Is Faith Certainty?

[blü 2]

On a Website I wrote some years ago, Biblical in nature, I wrote one of the precepts governing my study. I call it Harmony of Scripture. Within this HoS, I include the entire OT and NT.

Whereas I read it as an historical document, and, while its context is relevant, for me its value is in exactly what it says ─ human voices across a great deal of time: what are they saying, and why?

So, while I found the information you provided well put together, it fails my HoS test. Similarly, my information fails to move you from your position - which I actually do not mind.

Peace in our time, then. An interesting conversation.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Also @Mister Silver there is no such thing as a belief not based on proof. All belief is based on proof.

NewGuyOnTheBlock: "Hogwash"

Care to give an example?

There is no evidence for God; there is no evidence for Bigfoot; there is no evidence for Nessie or Champ; there is no evidence for Dragons; there is no evidence for Meremaids; there is no evidence for the Illuminati; there is no evidence of Flight 800 being shot down by our own military; there is no evidence for Pegasi; there is no evidence for Magic; there is no evidence that Sandy Hook was a "false flag" event; there is no evidence for Flat Earth; there is no evidence for ghosts; there is no evidence for countless things that people believe in.

===================================

"Faith", as used in "faith in God", has a very different meaning than "faith that I will drive my car to a given location and my friend will be there when I arrive".

The theist is eager to place both of these kinds of "faith" on equal footing; but they certainly are NOT.

"Evidence" must be falsifiable and objective; the theist eagerly forgets that, as well.

It appears that in this discussion, the words "faith" and "evidence" and "proof" and "belief" are so loosely used that communication has broken down and further discussion is pointless.

 

[blü 2]

Acting on that faith, he might perform various actions that others may argue constitute a basis to expect employment, but his faith in the employment came before his actions to find employment.

Why would he. or she, not just call it self-confidence?

 

[blü 2]

At this point, you have just expressed faith by the senses. In the different levels of faith, I would have to say it is the lowest level.

You share at least the first two of those assumptions I've made, or you wouldn't be posting here.

Perhaps it struck you why I assume those statements above (not the money example) are true? Because I can't demonstrate the existence of a world external to me until after I've assumed there is one. I can't demonstrate that my senses inform me about it until after I've assumed that they do. I can't demonstrate that reason is a valid tool without using reason. So those assumptions are in that sense necessary; and we all make them instinctively. But as I said, I like to be aware of what I take on faith, what I assume.

Paper and electronic money, I have faith in from experience. I use it out there in reality and it works. I can tell you how to do this yourself if you wish.

Now, what further assumptions are you making other than these *chuckle* 'lowest level' ones?

I'm interested to hear you specify them and then justify them.

 

[Grandliseur]

A 6000 year old earth? That modern science is wrong and he is right? How about Pat Robertson thinking hurricanes are created by tolerating homosexuals? The absurdity list is almost endless!

In your quote, I am 100% with you in saying this is absurd.

you should read Christians like Paul Tillich, or James Fowler in Stages of Faith

I usually do not read what other Christians write in their books. It tends to be boring.
I read my Bible, and try to explain to those who have questions about the Bible how things are, end of story.

who are you to say someone is an "unbeliever"

Since my authority for what the faith should be is found in scripture, in the Bible, using a Harmonious Interpretation of All Scripture, it is possible to determine who is and who isn't an unbeliever. Large latitudes must be given due to the number of churches that exist; so, while I personally may form an opinion, I am sure that the Lord Christ might be stricter than I am in who he accepts.

your local preachers

I belong to no church any longer. I am too demanding.

holy snakehandlers

Snake-handlers in particular, I frown upon. They are not holy in my book.

 

[Grandliseur]

Are you applying for a job? Sorry, but I am not hiring.

Thank you. I'll make a note of this somewhere, maybe.

 

[Grandliseur]

human voices across a great deal of time: what are they saying, and why?

