• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Faith is being sure...

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
in a way, it looks like divine intercession took place — thanks to the ottomans and persian governments then, the Baha’is have found a most congenial spot on earth.
Persia, or what is known as Iran, is a Shia country, the people who threw Baha into the jail called the black pit. The Ottomans were defeated by the people who are now known as the Saudis in conjunction with the British in 1918, and the Saudis are a Sunni state. The Baha faith is considered an apostate religion by most other Islam sects. I don't think Haifa was a congenial place for the Bahas under the Ottomans, who were a Sunni state. They seem do well enough under the Israel state, whereas Israel doesn't at this time cut off heads for being a Muslim apostate.
 

Jimmy

King Phenomenon
There are many discussions on this forum asking that Christian doctrines be proven (according to what one understands 'proof' to mean).

By 'proof', the person usually means "The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions". This reasoning is erroneously employed to show the validity of one's stated position of faith. However, this entirely misses the point...

Here is what the Bible clearly defines as faith: Hebrews 4:11 (NRSVue) shows the fundamental error of this approach: "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."

In other words, it is folly to apply the conventional standard of proof to one's religious convictions. Since it is both assurance and conviction, the conventional standard of proof clearly does not apply.

Isn't it about time that some people stopped challenging a person's faith by applying the principle of "proof"?
I think trying to prove faith makes no sense.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I agree entirely. Either a person accepts what the Bible clearly says or s/he doesn't. People who have faith know they have it.
That's true, they know when they have faith in God but they don't necessarily have faith in the Bible.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
There are many discussions on this forum asking that Christian doctrines be proven (according to what one understands 'proof' to mean).

By 'proof', the person usually means "The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions". This reasoning is erroneously employed to show the validity of one's stated position of faith. However, this entirely misses the point...

Here is what the Bible clearly defines as faith: Hebrews 4:11 (NRSVue) shows the fundamental error of this approach: "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."

In other words, it is folly to apply the conventional standard of proof to one's religious convictions. Since it is both assurance and conviction, the conventional standard of proof clearly does not apply.

Isn't it about time that some people stopped challenging a person's faith by applying the principle of "proof"?
I would say that great faith is NOT being sure, but choosing to believe anyhow.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I would say that great faith is NOT being sure, but choosing to believe anyhow.
That applies to some things I have faith in but not everything.

For example, in my mind I am sure that God exists and I am sure that my religion is true, but I am not sure of other things such as God being all-loving or that the afterlife will be all it is cracked up to be. I am not sure of those things but I choose to believe in them anyhow.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
I would say that great faith is NOT being sure, but choosing to believe anyhow.
If Abraham wasn't sure about sacrificing Isaac, he wouldn't have tied him up and started to sacrifice him. Most people believe one thing or another, but do not have what it takes to act.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
My "faith" leans quite far into the camp of I know nothing really, but all will be just fine in the end.

Que Sera, Sera
Things work out for those that God loves. If you feel that love, and don't test God, well then you may well have reason to feel the way you do. Being completely oblivious doesn't sound like the best path, but girls seem to get away with a lot. Personally, I like to know if something is coming before it gets here. I mean, I have been saved from stupidity, when crossing a road without fully looking, and having someone have to yank me back because of coming vehicle, but it seems better to be more careful and know what to expect.
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I would say that great faith is NOT being sure, but choosing to believe anyhow.
Then you disagree with the Bible. Guess which source I and billions of others believe!

Christianity is the predominant religion and faith in Europe, the Americas, the Philippines, East Timor, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Oceania. There are also large Christian communities in other parts of the world, such as Indonesia, Central Asia, the Middle East, and West Africa" (wikipedia) And this figure doesn't include Jews.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Then you disagree with the Bible. Guess which source I and billions of others believe!

