Why is faith important?

[oldfart]

A couple of things I want to address, and I would like to hear the story of the origin of bat shit crazy.

The important stuff first: most people know the origin of "mad as a hatter". Mercury was used in the sixteenth through the early nineteenth century to cure beaver pelts for hats. Inhaling mercury compounds caused brain damage and peculiar behavior. Hence the phrase. Something similar happened in the eighteenth and nineteen centuries with the mining of guano deposits. The major domestic deposits in Europe were in large bat caves where bat droppings were concentrated and high levels of nitrates needed for gunpowder production. Workers collecting bat guano exhibited the same kind of behavior as beaver hatters, but luckily it was not as permanent.

In your first paragraph, you point out that in an uncertain world one has to have faith in order to even make a decision. I think one could switch out the word faith and replace it with confidence or trust and have no change in the principle of the idea. And although that by itself would be an interesting conversation, I wanted to remain in the context of religious belief - or even belief in the foundational (lower case t) truths of the universe.

There is a common philosophical argument about the nature of perception and reality which is often extended to a silly level. Even if perception is different from reality, almost all of us behave AS IF perception was reality. This is supported by a simple experiment: at the next sporting event consume three beers and just keep telling yourself that you really don't need to pee, it's all just a perception in your mind!

My point is that we all operate with confidence (to use your term) that the universe works the way we perceive it. It's a great leap, I agree with you, to go from there to a great theological edifice, but it's a leap often made.

One can remain unsure of the purpose of life, morality, what is of real value, quality, and continue to question everything for there is no such thing as righteousness and no one has a foundation for judgement or one believes that he/she is right and know already what is right for everyone else. I see that on these forums a lot and it is symptomatic of that kind of absolute truth belief, imo. Is there middle ground between those two positions? Yeah, I think so, but I see no purpose to it beyond the personal and emotional. I acknowledge that those are important but I need to be convinced of something before I accept it. I can not choose to believe.

I'm not sure I understand you, but let me give it a try. You posit a continuum from a complete amorality at one extreme to a theologically ordained certainty on the other as the basis for moral or ethical decisions. I think this confuses two very different questions. The question basically asked by revealed religions is "What does the Deity want us to do?" The answer is God's will, which is inscrutible. If we are lucky, God's will is for good, but that is an article of faith, not a part of determining our behavior. If God is malevolent, we are truly screwed! The other approach is to first ask "How should a wise person conduct their life and treat other creatures?" This question argues ethics from not a revealed basis by appeal to authority, but from observation, experience, and reason. In many philosophies (like philosophical Taoism) no deity is necessary or assumed. So it's a false dilemma. The opposite pole from theological morality is not amorality, but observational and logically derived morality. Or I could have missed your point entirely!

And that brings me to the next point. I recognize that the process of verification of scientific knowledge is rigorous and need be in order to minimize bias, among other things. That is the same process I use when it comes to the big meaningful things about "life, the universe, and everything". Because of that, I remain unsure of what we as a species "know" about those things. And when it comes to there existing a being or force or will that governs the universe and our lives, my doubt is overwhelming. But even if my doubts weren't so great, and my skepticism so thorough of all things, how could I ever be convinced of a higher power without there being some doubt, even in the least? And if there is doubt, doesn't that make faith pointless?

I make a distinction between "divine inspired revelation of a personified deity" (for example the Abrahamic religions) and philosophies like Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism which may be taken with or without deities. I belong to one of the latter, so I do not believe in a personified deity that can be prayed to, cajoled, bribed, worshiped, etc. The universe is governed by sets of principles and humans are able to discern at least some of those principles. You don't need a personified god to notice patterns in the universe.

What connection to faith and its importance am I missing in it?

I do appreciate your perception of this subject. It is one where my ignorance greatly outweighs my experience.

There is a common straw man argument often used by religious zealots; that those who do not believe as they do are without a moral compass and lack meaning in their life. While they talk a lot about "atheists" in this regard, they are usually also talking about anyone whose beliefs are outside a circle of what they find acceptable. Some for example think that all Christians are OK, others that only "born again" Christians are OK.
I see echos of this argument in your posts and if I am wrong I apologize.

I believe everyone has a faith because some level of faith is necessary for mental health (determining meaning) and social action. Lots of people use a religion for that foundation, but a lot of other folks do not. We live in a society that is actually pretty extreme in this regard, having little understanding of how other people arrive at ethical precepts and answer the big T questions (the theological problems of pain, death, and evil). Everybody is working on their own answers and it's a never-ending process (called being human!). It's also a fun journey to shoot the bull while walking.

Jamie

 

[theword]

Quote: Originally Posted by Coloradomtnman View Post
In the context of religious belief - faith (from Merriam-Webster): the firm belief in something for which there is no proof.

I am a peson without faith.
Some other posters have made the point that when you make decisions under conditions of uncertainty (is there any other kind?), some degree of faith is required. In that sense everyone who is not catatonic has faith.

Quote: Originally Posted by Coloradomtnman View Post
But when it comes to God, or any kind of supernatural phenomena (such as chakras, ghosts, healing energy, crystals, vibes, etc.), there is no preponderance of evidence. The evidence that can be used to support such beliefs, can also be explained with more than one hypothesis or theory. I do not have confidence in religious explanations for existence, life, or the stories and myths of religious origin.

If you have no faith in anything except what can be scientifically proven, why are you even interested in what others think and/or why? If you are absolutely, positively sure that only scientific proof means something "is" it shouldn't matter to you. On the other hand, if there's just this tiny, tiny little piece of curiosity, doubt, or whatever then it seems perhaps you aren't that absolutely, positively sure of the existence of something that can't be proven by scientific evidence.