There is great value in trying to decipher what people are saying, their motives, etc. I also try to listen to them, but not only to what is said, also to what their actions might reveal of hidden thoughts and motives. Thus, my understanding of why Adam sinned is not exactly what others may think. I don't belong to any church; so, I can conclude whatever wherever the data takes me.

 

[Ponder This]

Why would he. or she, not just call it self-confidence?

Sure. I would say self-confidence is faith in one's self, but not that self-confidence is faith in the general sense.

 

[Kenny]

You share at least the first two of those assumptions I've made, or you wouldn't be posting here.

Perhaps it struck you why I assume those statements above (not the money example) are true? Because I can't demonstrate the existence of a world external to me until after I've assumed there is one. I can't demonstrate that my senses inform me about it until after I've assumed that they do. I can't demonstrate that reason is a valid tool without using reason. So those assumptions are in that sense necessary; and we all make them instinctively. But as I said, I like to be aware of what I take on faith, what I assume.

Paper and electronic money, I have faith in from experience. I use it out there in reality and it works. I can tell you how to do this yourself if you wish.

Now, what further assumptions are you making other than these *chuckle* 'lowest level' ones?

I'm interested to hear you specify them and then justify them.

I'm sorry if it sounded like a judgment call. Wasn't my attempt at all--as I am speaking purely in a Christian definition.

For Christians, if one believes on the basis of what one sees it becomes a sense based faith. Much like Thomas who said "Unless I put my finger in the hole of his hands...". Jesus simply said the greater faith is the one who believes who hasn't yet seen.

So I speak only in terms of a Christian outlook and give my humble apologies if it came across in any other way than just discussing points of view.

 

[Windwalker]

In your quote, I am 100% with you in saying this is absurd.

Excellent. This is something we can relate to on.

I usually do not read what other Christians write in their books. It tends to be boring.

That's interesting to me. Why is it boring? I think I'd guess it's because you don't personally relate to it, so it sounds rather foreign. I can see that. However, my personal experience makes it incredibly interesting and meaningful to me.

I read my Bible, and try to explain to those who have questions about the Bible how things are, end of story.

I've found over the years that how I read and understood things from the Bible have changed, quite a fair amount, as I've changed as a person based on my life experiences. It kind of works that way.

Since my authority for what the faith should be is found in scripture, in the Bible, using a Harmonious Interpretation of All Scripture, it is possible to determine who is and who isn't an unbeliever.

I've found that's really not the case. Usually who I had said was an "unbeliever" was really more about what I was or wasn't comfortable with in my personal faith at that time in my life.

Large latitudes must be given due to the number of churches that exist; so, while I personally may form an opinion, I am sure that the Lord Christ might be stricter than I am in who he accepts.

You see, I've come to see that Jesus isn't "strict" like that. In fact, I see him as very much about the spirit of the law, and not the letter. I think that pretty much defines Jesus Christ actually, from top to bottom.

So when I read him say, "Judge not, lest you be judged", I very much take that to heart, that to glance at your neighbor and pass ulitmate judgement on them from your point of view where you are at in your life, is actually what Paul warned us against to, "Grieve not the Holy Spirit." "Who are you to judge another man's servant", he also asks. As we point the finger outward, it's a reflection of ourselves we see, and the accuser, becomes the accused, as Jesus taught us with great stress.

To me, the lessons of Jesus were to teach us humility. When we place ourselves in the throne of judgement of others, we fall way short of what Jesus taught. We violate love, for our idea of "law". We haven't moved yet from strict adhere to rules to find God for ourselves, to the love of others, which is what Jesus died for, right?

 

[Jeremiahcp]

NewGuyOnTheBlock: "Hogwash"



There is no evidence for God; there is no evidence for Bigfoot; there is no evidence for Nessie or Champ; there is no evidence for Dragons; there is no evidence for Meremaids; there is no evidence for the Illuminati; there is no evidence of Flight 800 being shot down by our own military; there is no evidence for Pegasi; there is no evidence for Magic; there is no evidence that Sandy Hook was a "false flag" event; there is no evidence for Flat Earth; there is no evidence for ghosts; there is no evidence for countless things that people believe in.

