Why is faith different? - Page 7

لولوالمسافرة · 12-23-2007, 06:00 PM

I think faith is return to one who believes in one God no matter what religon he belongs to.
thnx

esa888 · 01-05-2008, 12:36 PM

Faith is a product of belief, if one is to believe then
you must have been, either told this is the truth
and accept or have knowledge of this matter.

If said faith is only a product of belief, then that is
all it must be , there is a big difference. To know
is that difference.

Our minds are very strong and creative, if we have
such a strong need for something our minds can create
this for us, the trick is to get beyond the words and scripture's
and complicated idea's we have.

This is the problem i have with our world religions , i still think
that we are all the more richer for them, but the simple truth's are buried
within over a thousand years of men's idea's and concept's.

There are no set ways to learn about spiritual matters, all i myself
can do is to remain open.

noctuary · 01-06-2008, 07:35 AM

I don't believe in faith.

cyberpi · 01-06-2008, 01:18 PM

I see that faith is more than believe, because a person is more than flesh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by noctuary

I don't believe in faith.

Do you believe in being faithful?

noctuary · 01-06-2008, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I see that faith is more than believe, because a person is more than flesh.

Do you believe in being faithful?

I believe in being faithful in the non spiritual/religious sense to my boyfriend etc. You can google faithful to see what I mean.
As for faith? No. I don't have faith or hope. I am bi-polar. You figure that out.

chron · 01-06-2008, 10:33 PM

I'm bi-polar, too, btw.

Seems I have to keep reminding people on this thread what the topic is:

Faith, whether or not you believe in it, is something that does exist. It's treated differently from most all other areas of life, IMO. The question is, Why is faith worthy of a different standard? Why isn't it held to standards of reason as most all other things in life seem to be?

I find a lot of people on this thread that think they need to share with me what faith is, but I believe I have a handle on that.

Then there are those who feel the need to convince me that I should "have faith."

But all I really want is an explanation of the questions above.

Still hoping someone can explain it.

btw, saying you don't believe in faith doesn't mean it doesn't exist, of course. I think you'd be more accurate and precise to say that there is no place for faith in your life, or that you don't believe that faith does any good, or doesn't work.

noctuary · 01-07-2008, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chron

I'm bi-polar, too, btw.

Seems I have to keep reminding people on this thread what the topic is:

Faith, whether or not you believe in it, is something that does exist. It's treated differently from most all other areas of life, IMO. The question is, Why is faith worthy of a different standard? Why isn't it held to standards of reason as most all other things in life seem to be?

I find a lot of people on this thread that think they need to share with me what faith is, but I believe I have a handle on that.

Then there are those who feel the need to convince me that I should "have faith."

But all I really want is an explanation of the questions above.

Still hoping someone can explain it.

btw, saying you don't believe in faith doesn't mean it doesn't exist, of course. I think you'd be more accurate and precise to say that there is no place for faith in your life, or that you don't believe that faith does any good, or doesn't work.

No. I think my direct statement of I don't believe in faith works just well for me.
I never made mention if it is real or not. I simply stated I don't believe in it. And that's MY accurate statement.

chron · 01-07-2008, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by noctuary

No. I think my direct statement of I don't believe in faith works just well for me.
I never made mention if it is real or not. I simply stated I don't believe in it. And that's MY accurate statement.

So we're saying essentially the same thing, I think.

The problem occurs because the word "believe" can mean "accept something as true" and also "to hold something as an opinion."

I didn't mean to say you didn't know what you were talking about. Please forgive if I've offended.

noctuary · 01-07-2008, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chron

So we're saying essentially the same thing, I think.

The problem occurs because the word "believe" can mean "accept something as true" and also "to hold something as an opinion."

I didn't mean to say you didn't know what you were talking about. Please forgive if I've offended.

It's ok. I do think we are saying the same thing actually.

Bruno's logic · 01-07-2008, 05:19 AM

Quote:

What to do, indeed?

For me, there is this to do: ask questions, seek truth, engage in dialog and conversation with those who care about this topic, learn from them, consider, revise, go on, and on, and on.

Coming back to my original question, which has yet to be answered, why is, in the mind of some, faith not a matter to be questioned? Exempt from the strictures of logical thought?