Your OP was a question of "how and why" and when you get the views of other people I think you're looking for their answer to be something they can absolutely, positively prove to you so that you can see it in black and white before you will accept that “it“ exists.

Have you ever really sat back and looked at the Rocky Mountains and asked yourself if some divine spirit could have caused all the natural occurrences of earthquakes, water erosion and everything else that carved out that splendor? Have you ever looked at the leaves of a tree, or snowflakes and asked why each and every one of them are visibly DIFFERENT? Mankind sure as shit didn't do that. But an invisible being sure could have. Do I think the earth is billions of years old? I can’t prove that it isn’t but I also consider that early scribes had no concept of what “billions” were so they wrote in terms of what they knew at that time in history.

Look at the first chapter of Genesis in the Old Testament - the Adam and Eve story. I look at that as sort of an analogy instead of every single word being the absolute truth. Essentially, I believe that God created a perfect place - the “Garden of Eden” - and put perfect people in that utopian paradise to enjoy forever. Did Eve alone pick an apple off a tree in disobedience of God’s instruction not to do it? Was there really one apple tree with a snake in it tempting Eve? I don’t know. But what I think is that one (or several) of these perfect people decided to test God’s instructions and when they did the result is that they became imperfect and were forever banned from this paradise they had. Mankind is always trying to come up with some way to create this utopian world and it ain’t going to happen. No matter how much they try, mankind will never create some perfect paradise where everybody loves everybody else, etc.

Do I think mankind is descended from apes or ape men? Hell, no - and I don’t give a damn what Isaac Newton, Einstein, or Clarence Darrow believed - not my problem. I may think some people act like apes, but I don’t think it’s because they descended from apes. It’s because they want to act that way.

Religion has taught "faith" to be something other than the "faith" that Abraham had. The faith Abraham, Noah, Jacob (Israel), Moses, Job, David, Isaiah, etc. had was that God had come to them within their minds with thoughts that were different than the worldly thoughts that mere men have. These differing thoughts let them know that there was an invisible Creator. This is the moment of true "faith", when one of God's servants in the flesh of a prophet or saint are contacted by the true God, the Creator of all things.

From this these thoughts that produce faith in the flesh of a prophet or saint, God begins His work through them so whenever He comes into their minds after this, the prophet or saint will instanty know it is Him. Only these prophets and saints were contacted by our Creator and given instructions by Him to do things, such as speak, write, or whatever it is that God wants them to do. Whatever the servants writes or speaks because of the words that God puts in their minds, is called a testimony.

God chose men and future prophets and saints to listen to the testimonies of the servants who are writing and speaking for Him. These people are called believers who can only believe the testimonies of God's servants because they don't have any "faith" to know God, our Creator.

Religious people have taken the word "faith" and made it appear to be like "belief", which isn't true. This is why it's easy to believe the lies of government or religious leaders who have no faith at all. A true believer is one who believes the spoken Word coming out of a saint or prophet's mouth or the writings by them. Even a servants bodily actions are part of a their testimony so a believer can believe a servants actions before believing in the words he's speaking or writing.

Many people believed antichrists in the days of the saints who stole the words a saint spoke and used them for their own selfish purpose to make money or control people. This is where Christ-like religions appeared and why Rome started the religion of Christianity in 325 a.d. It was very easy for Rome to start this false religion because they killed all the saints who had "faith" in our Creator. The former believers of the true gospel that the saints preached were deceived by Rome who adopted Christ-like sayings to lure these believers into their false churches, particularly the false Roman Catholic Church.

Rome used an unbelieving leader named, Constantine, to set up the Vatican and elect a new pope, someone who didn't have any faith in our Creator, but believed in using Christianity to deceive all the old believers of the gospel the saints preached. These early Roman religious leaders knew that Christianity was false because they were only antichrists who were using some of the writings of the saints for their own selfish purpose to make lots of money and control the masses of people that the Roman Empire was slowly losing control of. The Roman Catholic Church did better in controlling the masses of people than the Roman Empire did because they did it with false gods that their Christians believed in.

Since none of these Christians had true "faith", it was very easy for Rome to lead them astray from the teachings of the true saints who knew our Creator, which is true faith and not belief. Why would the saints who knew God have to believe in Him. They already knew Him, which is much different than believing you might know Him some day, which is only hope.

So belief and hope came after God's servants in the flesh of prophets and saints received "faith" from our Creator. For example, it took a lot of belief on the part of the Israelites to follow Moses out of Egypt, who received faith from God after God appeared with thoughts in the mind of Moses. These thoughts within the mind of Moses led him out of Egypt for 50 years before these thoughts came back to lead him back to Egypt to guide the Israelites out of that country. It was very difficult for these Israelites to keep believing in the faith of Moses while they were out in a desert and away from the good life they had in Egypt where they had jobs, food, places to live and not too many worries, except to face hard work and death of their flesh.

The reason God had Moses keep the Israelites out in the desert area for so long was to get the second and third generations of Israelites to stop believing in the Egyptian lifestyle, which was very attractive to the first Israelites that were led out of Egypt. Their offspring grew up without this attraction for the city life with all it's false gods (architectural buildings) to look at and admire, since they were the ones who built the bricks and blocks used for building them.

