
that." I'm willing to allow a distinction between the two, but not a separation. In one sense, I suppose you could say that "I believe the Bible is true" is a true statement. But I also
know the Bible is true, because the Holy Spirit has convinced me of that fact. In the same way, I
believe Jesus Christ came to this earth, lived a perfect life, died on the cross for my sins, rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, and will come again to judge everyone. But I also know those things, because the Bible says it. If you want to say that beliefs are your fundamental assumptions, and knowledge everything you can logically derive from that, fine. But everyone has assumptions. Everyone has to have a starting-place. I find talking about the starting-place to be the most fruitful discussions, oftentimes, because the issues seem simpler.
Historically, interestingly, the word "belief" used to be a
stronger word than "knowledge". That is, it was considered a stronger statement to say "I believe
x." than to say "I know
x."