Hello Chron,

It seems we joined this forum at about the same time…

I can’t tell you why this is but I know it is true… You must have faith that I speak the truth… This fact must not be questioned by anyone for any reason…

The fact that organized religions tell us that we cannot question their irrational and unreasonable stories and sources is proof and evidence enough that they don’t have the answers to the questions that have always eluded humanity… What is this place? Why do I experience this place like I do? Do others experience this place?
Why?
Because if this knowledge is found out to be false then their power, their control, will be lost because people will be free to explore existence with an open mind until they happen onto the truth.

This next paragraph may very well be the actual truth of this place, this reality, but I can’t prove it to myself let alone anyone else, so this theory will have to be taken on faith without question…

An ancient entity has found the path to continued self awareness but is also all too aware of the danger that lies within free will. So when it encounters fledgling entities with free will (humanity) on the slippery slope that is lined with hate and fear, cruelty and lies whose path can only lead to some kind of dense 3 dimensional hellish place then this ancient entity does what it can to lead these ignorant spirits of space on the path of love and compassion, kindness and forgiveness, for this great spirit knows the answers to the elusive questions but understands that these babes of existence will need to evolve for a while before they too can understand anything more than…
“ Because I said it is better this way….”

I can’t prove this but the world would be a better place if everyone believed it so I am going to plant the seed here and hope that 6 billion people will accept it without question and have faith in the power of love and compassion, kindness and forgiveness, and so stop all of the stupid killing and hating and unnecessary suffering….
~Bruno

cyberpi · 01-07-2008, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by noctuary

I believe in being faithful in the non spiritual/religious sense to my boyfriend etc. You can google faithful to see what I mean.
As for faith? No. I don't have faith or hope. I am bi-polar. You figure that out.

Then you are placing faith in your boyfriend. If you ask your boyfriend to do something, does he do it? Then you have faith... the faith of your boyfriend.

No hope? You hope for nothing? Nobody has hope of you? I don't think it is possible, but I see you think it.

cyberpi · 01-07-2008, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chron

The question is, Why is faith worthy of a different standard? Why isn't it held to standards of reason as most all other things in life seem to be?

Well...

Whatever standards or reasons you require of somebody to place faith in them is your choice. Whatever standards or reasons others require of you to place faith in you, is their choice.

So then what are your standards or reasons? Does a verbal agreement work? Deposit required? A written agreement with the signature of three lawyers? A resume with five hand-written recommendations... and a credit check?

chron · 01-07-2008, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Well...

Whatever standards or reasons you require of somebody to place faith in them is your choice. Whatever standards or reasons others require of you to place faith in you, is their choice.

So then what are your standards or reasons? Does a verbal agreement work? Deposit required? A written agreement with the signature of three lawyers? A resume with five hand-written recommendations... and a credit check?

You misunderstand.

Here's what I mean.

"Rain is caused by atmospheric conditions."

"No, no, rain is caused by the gods."

"But I can show you why rain is caused by atmospheric conditions. There are reasons why this is true."

"I refuse to believe other than that rain is caused by the gods. Why? Because my gods say that is the way it is, and I have faith in them. I trust them, and that is all there is to it."

Now listen to another conversation.

"Rain is caused by atmospheric conditions."

"No, no, rain is caused by little green mice of microscopic size that float in the air."

"But I can show you why rain is caused by atmospheric conditions. There are reasons why this is true."

"I refuse to believe other than that rain is caused by little green mice of microscopic size that float in the air. Why? Because I have faith that this is so. I trust my intuition, and that is all there is to it."

What is the difference in these two conversations? As I see it, there is only one difference. We somehow think it's okay for the god-believer to hold her belief that rain comes from the gods, but that it is not okay for the green-mice-believer to hold his belief that rain comes from green mice.

Why?

Why is faith different?

This is not about asking for proof -- at least, not in my mind. I simply want to know why we ascribe this special place to faith.

The bottom line for me is that I don't think faith is any different from any other area of life, and should not be given an exemption to the rules of logic. If that means I expect a person of faith to support their beliefs with logical reasons, then, yes.

Do I expect a certain standard? Why, yes. The standard that all rational men and women are held to.

Why is this wrong? If someone can give me a reason why it should be okay for faith to be exempt from logical reasoning, then I'll consider whether or not to ascribe to the things that faith says.

Thomas Merton speaks of a reasonable faith, but that phrase seems oxymoronic to me.