This way, when God had Moses lead them into their new land of Israel, they would have forgotten how to build these bricks and blocks to build new false gods with. They wouldn't learn how to do these things until many of the Jews were captured by the Babylonians who destroyed Jerusalem and took them to Babylon. It was there that the Jews learned architectural designs because their children learned about them in Babylon schools. When they were released from Babylon after Persia-Medes took over their dynasty, some of the Jews went back to Jerusalem with their newfound architectural education to build synagogues for their false god of Abraham, the god they never knew by the "faith" that Abraham, Israel, Moses, Aaron and his two sons had. They believed in their false gods instead of having the "faith" of David, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc. had that they eventually killed because of their true testimonies from the "faith" they had in our Creator.

By the time the first saint appeared, the Jews believed in the misinterpretations of the scriptures instead of knowing the true Creator by "faith". The first saint, known as Jesus in the new testament, was the first servant of God to have the knowledge to know that the "beast" of Daniel was God's plan to deceive man from the Truth while at the same time, teaching man to build things so that Jesus would have some way of teaching his believers the invisible Kingdom of "Christ", which is where the thoughts of God without deception are kept. There's no plan of "Lucifer" in these pure thoughts of God so that whenever Jesus spoke, it didn't contain any deceptive language to agree with the Jew's false gods.

Since the religious Jews didn't have any "faith" in the true Creator, they couldn't believe in the gospel that Jesus preached or that of the other saints who preached the same gospel. This led them to be jealous of all those who were chosen to believe in the gospel, men who were kept out of the synagogues of the religious Jews because they weren't obeying their religious laws. These believers were murderers, thieves, prostitutes, alcoholics, tax collectors and anyone the religious Jews rejected because of their disobedience to their religious laws. These rejected people were chosen by God to be the true believers of the true gospel that all the saints preached, the servants who God came into their minds with thoughts without deception and guided them out of the "beast". Once they became "born again", meaning the deceptive sinful veil is removed from their flesh, their thoughts changed within their minds so that God could teach them the Truth, which is stored in "Christ" the thoughts without deception, opposite of "Lucifer" and the "beast" that confuse the thoughts of men.

So belief is much different than "faith". If you weren't chosen to have "faith" or "belief of the true gospel", you won't believe in the last saint's testimonies who preach the only gospel that exists, which is the voice of God where the Truth can be heard. Only chosen believers can hear the Truth while the unbelievers are those who believe in only religious ideas handed down from the first four kingdoms of gentile nations of Babylon, Persia-Medes, Greece and Rome and into Christianity (Vatican and Roman Catholic Church). Now it's Christians who don't have "faith" to know our Creator and can't believe the last saint's testimony of "Christ". However, God has chosen a few Christian believers to listen to the gospel I preach. They can hear the Truth while most Christians can't believe the true gospel. Their rejection will lead to the death of my flesh. Read Revelation 6: 9-11 to see that all God's servants must be killed for their testimonies of the true Word of God. That's because unbelievers, who have no "faith" or chosen as believers, get jealous and have to get rid of me to stop me from exposing their false religion and false gods.

 

[oldfart]

Religion has taught "faith" to be something other than the "faith" that Abraham had. The faith Abraham, Noah, Jacob (Israel), Moses, Job, David, Isaiah, etc. had was that God had come to them within their minds with thoughts that were different than the worldly thoughts that mere men have. These differing thoughts let them know that there was an invisible Creator. This is the moment of true "faith", when one of God's servants in the flesh of a prophet or saint are contacted by the true God, the Creator of all things.

Emphasis is mine. You do realize that this is a clinical description of schizophrenia? Your definition of revelation and that of mental illness are identical. I don't say this to insult you or to disparage what you believe in. I would be interested in your answer to the classic problem of revealed religions.

It goes like this. God knows more than we do, so God is always right. God tells us what He wants us to do and we should always obey. But some people out there are actually mentally ill (or possessed by demons, or led astray by temptation, etc) and what they hear is not the true voice of God. Their voices tell them to do evil, to "kill all the cats". Someone you do not know comes up to you and tells you that God's voice in his head tells him to kill all the cats. Do you respond by believing him and helping him kill all the cats? Do you identify him as mentally ill and seek professional help for him? Or do you do nothing because you are uncertain?

I suppose you could pray and depend on God to tell you the answer to this problem. But to any outside observer this is begging the question. It puts each individual in the position of determining what is God's true will in every case. Today would we arrest Abraham for trying to kill his son? Or Aaron for commiting genocide? Is "God told me too" a complete defense for all crimes?

What I am really trying to point out here is that systems of philosophy and religions are to an important extent self-countained systems. If you accept the premise (in this case that God exists and will tell you what to do, and you should follow that instruction) then all questions are answered. Just ask God. It explains too much. Everything becomes God's will and there is no outside standard (law, tradition, morality, ethics, custom) that is superior to God's will. Anything is justified if done in God's name.

To be fair, theologians have been wrestling with this in the Christian church for two millenia. The response is that mentally ill people exist who believe they hear voices from God, and that these can be false voices. Therefore the church must as an institution provide people who hear the voice of God in their head assistance in determining if those voices are true. This is done in two ways. First the church develops a set of morals and ethics based on its fundamental teachings and generally states that messages from God which violate these standards are presumed erroneous. Second, the church provides a mechanism in its ecclesiastical structure to determine what the true word of God is and encourages believers to accept that process.

