What is the semantic problem if used in proper context? If that is misunderstood the fault lies not with the user. To automatically attach any other weight or meaning to perfectly good verbs or nouns is understandable but not logically permitted.
We have these words in order to communicate, not to quibble about subtle implications or hidden agendas, unless that is the subject of the conversation. Is it?
Yes, I agree with you on all points.
What I thought was interesting to me was that I could replace the word “Belief" with the lack of “Knowledge" and keep the idea or thought of the commutation. And by doing this it seemed obvious that the
root meaning for “Belief" may be the lack of “knowledge".
So it seemed to me that using the word “Belief" is referring to a lack of “knowledge" and when there is a disagreement about “Belief" it is a disagreement about the “knowledge" of the thought or subject.
When used in the following way. “I believe you look better in a red dress than the yellow one." It sounds better than “I know you look better in a red dress than the yellow one."
That’s the same when used in religion. “I believe……. “I know……
Do you see where I am headed?
A person is more likely to say “I believe" because it is a softer meaning and it is ok to use even if it is untrue. So the comparison would be, “I believe god exists." For some people it is the same as “I am not sure but I think and hope that god exists?"
In other words, take way the use of the word “belief". And tell the people that they have to use “know" when talking about god. And you may have a lot of people realizing that they really don’t know if god does exist. Which shows a lack of “knowledge" when they begin questioning themselves. Yet, they do not question themselves when using the word “Belief".
"Belief" is weak and without authority.
Point being, a god that requires "Belief" is a weak god and lacking in "Knowledge".