Saltmeister · 01-07-2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chron

Here's what I mean.

"Rain is caused by atmospheric conditions."
"No, no, rain is caused by the gods."
"But I can show you why rain is caused by atmospheric conditions. There are reasons why this is true."
"I refuse to believe other than that rain is caused by the gods. Why? Because my gods say that is the way it is, and I have faith in them. I trust them, and that is all there is to it."

Now listen to another conversation.

"Rain is caused by atmospheric conditions."
"No, no, rain is caused by little green mice of microscopic size that float in the air."
"But I can show you why rain is caused by atmospheric conditions. There are reasons why this is true."
"I refuse to believe other than that rain is caused by little green mice of microscopic size that float in the air. Why? Because I have faith that this is so. I trust my intuition, and that is all there is to it."

What is the difference in these two conversations? As I see it, there is only one difference. We somehow think it's okay for the god-believer to hold her belief that rain comes from the gods, but that it is not okay for the green-mice-believer to hold his belief that rain comes from green mice.

Why? Why is faith different? This is not about asking for proof -- at least, not in my mind. I simply want to know why we ascribe this special place to faith.

The bottom line for me is that I don't think faith is any different from any other area of life, and should not be given an exemption to the rules of logic. If that means I expect a person of faith to support their beliefs with logical reasons, then, yes.

Do I expect a certain standard? Why, yes. The standard that all rational men and women are held to.

Why is this wrong? If someone can give me a reason why it should be okay for faith to be exempt from logical reasoning, then I'll consider whether or not to ascribe to the things that faith says.

Ok, chron. I think I see what you mean.

Both cases involve scientific falsities. I would disagree that we should encourage the god-believer to go on believing in something that is, to a significant degree, impractical, not just financially, economically and scientifically, but even spiritually.

The question is, does a person really need to believe that rain is caused by the gods? Are there not other ways to honour the gods without having to believe that they cause rain? Did the gods actually say that?

It may, for a while, seem like a desecration of something sacred, or a dilution of a requirement essential for holiness.

Moreover, if others can express devotion to your gods in other ways, without having to believe that they cause rain, is that not more honourable and noble than what you do? Why would the gods, if they were honourable and noble, hold you to such a standard? It is easy to say, "I believe the gods cause rain" but what virtue does that achieve? Is that not just a way of pleasing others who believe the same thing? Isn't that just politics?

cyberpi · 01-07-2008, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chron

I find a lot of people on this thread that think they need to share with me what faith is, but I believe I have a handle on that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chron

You misunderstand...

I find that the overwhelming majority of people have the word 'Faith' wrong, including yourself. But it is just a word, and a word is just a symbol or a standard for the real thing. If we disagree with the definition of a word, then do we disagree with the real thing? Not necessarily.

If a person tells me something, and then my reasoning says they are wrong or dishonest, I will bring the evidence to their attention. If that person argues then I will hear their argument, to gain more evidence and because my reasoning or evidence could equally be wrong. But if it is a lie, and damage has been done from it, then I will rebuke and remove trust and faith in that person. If that person confesses to the cause and agrees to not do it again, then I will replace overwhelming trust and faith in that person. Replacing that trust and faith, counter to all known statistics, is the harder thing to do... especially if you think people are merely flesh.

Regarding the rain... I tell you that I found that the entire fabric of space, of time, of matter... every particle, force, and the nature of the interactions of those things, the entire fabric of everything physical was made. The reason I say that comes more from science than from any religion. It comes mostly from a study of control theory, information theory, communications theory, and thermodynamics. A lot of theory... but the subjects hold up scientifically and are in widespread use in engineering. Whether or not you believe me is irrelevant, because that is NOT a matter of Faith. Why? I am not asking you to do anything and you are not asking me to do anything. I suspect you are not going to do very much with the information I have provided and I am not trying to make you believe, or to sell to you, or to get you to join my club. I am just communicating. You do with it what you please. I speak truthfully and honestly whether I am right or wrong... but telling you that does not prove it.

If I don't consider any of that faith... then what do I consider to be faith? I'd like to send you a present as a token of my sincerity. Please send to me in PM your name and address so that I can deliver the present. Do you have faith in me? By what standard or reasoning would you place faith in me? What evidence can I provide to you that I am honest and trustworthy? What can I do to assure you that you will enjoy the gift?