I would note that the "kill all the cats" problem is not much of a problem for a Jesuit, who has been trained to handle this objection in the manner described above; but it is a serious issue for Christians, such as most evangelicals, who reject ecclesiastical authority. In particular, if the literal parsing of a particular translation of a particular canon of "inspired word of God" determined by each individual is governing, we have to accept either a form of ethical anarchy or determine ethics by vote. Both have been put forward! Of course, if everyone prayed sincerely to God, everyone would get the answer God wants them to have (note they would not have to agree) and the result would be what God intended. So even if we disagree and at least some of us must be wrong, we are doing God's will even if God is telling us things that are different from what he is telling everyone else. Discerning God's truth can be a bitch.

I suggest reading the balance of your post in light of this discussion. The emphasis is mine as is the ommission of parts of your post for brevity.

God chose men and future prophets and saints to listen to the testimonies of the servants who are writing and speaking for Him....This is why it's easy to believe the lies of government or religious leaders who have no faith at all. A true believer is one who believes the spoken Word coming out of a saint or prophet's mouth or the writings by them.

Many people believed antichrists in the days of the saints who stole the words a saint spoke and used them for their own selfish purpose to make money or control people. ....The former believers of the true gospel that the saints preached were deceived by Rome who adopted Christ-like sayings to lure these believers into their false churches, particularly the false Roman Catholic Church.

By the time the first saint appeared, the Jews believed in the misinterpretations of the scriptures instead of knowing the true Creator by "faith". The first saint, known as Jesus in the new testament, was the first servant of God to have the knowledge to know that the "beast" of Daniel was God's plan to deceive man from the Truth while at the same time, teaching man to build things so that Jesus would have some way of teaching his believers the invisible Kingdom of "Christ", which is where the thoughts of God without deception are kept. There's no plan of "Lucifer" in these pure thoughts of God so that whenever Jesus spoke, it didn't contain any deceptive language to agree with the Jew's false gods.....

Since the religious Jews didn't have any "faith" in the true Creator, they couldn't believe in the gospel that Jesus preached or that of the other saints who preached the same gospel....These rejected people were chosen by God to be the true believers of the true gospel that all the saints preached, the servants who God came into their minds with thoughts without deception and guided them out of the "beast". Once they became "born again", meaning the deceptive sinful veil is removed from their flesh, their thoughts changed within their minds so that God could teach them the Truth, which is stored in "Christ" the thoughts without deception, opposite of "Lucifer" and the "beast" that confuse the thoughts of men.

OK folks, I know that I am not really answering the previous poster, as I know what his response will be. His God will enlighten him if and when and in the manner He choses.
But I think the exercise of the reply is worth the effort to show what the response to this line of argument should be.

Peace all, Jamie.

 

[theword]

Religion has taught "faith" to be something other than the "faith" that Abraham had. The faith Abraham, Noah, Jacob (Israel), Moses, Job, David, Isaiah, etc. had was that God had come to them within their minds with thoughts that were different than the worldly thoughts that mere men have. These differing thoughts let them know that there was an invisible Creator. This is the moment of true "faith", when one of God's servants in the flesh of a prophet or saint are contacted by the true God, the Creator of all things.

Emphasis is mine. You do realize that this is a clinical description of schizophrenia? Your definition of revelation and that of mental illness are identical. I don't say this to insult you or to disparage what you believe in. I would be interested in your answer to the classic problem of revealed religions.

It goes like this. God knows more than we do, so God is always right. God tells us what He wants us to do and we should always obey. But some people out there are actually mentally ill (or possessed by demons, or led astray by temptation, etc) and what they hear is not the true voice of God. Their voices tell them to do evil, to "kill all the cats". Someone you do not know comes up to you and tells you that God's voice in his head tells him to kill all the cats. Do you respond by believing him and helping him kill all the cats? Do you identify him as mentally ill and seek professional help for him? Or do you do nothing because you are uncertain?

I suppose you could pray and depned on God to tell you the answer to this problem. But to any outside observer this is begging the question. It puts each individual in the position of determining what is God's true will in every case. Today would we arrest Abraham for trying to kill his son? Or Aaron for commiting genocide? Is "God told me too" a complete defense for all crimes?

What I am really trying to point out here is that systems of philosophy and religions are to an important extent self-countained systems. If you accept the premise (in this case that God exists and will tell you what to do, and you should follow that instruction) then all questions are answered. Just ask God. It explains too much. Everything becomes God's will and there is no outside standard (law, tradition, morality, ethics, custom) that is superior to God's will. Anything is justified if done in God's name.

To be fair, theologians have been wrestling with this in the Christian church for two millenia. The response is that there are mentally ill people exist who believe they hear voices from God, and that these can be false voices. Therefore the church must as an institution provide people who hear the voice of God in their head assistence in determining if those voices are true. This is done in two ways. First the church develops a set of morals and ethics based on its fundamental teachings and generally states that messages from God which violate these standards are presumed erroneous. Second, the church provides a mechanism in its ecclesiastical structure to determine what the true word of God is and encourages believers to accept that process.

I would note that the "kill all the cats" problem is not much of a problem for a Jesuit, who has been trained to handle this objection in the manner described above; but it is a serious issue for Christians, such as most evangelicals, who reject ecclesiastical authority. In particular, if the literal parsing of a particular translation of a particular canon of "inspired word of God" determined by each individual is governing, we have to accept either a form of ethical anarchy or determine ethics by vote. Both have been put forward! Of course, if everyone prayed sincerely to God, everyone would get the answer God wants them to have (note they would not have to agree) and the result would be what God intended. So even if we disagree and at least some of us must be wrong, we doing God's will even if God is telling us things that are different from what he is telling everyone else. Discerning God's truth can be a bitch.

I suggest reading the balance of your post in light of this discussion. The emphasis is mine as is the ommission of parts of your post for brevity.