Christianity is the predominant religion and faith in Europe, the Americas, the Philippines, East Timor, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Oceania. There are also large Christian communities in other parts of the world, such as Indonesia, Central Asia, the Middle East, and West Africa" (wikipedia) And this figure doesn't include Jews.
Are you actually trying to make an argument from popularity? Are you not aware this is a fallacy?
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
Things work out for those that God loves.
In my view, things work out for those who have faith in a fair God -- more readily referred to as a loving God, though I think that term leads to disappointment for many.
If you feel that love, and don't test God, well then you may well have reason to feel the way you do.
My God can be tested and tested some more because He is always fair.
Being completely oblivious doesn't sound like the best path, but girls seem to get away with a lot.
It's not being oblivious to trust. It's knowing that if you don't fight against karma, you'll have dharma. (Did I get that correct, my Hindu friends? I'm trying to learn the vocabulary and meanings correctly. )
Personally, I like to know if something is coming before it gets here. I mean, I have been saved from stupidity, when crossing a road without fully looking, and having someone have to yank me back because of coming vehicle, but it seems better to be more careful and know what to expect.
I prefer knowing I can handle whatever comes my way because I'm prepared for and aware that what's coming is unknown.
Namaste
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
In my view, things work out for those who have faith in a fair God
Sorry, but I don't see that. There are people of faith who starve to death, people of faith who have their careers permanently sabotaged, people of faith who suffer from chronic debilitating pain, people of faith who find themselves homeless on the streets.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Christianity is the predominant religion and faith in Europe, the Americas, the Philippines, East Timor, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Oceania. There are also large Christian communities in other parts of the world, such as Indonesia, Central Asia, the Middle East, and West Africa" (wikipedia) And this figure doesn't include Jews.
Christianity is the largest religion in the world, but 68.4 % of people in the world are not Christians, so that means that the majority of the world population is not Christians.

Share of global population affiliated with major religious groups 2022. In 2022, around 31.6 percent of the global population were identify as Christian.Oct 13, 2023

Share of global population by religion 2022 | Statista
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
Sorry, but I don't see that. There are people of faith who starve to death, people of faith who have their careers permanently sabotaged, people of faith who suffer from chronic debilitating pain, people of faith who find themselves homeless on the streets.
I agree, been there, done that in some of your examples - but that's materialistic, worldly, and it does matter, but how does one get through those things? By faith, IMO.
I think of Job, but more so I think of Elie Wiesel: "We were the masters of nature, the masters of the world. We had transcended everything--death, fatigue, our natural needs. We were stronger than cold and hunger, stronger than the guns and the desire to die, doomed and rootless, nothing but numbers, we were the only men on earth."
And, yes, Wiesel spoke of his God being dead, "Never shall I forget those moments that murdered my God and my soul and turned my dreams to ashes.", but he still spoke of gratitude and faith: "Have faith in life. Above all else, have faith. Drive out despair, and you will keep death away from yourselves.", "Eliezer starts as a naive and childish kid who is blindly faithful to his faith and God....He felt that God was in fact there for him and helped him survive the Holocaust. He was very grateful to God when he was liberated from Auschwitz. One example that shows Wiesel did not reject God is in Night when he says, “I was not denying his existence."

Faith can be complicated to explain.
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Sorry, but I don't see that. There are people of faith who starve to death, people of faith who have their careers permanently sabotaged, people of faith who suffer from chronic debilitating pain, people of faith who find themselves homeless on the streets.
People of faith have always suffered, so what is your point?
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
t's not being oblivious to trust. It's knowing that if you don't fight against karma, you'll have dharma. (Did I get that correct, my Hindu friends? I'm trying to learn the vocabulary and meanings correctly. )
Karma is you get what you give. There is no fight in the concept. If you were a rotten child, if you become a parent, don't be surprised if your kids are not angels. It is best to not be a rotten child, but to expect Karma if you were. No one escapes justice in the long term. It is best to know the rules, so you won't be blindsided by a just/fair God.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
There are many discussions on this forum asking that Christian doctrines be proven (according to what one understands 'proof' to mean).

By 'proof', the person usually means "The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions". This reasoning is erroneously employed to show the validity of one's stated position of faith. However, this entirely misses the point...
The bold is OK for the requirements for 'proof' usually applied to subjective logical arguments. This is the reason that subjective beliefs are only believed by those that accept the logical argument for that belief. This is the basis for your argument that only those that believe as you do understand the Bible.
Here is what the Bible clearly defines as faith: Hebrews 4:11 (NRSVue) shows the fundamental error of this approach: "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."
This is the reason for the problematic assertion that one belief is the only true belief and interpretation of scripture. The lack of a standard for "the conviction of things not seen."
In other words, it is folly to apply the conventional standard of proof to one's religious convictions. Since it is both assurance and conviction, the conventional standard of proof clearly does not apply.
True, but you have not presented any viable standard that could differentiate the many conflicting subjective beliefs that disagree with your beliefs and make the claim that their belief is the only "true" belief.
Isn't it about time that some people stopped challenging a person's faith by applying the principle of "proof"?
I do not apply the principle of 'proof' to any claims based on subjective assumptions and beliefs, because in logical arguments it requires subjective assumptions that must be believed for the argument to be valid.

The many subjective variable religious beliefs in all religions lack a basis of objectivity beyond those that believe they are "true."
 
Top