Faith

[Clara Tea]

Id notmess with somrones faith in whatever god, thats very unsuitable.

Faith in some peripheral things, like noahs ark,
that are contrary to all evidence are fair game.

FTM- the creationists routinely start threads
to attack what they amusiungly equivocate
as " greater faith" in science!

No evidence? But it happened thousands of years ago. So, there is no evidence of most events back then. Maybe some day evidence will be found. But I suppose that it is wise to withhold judgement until more proof is uncovered.

 

[Clara Tea]

Id notmess with somrones faith in whatever god, thats very unsuitable.

Faith in some peripheral things, like noahs ark,
that are contrary to all evidence are fair game.

FTM- the creationists routinely start threads
to attack what they amusiungly equivocate
as " greater faith" in science!

Discussions about faith strengthen the faithful and the faithless. Discussions bring out the points that make them believe, and they thoroughly discuss them.

This is why Jews have kept their Jewish faith for thousands of years, and why they remained Jews even under torture of Adolf Hitler.

You will often see two Jews discussing religion, both waving their hands wildly and shouting. They both believe in the same religion, but they have small differences in belief. Each hardens their belief by discussion.

What they consider discussion, you consider messing with one's faith.

In the Dark Ages, such discussions were strictly banned. They believed that God was good and merciful, and they would torture people to death to assert that (and no one had better argue).

Torture and murder were used by Father (now saint) Junipero Serra, to build California missions. Murder and torture for Christ? No one had better argue with the torturer or murderer who is torturing and murdering for Christ, unless they, too, want to be tortured and murdered.

It boils down to a question of having free speech or not. Can a religion or faith survive when someone questions it?

 

[Audie]

No evidence? But it happened thousands of years ago. So, there is no evidence of most events back then. Maybe some day evidence will be found. But I suppose that it is wise to withhold judgement until more proof is uncovered.

It happened?

All known relevant evidence shows no flood.

 

[Audie]

Discussions about faith strengthen the faithful and the faithless. Discussions bring out the points that make them believe, and they thoroughly discuss them.

This is why Jews have kept their Jewish faith for thousands of years, and why they remained Jews even under torture of Adolf Hitler.

You will often see two Jews discussing religion, both waving their hands wildly and shouting. They both believe in the same religion, but they have small differences in belief. Each hardens their belief by discussion.

What they consider discussion, you consider messing with one's faith.

In the Dark Ages, such discussions were strictly banned. They believed that God was good and merciful, and they would torture people to death to assert that (and no one had better argue).

Torture and murder were used by Father (now saint) Junipero Serra, to build California missions. Murder and torture for Christ? No one had better argue with the torturer or murderer who is torturing and murdering for Christ, unless they, too, want to be tortured and murdered.

It boils down to a question of having free speech or not. Can a religion or faith survive when someone questions it?

You misunderstand me.
I mean i would never try to talk someone out of belief in god(s)..

 

[Revoltingest]

 

[Lain]

This thread is about faith, not truth.

Very few folks have certitude, but when they do it often leads to megalomania and arrogance because only they can be right, they think.

I see faith as a means of making claims about reality, basically a source of knowledge. I do not separate it from truth or reality at all. Not sure how you define it.

 

[Lain]

What does God have to do with it? There is one God, there are not two Gods. Conflicting beliefs about God means they don't understand God. But then, who does understand God? But I do understand that the fact that no one understands God doesn't mean having conflicting ideas about God would be acceptable for us.

Some people hold to ideas about god which are wrong is what I meant. I think no one understands God completely but there are accurate ideas about God and contrary ones are wrong.

 

[Lain]

Not wise to do so directly, even if after careful examination we don't think what they believe is wrong. Confronting someone actually entrenches them further in their belief usually.

That's true it does that, although I am not exactly good at trying to change the minds of others and I do not usually debate or discuss with that aim, but with the aim to get more knowledge myself.

 

[Lain]

When looking at their "claim" or faith, do you use their religious teachings to find those answers? Or from the religious teaching you your self believe in?

Mine as I believe I am right. If I didn't I wouldn't hold to what I hold to.

 

[Lain]

All personal experiences differ, in turn some beliefs will differ a little. How does different make them wrong?

It has nothing to do with differing personal experiences it has to do with whether or not the claims they are making based on them are true or not.

 

[Polymath257]

Lets say you believe in a god with faith. You also believe by faith said god is guiding you.
If i called you full of ****, would that be rational?

If I believe there is an elf on my shoulder and that elf is guiding me, would you be justified in saying I am full of it?

My answer: yes.

 

[Revoltingest]

If I believe there is an elf on my shoulder and that elf is guiding me, would you be justified in saying I am full of it?

My answer: yes.

Dang, I've been saying that even before I knew of the elf.

Just kidding!

 

[QuestioningMind]

Being faith is on a personal level/personal experience,, How can a person without faith tell others they are wrong, argue, or debate about something they don't have or experience?

If someone were a carpenter and someone else who knew nothing about carpentry tried to tell them what is what about carpentry, why would they even listen to them?

The problem is that faith is a horribly unreliable method for determining truth. It's like determining what's true or false by flipping a coin. Person A can believe that the Earth is a sphere based 100% on faith and person B can believe that the world is flat based 100% of faith. Since the Earth cannot be both flat and a sphere, clearly one of these people is wrong. Using faith to determine the truth is completely useless.

Let's say that you are a carpenter and I know nothing about carpentry. If I ask you how you know that the frame you built is strong enough to support the roof you plan to put on it, you'd better have some sort of method for making that determination other than, "I just take it on faith'. Your mere faith isn't sufficient. I'd need to know what actual calculations you made to reach your conclusion.

 

[Valjean]

It happened?

All known relevant evidence shows no flood.

Yes, individual actions or sayings leave little evidence. Massive events like huge floods, ice ages, extinction events and the like leave observable evidence all over the place.

 

[Valjean]

I few people i seen seem to think if a person has different belief than them selvs, that person is more or less evil...but how do they know if a person is evil just based on their faith?

A lot of 'faith' involves declarations of what constitutes right and wrong, good and evil. (It's all there in the by-laws).

 

[Spirit of Light]

A lot of 'faith' involves declarations of what constitutes right and wrong, good and evil. (It's all there in the by-laws).

It speaks of what is "right/wrong within that teaching yes, how one could understand it from that point of view. But one would benefit from being careful telling everyone else have to be like that too.

 

[Valjean]

What does God have to do with it? There is one God, there are not two Gods. Conflicting beliefs about God means they don't understand God. But then, who does understand God? But I do understand that the fact that no one understands God doesn't mean having conflicting ideas about God would be acceptable for us.

" But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
--Thomas Jefferson.

 

[Valjean]

If a person believer or non believers alike has good action,speech and thoughts they are good IMHO.
If a person believers or non-believers alike has bad action, speech and thoughts they are not good people.

But here's the rub: What constitutes "good" action or speech? Is there a sine qua non?

 

[Spirit of Light]

But here's the rub: What constitutes "good" action or speech? Is there a sine qua non?

A general sense of being good to others, speech that is not harmful, and thoughts that are helping the two other aspects.

 

[Valjean]

This thread is about faith, not truth.

Very few folks have certitude, but when they do it often leads to megalomania and arrogance because only they can be right, they think.

I see them as quite closely related, though. The faithful have faith in the truth of their beliefs. Faith is a veracity determinant.