Eternal life surely is a false hope (whichever be the religion).
Harden yourself, try to understand pain or sorrow clearly, that will be just as effective. Yeah, belief in god is .. not as effective.
First how do YOU define faith?
Second in consideration of the first...how many KINDS of faith might there be and which kind are you speaking of?
For instance...might there be first order faith...faith in which there is absolutely no "reason" to hold faith in a particular thing being or happening at one end of the spectrum, and second order faith...faith in which one has reason to have faith given independent evidence with degrees approaching absolute proof of belief?
By faith, I mean insufficiently justified belief. There have been no benefits for me to believe anything that way, but there have been significant costs.
This idea that things have a reason, a purpose, a way about them, and that life itself isn't meaningless. That's a huge benefit for anyone of any faith.
Faith is used to mean religion. It's also used to mean confidence in an outcome.
I have "faith" that my savings will last as long as I do. I have "faith" that when I hit the brakes, my car will stop. Faith in this sense could be informed judgement about the outcome of something. It can also mean hope as has been pointed out.
But given that this thread is focused on religion, I take the question being asked about the benefits of having a religious belief. There is of course overlap. I have faith that if I follow the faith I believe in, I'll get a reward in heaven or a better next life.
To me, faith is a step not a destination. If I go to college and get a degree, my faith that this will lead to a good job is ended when I get a good job and am told that my college work lead to the job. Faith has been replaced by certainty.
Similarly if and when my religious faith leads to the expected result, realization replaces faith.
By faith, I mean insufficiently justified belief. There have been no benefits for me to believe anything that way, but there have been significant costs.
I wrote, "By faith, I mean insufficiently justified belief." I've paraphrased a common dictionary definition. Here are a few iterations of that:
"firm belief in something for which there is no proof"
"strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof."
"belief that is not based on proof"
They all say the same thing - one has skipped the evidence part and went straight to belief, that is, unjustified belief. Not surprisingly, the religions glorify the practice and teach that it is a virtue, but what is the virtue in unjustified belief?
There's an atheist firebrand named Pat Condell, who said in a YouTube video, "The truth is that faith is nothing more than the deliberate suspension of disbelief. It's an act of will. It's not a state of grace. It's a state of choice, because without evidence, you've got no reason to believe, apart from your willingness to believe. So why is that worthy of respect, any more than your willingness to poke yourself in the eye with a pencil? And why is faith considered some kind of virtue? Is it because it implies a certain depth of contemplation and insight? I don't think so. Faith, by definition, is unexamined. So in that sense it has to be among the shallowest of experiences."
Why? I'll bet you understood me perfectly well. Once I provided a clear definition for what I meant when using the word faith, you couldn't help but understand my position.
A handy sweeping claim, I am always dubious about sweeping unevidenced claims, and I don't believe anyone needs religious faith in order to have courage.
Faith is the conviction that the universe, despite all evidence to the contrary, is not a hostile place;
and that life, far from being a hapless accident, aimlessly rushing nowhere(anymore than any theist's is), signifying nothing, is a thing of meaning and wonder and purpose.
Well, you may speak for yourself of course, but my life isn't rushing nowhere, nor has it ever lacked purpose, and it has been, and remains a source of meaning and wonder and purpose, and all without unevidenced religious faith of any kind.
We need to understand that difficulties will always be there. God or no God. And why should we have fear of death. It happened to all our forebears. It will happen to us and those to come after us. It is the way of the world. Old goes, new comes.
Well said, I wasn't alive for billions of years, and it caused me no distress. Death is the price of admission for this ride, and one day it will be "hello darkness my old friend", I just hope the dying part isn't too protracted or painful.
Hope is frequently false, but it nonetheless can provide comfort and succour. It sometimes provides this despite being false. It was clear to me many years ago that hope was often more satisfying than what was hoped for, but often failed to be achieved.
I wrote, "By faith, I mean insufficiently justified belief." I've paraphrased a common dictionary definition. Here are a few iterations of that:
"firm belief in something for which there is no proof"
"strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof."
"belief that is not based on proof"
They all say the same thing - one has skipped the evidence part and went straight to belief, that is, unjustified belief. Not surprisingly, the religions glorify the practice and teach that it is a virtue, but what is the virtue in unjustified belief?
There's an atheist firebrand named Pat Condell, who said in a YouTube video, "The truth is that faith is nothing more than the deliberate suspension of disbelief. It's an act of will. It's not a state of grace. It's a state of choice, because without evidence, you've got no reason to believe, apart from your willingness to believe. So why is that worthy of respect, any more than your willingness to poke yourself in the eye with a pencil? And why is faith considered some kind of virtue? Is it because it implies a certain depth of contemplation and insight? I don't think so. Faith, by definition, is unexamined. So in that sense it has to be among the shallowest of experiences."
For those interested, here's the video (5 mins):
Why? I'll bet you understood me perfectly well. Once I provided a clear definition for what I meant when using the word faith, you couldn't help but understand my position.
I knew what you meant because you provided your definition in the post I quoted. If you were regularly in the habit of assigning your own meaning to words, and had to include a definition every time you did so, you would struggle to write a simple paragraph.
Upon what basis do you think “atheist firebrand” Pat Condell asserts that faith is “by definition unexamined”? Rather a bold assumption don’t you think? But I suppose you can assume anything you like when words mean whatever you decide they mean.