===================================

"Faith", as used in "faith in God", has a very different meaning than "faith that I will drive my car to a given location and my friend will be there when I arrive".

The theist is eager to place both of these kinds of "faith" on equal footing; but they certainly are NOT.

"Evidence" must be falsifiable and objective; the theist eagerly forgets that, as well.

It appears that in this discussion, the words "faith" and "evidence" and "proof" and "belief" are so loosely used that communication has broken down and further discussion is pointless.

Well I clearly said proof, so your rant about evidence is a straw man. At any rate you are very confused about the broad nature of evidence and also confuse on your scope and limited position to define such standards for other people.

 

[blü 2]

Thus, my understanding of why Adam sinned is not exactly what others may think. I don't belong to any church; so, I can conclude whatever wherever the data takes me.

That is certainly one kind of freedom.

I find the question 'What's true in reality?' tends to lead to the most useful and most satisfying freedom of all, a reality-compatible one. You may already have considered it in those terms, but if not, I commend it to you.

 

[blü 2]

Sure. I would say self-confidence is faith in one's self, but not that self-confidence is faith in the general sense.

Let me put it this way: it isn't necessary to have faith that some benevolent supernatural agent exists to have faith in oneself, in the sense of self-confidence.

I accept that there's testimony that some people with very low morale and self-esteem. with eg drug problems and criminal histories, have been helped back to a more normal way of life, and of self-control, by being persuaded to a view that such an external agent can be invoked to aid them. If that's correct then the outcome is a good thing, both for the individual and for society.

However, I query whether the true source of such changes is any external supernatural agent, or simply the support of the real humans who urge the message and the better conduct (though in most cases what they do is admirable).

 

[arthra]

The Baha'i definition of "Faith" may be less commonly known and I'll introduce it here:

"The greater the faith of man the more illumined his life. Faith is a miracle; it has a wonder working power. Its spiritual influence refines the character, suffers man to become humble and meek; places in his heart the fear of God; prompts him to devote his time to humanitarian deeds; spiritualizes his nature; exalts his ideals and enkindles his lamp. The greater the faith of man the more numerous will be his philanthropic actions. Faith is like unto the trees, deeds are like unto the fruits. Faith is like unto the lamp, deeds are like unto the light. ... Faith is not so much what we believe as what we carry out."
__________

(SOW - Star of the West, Star of the West - 10)

 

[Grandliseur]

Excellent. This is something we can relate to on.


That's interesting to me. Why is it boring? I think I'd guess it's because you don't personally relate to it, so it sounds rather foreign. I can see that. However, my personal experience makes it incredibly interesting and meaningful to me.


I've found over the years that how I read and understood things from the Bible have changed, quite a fair amount, as I've changed as a person based on my life experiences. It kind of works that way.


I've found that's really not the case. Usually who I had said was an "unbeliever" was really more about what I was or wasn't comfortable with in my personal faith at that time in my life.


You see, I've come to see that Jesus isn't "strict" like that. In fact, I see him as very much about the spirit of the law, and not the letter. I think that pretty much defines Jesus Christ actually, from top to bottom.

So when I read him say, "Judge not, lest you be judged", I very much take that to heart, that to glance at your neighbor and pass ulitmate judgement on them from your point of view where you are at in your life, is actually what Paul warned us against to, "Grieve not the Holy Spirit." "Who are you to judge another man's servant", he also asks. As we point the finger outward, it's a reflection of ourselves we see, and the accuser, becomes the accused, as Jesus taught us with great stress.

To me, the lessons of Jesus were to teach us humility. When we place ourselves in the throne of judgement of others, we fall way short of what Jesus taught. We violate love, for our idea of "law". We haven't moved yet from strict adhere to rules to find God for ourselves, to the love of others, which is what Jesus died for, right?