God chose men and future prophets and saints to listen to the testimonies of the servants who are writing and speaking for Him....This is why it's easy to believe the lies of government or religious leaders who have no faith at all. A true believer is one who believes the spoken Word coming out of a saint or prophet's mouth or the writings by them.

Many people believed antichrists in the days of the saints who stole the words a saint spoke and used them for their own selfish purpose to make money or control people. ....The former believers of the true gospel that the saints preached were deceived by Rome who adopted Christ-like sayings to lure these believers into their false churches, particularly the false Roman Catholic Church.

By the time the first saint appeared, the Jews believed in the misinterpretations of the scriptures instead of knowing the true Creator by "faith". The first saint, known as Jesus in the new testament, was the first servant of God to have the knowledge to know that the "beast" of Daniel was God's plan to deceive man from the Truth while at the same time, teaching man to build things so that Jesus would have some way of teaching his believers the invisible Kingdom of "Christ", which is where the thoughts of God without deception are kept. There's no plan of "Lucifer" in these pure thoughts of God so that whenever Jesus spoke, it didn't contain any deceptive language to agree with the Jew's false gods.....

Since the religious Jews didn't have any "faith" in the true Creator, they couldn't believe in the gospel that Jesus preached or that of the other saints who preached the same gospel....These rejected people were chosen by God to be the true believers of the true gospel that all the saints preached, the servants who God came into their minds with thoughts without deception and guided them out of the "beast". Once they became "born again", meaning the deceptive sinful veil is removed from their flesh, their thoughts changed within their minds so that God could teach them the Truth, which is stored in "Christ" the thoughts without deception, opposite of "Lucifer" and the "beast" that confuse the thoughts of men.

OK folks, I know that I am not really answering the previous poster, as I know what his response will be. His God will enlighten him if and when and in the manner He choses.
But I think the exercise of the reply is worth the effort to show what the response to this line of argument should be.

Peace all, Jamie.

As you judge a saint without authority to do so, you have just broken one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor".

It doesn't take religion to know that God's will isn't understood by unlightened men like yourself or any other disobedient children of His.

Next time you make an attempt to judge me, remember this, I didn't take any of these false accusations to heart. That's because I know who you are and it's absolutely nothing to fear.

 

[oldfart]

As you judge a saint without authority to do so, you have just broken one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor".

It doesn't take religion to know that God's will isn't understood by unlightened men like yourself or any other disobedient children of His.

Next time you make an attempt to judge me, remember this, I didn't take any of these false accusations to heart. That's because I know who you are and it's absolutely nothing to fear.

I have treated you and your ideas with respect, and I understand how your beliefs do not allow you to do the same with anyone you do not agree with. You judge yourself, and apparently you believe that you sound to every one else like a delusional fanatic. But that is your judgment, not mine. I bear you no ill will. I am not responsible for your bad behavior or foolish writing. Both will be judged by others according to their values. But that is of no importance to you.
I note that you make no effort to answer the direct questions I posed you. How long must you pray until God provides you an answer? Or is it His will that you stand mute and appear as the fool for God?

Which brings up the point, why are you posting here? To convert the world? To stroke your ego by chastising the sinners?

In your view, why should anyone pay any attention to you when you are so skilless in communication? What exactly is God's purpose in having you post here and how will you know if your efforts are bearing fruit?

 

[BreezeWood]

.................

And that brings me to the next point. I recognize that the process of verification of scientific knowledge is rigorous and need be in order to minimize bias, among other things. That is the same process I use when it comes to the big meaningful things about "life, the universe, and everything". Because of that, I remain unsure of what we as a species "know" about those things. And when it comes to there existing a being or force or will that governs the universe and our lives, my doubt is overwhelming. But even if my doubts weren't so great, and my skepticism so thorough of all things, how could I ever be convinced of a higher power without there being some doubt, even in the least? And if there is doubt, doesn't that make faith pointless?

And if there is doubt, doesn't that make faith pointless?


Faith is used to overcome doubt, to find an answer - Columbus used faith over doubt to find land across the ocean.

I would agree, faith used in religion is not enough if it does not eventually lead to an answer.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Without Faith It Is Impossible to Please G-d.

That is what the bible states about it.

 

[Avatar4321]

As you judge a saint without authority to do so, you have just broken one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor".

It doesn't take religion to know that God's will isn't understood by unlightened men like yourself or any other disobedient children of His.

Next time you make an attempt to judge me, remember this, I didn't take any of these false accusations to heart. That's because I know who you are and it's absolutely nothing to fear.

Where did he bear false witnesses against you?

More so, where did you get your authority? A man must be called of God as Aaron was. He cannot take this honor upon himself.

 

[Avatar4321]

.................

And that brings me to the next point. I recognize that the process of verification of scientific knowledge is rigorous and need be in order to minimize bias, among other things. That is the same process I use when it comes to the big meaningful things about "life, the universe, and everything". Because of that, I remain unsure of what we as a species "know" about those things. And when it comes to there existing a being or force or will that governs the universe and our lives, my doubt is overwhelming. But even if my doubts weren't so great, and my skepticism so thorough of all things, how could I ever be convinced of a higher power without there being some doubt, even in the least? And if there is doubt, doesn't that make faith pointless?

And if there is doubt, doesn't that make faith pointless?


Faith is used to overcome doubt, to find an answer - Columbus used faith over doubt to find land across the ocean.

I would agree, faith used in religion is not enough if it does not eventually lead to an answer.

And thats the beauty of faith in Christ. It does lead to answers.

