Religious faithw v

As I have stated before, this thread welcomes civil debate.

It always drives me up the wall when I am having a religion debate and one of the arguments for why a person justifies there religion is they say "I have faith". No don't get me wrong, I have faith in many things such as: the sun rising, gravity, blah blah blah. The difference between this and religious faith is the later has no evidence to support it.

When I have faith in something it is usually because I have seen time and time again the outcome I expect. It is more about probability than faith. So do we have any believers with faith in aspects of your religion? What brought you to that conclusion?

..its called blind faith (lol blessed are those that believe without seeing (or as a famous showman put it "there is one born, every minute" (though possibly 2))

kinda reminds me of "there is nothing up my sleeve, just look"

when priests asks one to take something on "faith" (And their income depends on this..)

if anyone else asks that look to "there is one born every minute"

For me its not about faith because I know God exists but that is based strictly on my own personal experiences not religious texts and I don't expect others to have the same view as me since obviously everyone has different experiences in life.

smok3y, tell us... how you know god exists? if you be true to yourself... im sure you will be facing an inner paradox. you will ask yourself...hmmm, how do i really know god exists? and then your inner being of truth will tell you, sir... you dont really know, you only think you know. then your mind will be like... wait! f that! i dont just think i know i really know! then your inner being will say hmmmm, tell me just how you know.

the only thing any theologian has to defend their point from other peoples questions..(even their own) is faith.

without faith, there is only truth. that beliefs are nothing more than thoughts, merely ideas emanating from our imaginations.

but people are scared, so scared in fact they would rather make up their own truth... or more accurately, accept to someone else's. no one wants to live life in uncertainty. much easier to pretend things are the way you want them to be, much easier to listen to someone else.

faith- pretending to know something that you dont, because you are either too scared to be truthful with yourself (hiding from the fear of not knowing)... too scared to go against everything that your parents taught you as you were growing up (feelings of betrayal to your parents or culture) or too scared of getting looked down upon by your fellow believers of faith as to be labeled an outcast (feelings of abandonment from your people in your culture, everyone wants to be accepted)

"uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes, dreams and fears can be extremely painful, but must be endured if you wish to live your life without the support of comforting fairytales."

Pbhash, without faith there would be no religion lol. just logical intelligent rational thinkers.

Zaehet Strife said:

smok3y, tell us... how you know god exists? if you be true to yourself... im sure you will be facing an inner paradox. you will ask yourself...hmmm, how do i really know god exists? and then your inner being of truth will tell you, sir... you dont really know, you only think you know. then your mind will be like... wait! f that! i dont just think i know i really know! then your inner being will say hmmmm, tell me just how you know.

the only thing any theologian has to defend their point from other peoples questions..(even their own) is faith.

without faith, there is only truth. that beliefs are nothing more than thoughts, merely ideas emanating from our imaginations.

but people are scared, so scared in fact they would rather make up their own truth... or more accurately, accept to someone else's. no one wants to live life in uncertainty. much easier to pretend things are the way you want them to be, much easier to listen to someone else.

faith- pretending to know something that you dont, because you are either too scared to be truthful with yourself (hiding from the fear of not knowing)... too scared to go against everything that your parents taught you as you were growing up (feelings of betrayal to your parents or culture) or too scared of getting looked down upon by your fellow believers of faith as to be labeled an outcast (feelings of abandonment from your people in your culture, everyone wants to be accepted)

"uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes, dreams and fears can be very painful, but must be endured if you wish to live your life without the support of comforting fairytales."

Pbhash, without faith there would be no religion lol. just logical intelligent rational thinkers.

Click to expand...

I'd be careful saying beliefs are purely imagination. Beliefs can stem from direct observation and reason just as easily as imagination. Just look at illusions; we see them and form a belief based on them, that belief doesn't stem from out imagination, but directly from our senses. I think you are making generalizations about peoples' beliefs based on "what you can think of" (argumentum ad ignorantiam). You cited your definition of faith, and followed by stating that 'fear' was the common variable between all your reasons for having faith.

What about people who actually just believe because they are convinced? Some people aren't scared, they just honestly think god exists based on the evidence. Just because you can't fathom an event happening doesn't restrict said event from happening.

Also, removing faith doesn't necessarily usher in "logical, intelligent, thinkers", it's not a dichotomy, and the denial of one doesn't validate the other, or vice versa.

"The only position that leaves me with no cognitive dissonance is atheism. It is not a creed. Death is certain, replacing both the siren-song of Paradise and the dread of Hell. Life on this earth, with all its mystery and beauty and pain, is then to be lived far more intensely: we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more." - Christopher Hitchens

Beefbisquit- having faith because you are just convinced is really just sang the same thing twice. Like...I have faith in God because my religion has convinced me. What I'm trying to weasel out is, what cause you to say, "that whole big bang thing is crap but God is real"
I personally believe in the Big Bang because of scientific finding ( which if need be I will present) but also reject christianity because for 18 yrs of my life I was forced to study it, by about 11 years old I was questioning people and got tired of getting no real answers. So with my own brain and everyone against me I actually did a little research on the big bang, the formation of life, the formation of the earth and cosmos. I have taken college level anthropology and religion classes. I think if people look beyond the faith fallacy at the scientific evidence that is out there, they would be amazed!