Absurd
About the Earth's age, in explaining part of the mysteries in Genesis chapter one, I wrote a link. In that file you should be able to see what I believe regarding this in this link:>Genesis 1 ligth <
The other point about hurricanes is so far off into left field, that it nearly demands people in white coats described here:

However, I am an equal opportunity 'absurd it is' awarder. When atheists reject claims that dinos lived at the same time as human beings, they ignore, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Cambodian temple art, and the Ika stones of South America - this is no less absurd than what the others in your post claimed. Even in the book of Job, there is one example clearly speaking of a dino, and Job was a post-deluge perhaps nearly Abraham contemporary.
Redirect Notice
Redirect Notice

What is demanded of us
Jesus said to us, 'why do you call me Lord, Lord, if you do not do what I ask of you?' (Luke 6:46)
In John's letters we are told that love of Christ, and of God, consists in obedience, doing what we should do, and refraining from what we should.

1 John 5:3-4 For this is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments; and yet his commandments are not burdensome, 4 because everything that has been born from God conquers the world. . .​

So, while there are allowances made for our sinfulness, willful disobedience is not tolerated:

Matthew 7:21 21 “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.
Matthew 7:13-14 13 “Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.​

Humility
For sure, this point is important to Jesus. But, please note that rather than making a person weak, humility actually is the sign of a strong person.

​

 

[Grandliseur]

That is certainly one kind of freedom.

I find the question 'What's true in reality?' tends to lead to the most useful and most satisfying freedom of all, a reality-compatible one. You may already have considered it in those terms, but if not, I commend it to you.

In John's Gospel he said this:

John 8:31-32 . . If ye abide in my word, then are ye truly my disciples; 32 and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.​

I have found that being in a church means that I abide by their word, not Jesus'. Trying to abide by Jesus', I have been set free from the shackles of men, their teachings, their demands.

Truth
Truth is an essential target of my agenda since I am unbound by any denomination. But, whose truth? Let me repeat myself, perhaps, my acquaintance who just put me through an exhausting time trying to provide evidence for the earth being round, him believing in a flat-earth, showed me that I couldn't budge him from his 'truth'. Let me quote this to you for the first time, I think. My first paragraph in the file to him:

[
Things that disprove the flat earth:
Only Evidence Needed:
Just before sunset, shadows become extremely long, whether summer or winter. Refer to flat earth angle figure below; there it may be seen that such angles cannot occur on a flat earth system. Only on a spherical earth can such extremely long shadows be seen.

In fact, the shadow's angle before sunset becomes Zero, that is, it is parallel to the ground. At no time can the sun of the flat-earth model create this phenomena.

On a walk around sunset, I happened to pass by a building on which my shadow was cast. It was as big as myself on the wall, as tall, if not a little taller. This was an example of a shadow parallel to the ground, Zero degrees, that no flat-earth sun can make.

Other Evidence: . . .
]​

Many truths
This single paragraph contains the only evidence needed to demonstrate what kind of earth we have, though I provided a lot more - namely, a demonstration of angles that a flat-earth sun cannot make.

To me, the question of angles becomes the alvin on which the sun above a flat earth creates angles that cannot be denied. This compared with the angles of a round earth (using a spherical model to make the calculations easier, and the result is not very much in error.) proves what kind of truth we have. Thus the truth is that the earth is round. But, that is my truth, not his.

We have the same problem all the time with other things. People's lives, their agendas, their beliefs - prevent them from accepting the same truth. Thus, we have an abundance of different truths. Ingledsva, HEATHEN ALASKAN, has her truth, I have mine, and others have theirs.

What truth
I think therefore that the only thing that counts is being true to yourself and stay within that. What then follows as effects of this cause, take it as a man, or woman.
However, I love science, and exchanging ideas can be very satisfying. At times, I have despite my age, learned from others things that changed what I thought of as being true.

​

 

[blü 2]

John 8:31-32 . . ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. [...]

I think therefore that the only thing that counts is being true to yourself and stay within that.

I have no argument with being true ─ which I'd say meant being honest, as best one can ─ to oneself.

