:candle:Faith is not just a religion but an actual trust in God(Spirit of Life). It is not humanly produced and it comes by hearing the Truth which is a gift of the Spirit of Life (Holy Spirit). Truth is knowledge and it is the Spirit of Life. You are a mind formed by knowledge not a body. Our minds are formed by our teachers who use knowledge to shape us to the same image (reflection). Whose image (reflection) do you have? A man's or God's? The Truth is the true image (reflection) which is actually formless Spirit. It is not for a student to be above his Master but enough for the student when he is fully learned to be just as his Master. Thoughts and words are spiritual and they are either Spirit full or Spirit less. The carnal mind (self) is the enemy of God for it is a fragmented by time mind and therefore cannot receive the Truth which is Eternal. Humble yourself in the presence of the God and He will exalt you. Seek and Ye shall find. Time(darkness) was give to us to emphasize the Light(Truth) once you have grasped this time will cease to exist and you will walk with your maker forever and not die.:candle:
-
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!
fideism and God
- Thread starter robtex
- Start date
love
tri-polar optimist
When your eyes are opened unto the wonderous nature of God you see His presence in all of nature. It is not based on an unseen faith that is abstract in nature, but deals with everyday situations. Life is fleeting but it is everywhere I look. I am seeking God and do not consider myself an infidel
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
I certainly don't agree with that.
robtex
Veteran Member
could you please elaborate on that?
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Nope. In fact, I would say that anyone who relies solely on fideism does not know God. He or she only knows the concepts of God of his or her ancestors.
robtex
Veteran Member
could you elaborate
robtex
Veteran Member
what reasons. Is personal evidence evidence that isn't available for anyone else to see?
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Huh?
Personal experience, not evidence. Kinda har to share that. You can try to describe it, but that's insufficient.
Troublemane
Well-Known Member
In my understanding of it (from personal experience, and from the words of wiser folks than I), faith is not a quantum to be measured, its a dimension of the soul. It could be considered another sense, but it is deeper than the senses. Quieter, more subtle so is easier to miss.
I think it goes beyond philosophy (which is reflective and imaginitive, positing "what if" and doing little thought experiements til something fits), as it is more direct and experiential. I think truely having faith is not hearing words that you agree with, but in directly knowing something to be true to the core of your being. You may not be able to explain it in words, but thats due to the inadequacy of words, not due to the limitations of the experience.:angel2:
I think it goes beyond philosophy (which is reflective and imaginitive, positing "what if" and doing little thought experiements til something fits), as it is more direct and experiential. I think truely having faith is not hearing words that you agree with, but in directly knowing something to be true to the core of your being. You may not be able to explain it in words, but thats due to the inadequacy of words, not due to the limitations of the experience.:angel2:
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Rob, I think that your OP fails to take into account the impetus that caused the thing that people have faith in. Yes, there are people who have unquestioning faith in their religion, unquestioning faith in the nature of God as has been told to them. But how did the religion originate in the first place? How did the originators come about their conception of God?
Personal experience.
Whether you believe in it or not, many people believe that they have experienced God. It's not just a matter of having been told about God.
In my view, as expressed by Emerson generations ago, those who have never experienced God first-hand, who only rely on what others have told them about God, they practice a dead religion, the religion of their ancestors, not their own. Faith in what has been reported can be used to supplement one's own personal experience, to help put things in perspective, but faith in what has been reported by others alone is insufficient to sustain a living spirituality.
robtex
Veteran Member
actually I see where you listed your reasons on post 160 of the thread evidence? That is kinda what I was looking for ..your qualifications of why perceive God exists..
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Ah. Well, that list is evidences I perceive now that I believe what I do. The catalyst for my belief was an intense theophany.
robtex
Veteran Member
can you give examples of those impetus. On a sidenote I reject fideism and if I didn't I would be a theist or deist but I still find merit in reading the ideas of the people who found merit in it. I find it odd you have such a negative view of it but can't qualify it on here.
experiences can be explained and shared. They are also a perceived product of the 5 senses, touch, taste, sound sight smell. It would be quite odd in the projection of an omnipresent being, which encompasses the most popular description of God's whereabouts, to present for some people but not others and for the the drastic variations that make up the various religions of history. Or if one by contrast was to suggest God is not omnipresent to be incapable of processing an idea of the location of their deity of choice. Relating this back to fideism the value proposition by both Pascal and Kierkegaard is that evidence is not a necessary by product for conviction. If one were to see that statement as valid than in some way one could perceive a value in the idea of fideism.
When people say "personal experiences" it means they aren't interested in discussing it with someone who they feel might have a different perception of their experience, which is their right but does little to add to the entitlement of merit that many theist attach to "personal experience."
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
I know this wasn't addressed to me, but....
I'm not sure what you meant by "entitlement of merit" but I don't expect any of the people I DO discuss it with to persuaded or convert.
Not all experiences can be adequately explained; my theophany certainly can't. Even when an experience can be explained it can't truly be shared.
That's an unfair generalization. I'm perfectly willing to discuss my experiences with most interested people regardless of whether or not they agree with me.
I'm not sure what you meant by "entitlement of merit" but I don't expect any of the people I DO discuss it with to persuaded or convert.
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Hmm... how about when Mohammed was called to "Recite"? When Moses experienced God in the desert?
Only to a certain extent. Experience is by definition subjective.
No, as evidenced by countless descriptions of experience with the Numinous. However, it is true that people generally aren't interested in discussing it with someone who they good reason to believe will be hostile and derisive. Which at least from my perspective is perfectly understandable.
I actually just posted an experience of God that I found on the internet:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/comparative-religion/66475-revelation-experience-god.html
robtex
Veteran Member
I would have to read on theophany before responding to that. I am presenting the idea that all experiences are involving one of the 5 senses so that a shared experience could be things like :
1) I saw God and he looks like..
2) I heard God and he sounds like ...
ect
"entitlement of merit" is the idea that in ones reservation of sharing their personal experience, which again is their right, that the idea of merit should be assigned to it irregardless of lack of shared exposure through explanation and qualification. Or rephrased, realize that if you or anyone choose not to share your experience or qualify it than others should and can not assign merit to it ---I feel that many theists, feel there is an entitlement of merit even in the absence of the idea they choose not to present. I find that assessment to be false.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Well, I can tell you that my own experience was not of the 5 physical senses. Would that it were! That would be SO much easier to understand, to say nothing of discussion.
I see, thank you for explaining. I certainly don't agree with that.
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
There is no entitlement of merit. We don't expect you to take our word for it. I wouldn't. As I said, the reluctance is based on having good reason to believe that shared experiences will be met with hostility. Would you be willing to share your most personal and cherished experiences if you knew the person is only "listening" to discredit your experience?