PbHash said:

It always drives me up the wall when I am having a religion debate and one of the arguments for why a person justifies there religion is they say "I have faith". No don't get me wrong, I have faith in many things such as: the sun rising, gravity, blah blah blah. The difference between this and religious faith is the later has no evidence to support it.

Click to expand...

I hear my friend complain about this all the time due to his efforts to explain atheism to his mother. She listens to everything he says, shakes her head and says she's sad cos her son is going to hell. All of his questions are answered with "I have faith". I get treated similar on facebook. I will post a well thought out statement simply asking questions about faith and belief, and I get one line comments from my family like "We are praying for you". This is a passive way of saying, we care about you, but your thoughts are unacceptable, you are going to hell.

Normally when this happens to me during face to face discussion, it is a sign that the person is no longer interested in the conversation. I normally drop the subject and let whatever I said to cause them to play the faith card sink in. If the person is still interested in discussion, I then ask why it is okay to have faith. I try to point out that religious faith requires you to be certain about things that no one can possibly be certain about, that god is the one area in which we allow belief without evidence, and that faith fosters ignorance by answering doubt with nothing. I can easily go on for a half hour on each of these points, if the person tolerates it.

If the person is still listening after that, I try to steer the conversation to the consequences of religious faith. What happens when we teach people that it is okay to accept propositions without evidence? What is the price that others pay for your unsupported certainty? How does this inexplicable faith affect your choices and policy making? After we list the harm in faith, I ask them to list the benefits, which doesn't take long. The benefits they list: comfort, security, charity, morality, ect. are all things we can easily find elsewhere within ourselves.

So basically, something that is indistinguishable from fantasy gets an undeserved excuse to have no accountability in order to cause indefensible harm, all while bringing nothing uniquely positive to the table. This is the road I take when people play the faith card.

Beefbisquit said:

I'd be careful saying beliefs are purely imagination. Beliefs can stem from direct observation and reason just as easily as imagination. Just look at illusions; we see them and form a belief based on them, that belief doesn't stem from out imagination, but directly from our senses.

Click to expand...

im talking about theology and metaphysics. also, how do you know that the illusion of god you saw wasn't just part of your imagination without being able to touch it. i understand that material things in the world that we can see hear touch smell and taste we can base beliefs on a higher level becuase we can use every single one of our senses to test the credibility of such things.

in theology there is nothing to test it on at all. you may be able to talk yourself into believing your illusions if that is what you must do.

belief in god is purely manifested out of thought/mind/imagination.

but ive learned this multiple times, to try to tell someone their belief in god is purely just a conviction of a thought/idea... doesn't work. i can lead you to water, but i cannot make you drink.

PbHash said:

Beefbisquit- having faith because you are just convinced is really just sang the same thing twice. Like...I have faith in God because my religion has convinced me.

Click to expand...

I said having a belief, not having faith. The two are not synonymous. What about people who believe in god that have no 'religion'? People who hold beliefs from personal revelation, for example.

What I'm trying to weasel out is, what cause you to say, "that whole big bang thing is crap but God is real" I personally believe in the Big Bang because of scientific finding ( which if need be I will present) but also reject christianity because for 18 yrs of my life I was forced to study it, by about 11 years old I was questioning people and got tired of getting no real answers. So with my own brain and everyone against me I actually did a little research on the big bang, the formation of life, the formation of the earth and cosmos. I have taken college level anthropology and religion classes. I think if people look beyond the faith fallacy at the scientific evidence that is out there, they would be amazed!

Click to expand...

I'm an atheist, I just loving playing devils' advocate and practicing my debate skills. Both you and ZS are making some bold claims, ones I'm not sure you've fully thought through.

..still, about the actual existence of god, anyone without personal experience is just basically just talking out of their asses.

speculating.

Religious people, by which I mean those who believe in an interactive creator god, fall into three categories. Lazy thinkers, sloppy thinkers, and inconsistent thinkers. Many are lazy and have not thought much at all about God, even though they may know scripture by heart. They have accepted and learned about god, but not done any real examination. Many others have thought deeply about god, but have not been careful. They defend their belief with errors, special pleading and sometimes manipulation. Then there are those who admit they have no good reason to believe in god, but believe anyway. These people are inconsistent, and are unable to explain why god gets a pass. If your position can so easily be put in one of these categories, it really isn't a defensible position, and you have no business bringing it to the table where serious adults sit.

Zaehet Strife said:

im talking about theology and metaphysics. also, how do you know that the illusion of god you saw wasn't just part of your imagination without being able to touch it.

i understand that material things in the world that we can see hear touch smell and taste we can base beliefs on a higher level becuase we can use every single one of our senses to test the credibility of such things.

Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa, whoa, who said anything about an illusion of god? Especially one that I saw??? I said 'illusion', what about sleight of hand, optical illusions, etc.? I bet Criss Angel could 'mindfreak' you. lol

in theology there is nothing to test it on at all.

Click to expand...

I agree.

you may be able to talk yourself into believing your illusions if that is what you must do.

Click to expand...

Um... no? You can continue to use sweeping generalizations to try to make your points, too; if you have to.

belief in god is purely manifested out of thought/mind/imagination.

Click to expand...

I agree, but have no way to prove it. It sure seems to be the most likely scenario, eh?

but ive learned this multiple times, to try to tell someone their belief in god is purely just a conviction of a thought/idea... doesn't work. i can lead you to water, but i cannot make you drink.

Click to expand...

First off, I was an atheist while you were still in your daddies ball sack. One thing I hate about all your posts ZS, is your smugness. You have a 'holier than thou' attitude.

sso said:

..still, about the actual existence of god, anyone without personal experience is just basically just talking out of their asses.

speculating.

Click to expand...

I do not allow personal experience as legitimate rationale. Mainly for the same reason that anecdotal information, hearsay, is not useful in court, and is considered the most unreliable evidence in science. Each religion has people with personal revelations that prove their god. So if we except personal experience as support for any one god, we must accept it as support for all, yet virtually every god insists that they are alone in their divinity. We have an array of natural explanations for divine revelations and nothing pointing us in the direction of God.

Also, why is it that people who have revelations, visions, or experiences that convince them of God, always convince them of a God they have heard of before, and most likely one that their families worship? If a true believer of Allah had a vision that convinced them of Jesus, I would pay much more attention.

Heisenberg said:

I do not allow personal experience as legitimate rationale. Mainly for the same reason that anecdotal information, hearsay, is not useful in court, and is considered the most unreliable evidence in science. Each religion has people with personal revelations that prove their god. So if we except personal experience as support for any one god, we must accept it as support for all, yet virtually every god insists that they are alone in their divinity. We have an array of natural explanations for divine revelations and nothing pointing us in the direction of God.

Click to expand...

I accept personal revelation as legitimate evidence for the person having the experience only. I can't falsify their experience, however their experience holds zero weight to anyone else unless testable.

Heisenberg said:

I do not allow personal experience as legitimate rationale. Mainly for the same reason that anecdotal information, hearsay, is not useful in court, and is considered the most unreliable evidence in science. Each religion has people with personal revelations that prove their god. So if we except personal experience as support for any one god, we must accept it as support for all, yet virtually every god insists that they are alone in their divinity. We have an array of natural explanations for divine revelations and nothing pointing us in the direction of God.

Click to expand...

well, personal experience is personally important, though yes, dealing with other people we do have to be careful in what we assimilate.

but a man with personal experience would have that to offer for others to pick apart and speculate about, while someone without personal experience could do nothing but speculate.


f. i , ive met god in a dream,, so, was that really god? or only a dream? can god only appear in dreams or burning bushes? (or has to be born here to live here?)

was the burning bush some type of halluconogenic smoke?

is god real or is he just a figment of mankinds collective imagination and need for a daddy in the sky?

without those personal experiences the conversation would be limited.

but they are also very telling, in of themselves, in these accounts, god is usually a very limited and very human being (in other words, created by humans, fiction to gain attention or favor or just plain crazy talk)

and the rest? hard to say, if there was a being that created all of this, then we are probably not even close to understanding one toe of that being and rather irrelevant to even speculate of its existence.

hard enough to live, without worrying about god.

besides, anything that created all this, is probably not much worrying about what we do (specially if we have souls, (it basically means we can only harm our "vehicles" (bodies) and are practically immortal and impervious to anything but mental harm (fixable in eternity i suppose)

i just wanted to throw my 2 cents in,
my belief is intertwined with scientific theory-big bang and religeon-god, and "god" being a extraterestial of other species coming here and starting their own human race and etc.
maybe they made a species similar to their own and one perverted alien had intercours with one of the....nv
it all sounds crazy but us humans have learned to change the DNA of certain species

i juss believe its highly possible that we were created by a more advanced species,and the supposibly "GOD" in our bibles is a extrateretial

idk ive been thinking about this for years but their are still large gaps that need to be filled in that i juss cant piece together

callofcannabis said:

i just wanted to throw my 2 cents in,
my belief is intertwined with scientific theory-big bang and religeon-god, and "god" being a extraterestial of other species coming here and starting their own human race and etc.
maybe they made a species similar to their own and one perverted alien had intercours with one of the....nv
it all sounds crazy but us humans have learned to change the DNA of certain species

i juss believe its highly possible that we were created by a more advanced species,and the supposibly "GOD" in our bibles is a extrateretial

idk ive been thinking about this for years but their are still large gaps that need to be filled in that i juss cant piece together

Click to expand...

still the same question as with god, who created the aliens? and so on.

still doesnt mean its not a viable theory. certain prehistorical artifacts can be interpeted in that direction.

yea thats where the bigbang theory comes in for me