But for me, 'truth' has the single primary meaning, 'conformity with reality'.

The trouble with religious 'truth' is that it has as many versions as there are religions.

So my definition ─ which gives an objective standard, hence falsifiability ─ is the only one that seems reasonable to me.

However, I love science, and exchanging ideas can be very satisfying. At times, I have despite my age, learned from others things that changed what I thought of as being true.

prosit!

 

[Grandliseur]

single primary meaning, 'conformity with reality'.

You have got to be kidding. It is a wonderful goal, I must say. Even the ones who think they have attained this ultimate goal many a times have just pulled blinders down over their own eyes so that they can believe they have attained this blissful goal.

being honest, as best one can ─ to oneself.

This is absolutely a must. But, again, so many of us have things that impeded this.

I hope you succeed in your quest. The ironic thing, to you I think, not to me, is that I already think I have arrived at this lofty goal of conformity with reality. Please have a good laugh at my expense.
------------
When I left my childhood church, nearly 10 or 15 years ago,for reasons of disagreement with their dogma that I gradually came to see, I never expected in just a few years to discover how much of their dogma was flawed. Just as a perhaps, what do you think would happen if after the churches have been attacked (which we are told they shall be, just not the extend of it) and been erased, that some event would prove without a doubt to atheists that they have been wrong all this time?! (I am asking in regard to 'conformity with reality', not to world events)

 

[idav]

Personally, I consider the notion that faith is certainty to be the biggest misdirection in religion. I think that is false faith, and an attempt to dodge reason.

These claims that religion makes, many of them are absurd and lack any supporting evidences. It is reasonable to doubt them, and it is reasonable to be uncertain of them. Plunging yourself into forced certainty and denying what any rational mind should find as uncertain is nothing but forced ignorance. And I refuse to accept forced ignorance as genuine faith, certainty, in this respects, is an illusion and a deceiver.

The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard said, "Without risk there is no faith." There is no such risk in blindly asserting certainty; the risk comes from facing that uncertainty. To take your faith in God and place it on the altar of reason without restrain, to embrace the absurd so that faith and reason do not end each other but walk hand in hand, that is genuine religious faith.

I am going to suggest that if you can't have faith with uncertainty then you don't really have faith at all, what you have is a poorly reasoned position that you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge. I think a true believer should both have the doubt of an atheist and faith in God.

I would also like to point out that declaring faith as certainty is just an attempt to rationalize the position, which is counter-intuitive to the notion that things like God cannot be reached with reason.

Faith does have to do with coviction of things. I think I see what your getting at but eventually faith runs out of reasons and at some point a premise is taken on. It's that premise which should leave a believer with at least an inkling of doubt, something that says the premise could be wrong.

 

[Thief]

Personally, I consider the notion that faith is certainty to be the biggest misdirection in religion. I think that is false faith, and an attempt to dodge reason.

These claims that religion makes, many of them are absurd and lack any supporting evidences. It is reasonable to doubt them, and it is reasonable to be uncertain of them. Plunging yourself into forced certainty and denying what any rational mind should find as uncertain is nothing but forced ignorance. And I refuse to accept forced ignorance as genuine faith, certainty, in this respects, is an illusion and a deceiver.

The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard said, "Without risk there is no faith." There is no such risk in blindly asserting certainty; the risk comes from facing that uncertainty. To take your faith in God and place it on the altar of reason without restrain, to embrace the absurd so that faith and reason do not end each other but walk hand in hand, that is genuine religious faith.

I am going to suggest that if you can't have faith with uncertainty then you don't really have faith at all, what you have is a poorly reasoned position that you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge. I think a true believer should both have the doubt of an atheist and faith in God.

I would also like to point out that declaring faith as certainty is just an attempt to rationalize the position, which is counter-intuitive to the notion that things like God cannot be reached with reason.

certainty.....as in....Yeah, no doubt!

I keep my notions to items I consider self proving
such as ...Someone had to be First

also....someone had to be first to walk with God

and my fellowman is borderline ...nuts....