The only reason I know God is because I had enough faith to knowledge from Him and He, in His mercy, gave me some. Something I'm very grateful for.

And i know that all people can likewise learn about God for themselves. The Lord opens His arms for all those who come to Him. We will each have our own experiences with Him.

 

[Derideo_Te]

As you judge a saint without authority to do so, you have just broken one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor".

It doesn't take religion to know that God's will isn't understood by unlightened men like yourself or any other disobedient children of His.

Next time you make an attempt to judge me, remember this, I didn't take any of these false accusations to heart. That's because I know who you are and it's absolutely nothing to fear.

I have treated you and your ideas with respect, and I understand how your beliefs do not allow you to do the same with anyone you do not agree with. You judge yourself, and apparently you believe that you sound to every one else like a delusional fanatic. But that is your judgment, not mine. I bear you no ill will. I am not responsible for your bad behavior or foolish writing. Both will be judged by others according to their values. But that is of no importance to you.
I note that you make no effort to answer the direct questions I posed you. How long must you pray until God provides you an answer? Or is it His will that you stand mute and appear as the fool for God?

Which brings up the point, why are you posting here? To convert the world? To stroke your ego by chastising the sinners?

In your view, why should anyone pay any attention to you when you are so skilless in communication? What exactly is God's purpose in having you post here and how will you know if your efforts are bearing fruit?

Before there was an internet there were street markets where people like TW would stand on a corner with a bible in one hand and a megaphone in the other. The message was just as garbled back then as it is today. Anyone who dared to question their nonsense was labeled as being possessed of the devil. They believed that they were doing "God's work" by harassing innocent passersby. Many of them had been drunks and reprobates who had "found Jesus" and were now "spreading the word". What was apparent is that they were "tripping" on the "buzz" that they were getting from religion. Their addiction had simply morphed from alcohol into the "holy spirit" instead.

So do you expect a drunk to make sense when he is in his cups? The same question applies here. The real Christians don't need a street corner and a megaphone or an internet message board. They go about living their lives as their God instructs and that is the example they set for others to follow. They don't need to "preach" at every opportunity. They can engage in meaningful discussion on other topics.

TW won't answer your questions because he can't anymore than an alcoholic can tell you why he lives inside of a bottle.

 

[Derideo_Te]

In the context of religious belief - faith (from Merriam-Webster): the firm belief in something for which there is no proof.

I am a peson without faith.

Some other posters have made the point that when you make decisions under conditions of uncertainty (is there any other kind?), some degree of faith is required. In that sense everyone who is not catatonic has faith.



You have faith in your operating assumptions but simply don't recognize this is what you are doing. You have no faith in scientific theories, but you have confidence in them if they pass your concept of verification. This is faith in your verification process.

BTW what is your verification process? Logical consistency? Your own observation? Hypothesis testing? It could be that we are all delusional (in fact a pretty good argument is made that we must be to survive) in which case observation is not necessarily a guide to "reality". You have faith that your verification standards have some correlation with "reality". Try the following experiment: Ask ten people if they believe in UFO's, or ghosts, or angels. Chances are you will get about half yeses on each of these. Then ask people if they think there is evidence for their opinion. Most of them will also say yes. They have a different verification process than people (I assume including you) who do not accept these concepts.



Oh Boy! When the discussion turns to "absolute capital-T Truth" I recommend running away as fast as my bandy short legs can carry me! So far in my life this type of phrase has been 100% of the time followed by something batshit crazy. BTW there is a great story about where "batshit crazy" comes from. If you haven't heard it already, remind me to tell it to you later.

I digress. Probability theory has a corollary that in a stochastic universe there is no state (other than one determined solely by definitions) that has a probability of either one or zero. IOW anything literally can happen. It's just that a large number of those things are exceedingly unlikely. As in the cumulative probability of them happening before the extinction of the universe is small.

So, why is faith important?

Faith is an integral part of decisionmaking, as discussed above. Further, every philosophical system that is non-trivial involves a leap of faith at some point. The trick is to make that leap wisely, accepting the minimum of disprovable hypotheses and generating the most useful guidance from observable data. Which is why I am a Taoist.

Excellent reply and thank you.

A couple of things I want to address, and I would like to hear the story of the origin of bat shit crazy.

In your first paragraph, you point out that in an uncertain world one has to have faith in order to even make a decision. I think one could switch out the word faith and replace it with confidence or trust and have no change in the principle of the idea. And although that by itself would be an interesting conversation, I wanted to remain in the context of religious belief - or even belief in the foundational (lower case t) truths of the universe.
In this context, one can either remain in doubt about the how of the universe and especially the big why of the universe or assume that one's religious beliefs are the absolute capital T Truth of the why and the how is just part of the details and of no immediate real importance. One can remain unsure of the purpose of life, morality, what is of real value, quality, and continue to question everything for there is no such thing as righteousness and no one has a foundation for judgement or one believes that he/she is right and know already what is right for everyone else. I see that on these forums a lot and it is symptomatic of that kind of absolute truth belief, imo. Is there middle ground between those two positions? Yeah, I think so, but I see no purpose to it beyond the personal and emotional. I acknowledge that those are important but I need to be convinced of something before I accept it. I can not choose to believe.

And that brings me to the next point. I recognize that the process of verification of scientific knowledge is rigorous and need be in order to minimize bias, among other things. That is the same process I use when it comes to the big meaningful things about "life, the universe, and everything". Because of that, I remain unsure of what we as a species "know" about those things. And when it comes to there existing a being or force or will that governs the universe and our lives, my doubt is overwhelming. But even if my doubts weren't so great, and my skepticism so thorough of all things, how could I ever be convinced of a higher power without there being some doubt, even in the least? And if there is doubt, doesn't that make faith pointless?

Your last paragraph I understand and understood. What connection to faith and its importance am I missing in it?

I do appreciate your perception of this subject. It is one where my ignorance greatly outweighs my experience.

The purpose of religious dogma is to supplant the doubt with faith. By immersing yourself into the cult you replace your doubts with the credo that tells you that there is a "creator" of some sort. You are instructed that you "lack faith" if you still have doubts. So the opposite of faith is doubt in the context of religion.

 

[Avatar4321]

Before there was an internet there were street markets where people like TW would stand on a corner with a bible in one hand and a megaphone in the other. The message was just as garbled back then as it is today. Anyone who dared to question their nonsense was labeled as being possessed of the devil. They believed that they were doing "God's work" by harassing innocent passersby. Many of them had been drunks and reprobates who had "found Jesus" and were now "spreading the word". What was apparent is that they were "tripping" on the "buzz" that they were getting from religion. Their addiction had simply morphed from alcohol into the "holy spirit" instead.

So do you expect a drunk to make sense when he is in his cups? The same question applies here. The real Christians don't need a street corner and a megaphone or an internet message board. They go about living their lives as their God instructs and that is the example they set for others to follow. They don't need to "preach" at every opportunity. They can engage in meaningful discussion on other topics.

TW won't answer your questions because he can't anymore than an alcoholic can tell you why he lives inside of a bottle.

If you understand Christianity you know that we are commanded to preach at every opportunity. We are also to use words when necessary.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Before there was an internet there were street markets where people like TW would stand on a corner with a bible in one hand and a megaphone in the other. The message was just as garbled back then as it is today. Anyone who dared to question their nonsense was labeled as being possessed of the devil. They believed that they were doing "God's work" by harassing innocent passersby. Many of them had been drunks and reprobates who had "found Jesus" and were now "spreading the word". What was apparent is that they were "tripping" on the "buzz" that they were getting from religion. Their addiction had simply morphed from alcohol into the "holy spirit" instead.

So do you expect a drunk to make sense when he is in his cups? The same question applies here. The real Christians don't need a street corner and a megaphone or an internet message board. They go about living their lives as their God instructs and that is the example they set for others to follow. They don't need to "preach" at every opportunity. They can engage in meaningful discussion on other topics.

TW won't answer your questions because he can't anymore than an alcoholic can tell you why he lives inside of a bottle.

If you understand Christianity you know that we are commanded to preach at every opportunity. We are also to use words when necessary.

You are blind to how the babbling of TW and his ilk appears to the rest of the world. He is not "preaching at every opportunity". He is like a windup bobble toy that that just goes on and on without any clue as to how his "message" is being perceived.

If the purpose of "spreading the word" is to "convert followers" then that kind of mindless "preaching" is doing the exact opposite. Who wants to be associated with people who are virtually indistinguishable from the homeless who argue with lampposts?

Christians are not immune to mental illness. You are not doing yourself any favors by allowing your "crazies" to be the "face" of your religion. Jesus would have cured these people of their addiction instead of just supplanting one addiction with another. To you they are just another notch in the belt of the "saved". To everyone else they are people to avoid at all costs. Why do you think the Mormons and the Jehovahs Witnesses always dress up in their Sunday best when they go soliciting for "followers" door to door? How many "converts" do you imagine they would be getting if they were doing what TW and his ilk are doing? In a mere handful of posts Old Fart has communicated more about Taoism than TW has managed to communicate about Christianity in hundreds of posts.

The "message" is lost if the messenger has no credibility.

 

[Lipush]

Faith is important because if we didn't have faith, no one would do anything. Every action we engage in is done because of some degree of faith. Faith is a principle of action.

Could you explain that? I act, yet without faith.

You have faith. just because it is not a religious one doesn't mean you don't have it.

Faith is important because it gives you something to look up to. a reason to start your day, it's part of the human personal and socialistic behavior.

 

[Lipush]

Faith is a very personal thing, I think. In many ways it gives hope and happiness, it sustains people during very hard times, a very internal peace - very hard to explain.

I think one of the best examples I can give from my own experience is that as a child I prayed and prayed that God would let me find my Daddy. My parents were divorced and my mother refused to let anyone in my paternal family have any contact with me whatsoever. As a teenager I was angry - there were a few choice words I wanted to give my Dad when I found him - it was, of course, HIS fault that I was put in an orphanage. And I kept praying.

I always had this sense that I was running but not out of fear - sort of like breathing or having a heart beat - it's always there but we don't always actively think of it until there's a "burp" - someone knocks the breath out of you and you're gasping for that air or you have a sharp pain in your chest and your first thought is "heart attack."

As a young adult I finally made contact with my paternal grandmother and went to visit her and met all my Dad's siblings. Still didn't know where my Dad was and his family wasn't coming forward with any information. It was a couple years later that I contacted the military records department and asked if they had any information. They gave me the last address they had where his checks were being sent. I made contact and we did get together.

I don't know how to explain it, but it was like two magnets coming together, hugs and tears, it was all so wonderful ... and not a harsh word was spoken.

On the way home I said to my husband, "It's gone." He looked at me like I had lost my mind and asked, "What's gone?" I had to explain about the running thing I always had. I realized I was never running FROM something, but running TO something - and after I got back with my Dad it stopped and I've never had that feeling again since then.

God waited until He knew it was the right time for me - I truly believe that. We may want immediate answers to our prayers, but I believe God will sometimes wait awhile - or if our prayer was never meant to be, then it won't be answered - probably for a very good reason.

I have some issues and questions regarding Christ and religion in general - but God? You bet I believe in God.

That's a very touching anecdote, Granny, and I mean that genuinely. However, I don't understand what faith had to do with the conflict you felt or the eventual happy outcome. Why was faith important then, and why is it still important to you in that context?

When you are in times of grief of pain or sorrow, where do you take the strength to rise up and fight, from?

Doesn't have to be God, because you've stated you're not religious, but it has to come from SOMEWHERE, right?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Faith is a very personal thing, I think. In many ways it gives hope and happiness, it sustains people during very hard times, a very internal peace - very hard to explain.

I think one of the best examples I can give from my own experience is that as a child I prayed and prayed that God would let me find my Daddy. My parents were divorced and my mother refused to let anyone in my paternal family have any contact with me whatsoever. As a teenager I was angry - there were a few choice words I wanted to give my Dad when I found him - it was, of course, HIS fault that I was put in an orphanage. And I kept praying.

I always had this sense that I was running but not out of fear - sort of like breathing or having a heart beat - it's always there but we don't always actively think of it until there's a "burp" - someone knocks the breath out of you and you're gasping for that air or you have a sharp pain in your chest and your first thought is "heart attack."

As a young adult I finally made contact with my paternal grandmother and went to visit her and met all my Dad's siblings. Still didn't know where my Dad was and his family wasn't coming forward with any information. It was a couple years later that I contacted the military records department and asked if they had any information. They gave me the last address they had where his checks were being sent. I made contact and we did get together.

I don't know how to explain it, but it was like two magnets coming together, hugs and tears, it was all so wonderful ... and not a harsh word was spoken.

On the way home I said to my husband, "It's gone." He looked at me like I had lost my mind and asked, "What's gone?" I had to explain about the running thing I always had. I realized I was never running FROM something, but running TO something - and after I got back with my Dad it stopped and I've never had that feeling again since then.

God waited until He knew it was the right time for me - I truly believe that. We may want immediate answers to our prayers, but I believe God will sometimes wait awhile - or if our prayer was never meant to be, then it won't be answered - probably for a very good reason.

I have some issues and questions regarding Christ and religion in general - but God? You bet I believe in God.

That's a very touching anecdote, Granny, and I mean that genuinely. However, I don't understand what faith had to do with the conflict you felt or the eventual happy outcome. Why was faith important then, and why is it still important to you in that context?

When you are in times of grief of pain or sorrow, where do you take the strength to rise up and fight, from?

Doesn't have to be God, because you've stated you're not religious, but it has to come from SOMEWHERE, right?

Family and close friends provide more real comfort and support than all of 3000+ imaginary deities combined have ever done. Even total strangers will come to the aid of someone who needs support. It was Iraq war veterans who visited the civilian victims of the Boston bombing to give them comfort and support and tell them how they survived losing both their limbs and they fellows in arms.

So yes, it comes from "somewhere" and that is real people with empathy and compassion rather than mythical entities.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Faith is important because if we didn't have faith, no one would do anything. Every action we engage in is done because of some degree of faith. Faith is a principle of action.

Could you explain that? I act, yet without faith.

You have faith. just because it is not a religious one doesn't mean you don't have it.

Faith is important because it gives you something to look up to. a reason to start your day, it's part of the human personal and socialistic behavior.

You are confusing the will to live with faith. Animals have a "reason to start their day" and it has noting to do with "something to look up to".

 

[dilloduck]

Why do we take our next breaths ? What is our purpose or significance ?

People often claim there is a purpose and reason for everything but I've never heard anyone who able verify it. Faith is the belief that a mortal man has that his efforts or even existence mean something because the thought of being insignificant and meaningless is too horrifying to bear.
Why are we here ? No one knows.
What is our purpose ? No one knows.

Inventing our own purposes may have to suffice.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Why do we take our next breaths ? What is our purpose or significance ?

People often claim there is a purpose and reason for everything but I've never heard anyone who able verify it. Faith is the belief that a mortal man has that his efforts or even existence mean something because the thought of being insignificant and meaningless is too horrifying to bear.
Why are we here ? No one knows.
What is our purpose ? No one knows.

Inventing our own purposes may have to suffice.

If there was an evolutionary benefit to all living things knowing their "purpose or significance" then it would be readily apparent. Instead it appears as though only sentient beings capable of abstract thought have even addressed the question. Of course once the question was asked and there was a lack of knowledge the void was filled with speculation. Hence we have invented deities, religions, faith, beliefs and philosophies as a substitute for actual knowledge.

 

[Lipush]

That's a very touching anecdote, Granny, and I mean that genuinely. However, I don't understand what faith had to do with the conflict you felt or the eventual happy outcome. Why was faith important then, and why is it still important to you in that context?

When you are in times of grief of pain or sorrow, where do you take the strength to rise up and fight, from?

Doesn't have to be God, because you've stated you're not religious, but it has to come from SOMEWHERE, right?

Family and close friends provide more real comfort and support than all of 3000+ imaginary deities combined have ever done. Even total strangers will come to the aid of someone who needs support. It was Iraq war veterans who visited the civilian victims of the Boston bombing to give them comfort and support and tell them how they survived losing both their limbs and they fellows in arms.

So yes, it comes from "somewhere" and that is real people with empathy and compassion rather than mythical entities.

Fair enough. But faith can come from different sources other then religion per se.