What does having faith mean to you?

[Valjean]

"Faith is irrational."

What makes it irrational? If my heart desires the touch of "God" that should be included in the calculating processes of the mind. It would be irrational to exclude the whispers of the heart. You can say it is lacking in "objective security" but, when harmless, it can be very rational.

I thought rational meant based on reason? How are desires of the heart "caluulated?"

 

[YmirGF]

I have faith in my doubt. It never fails me.
It helps me keep a watchful eye on my certainty.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

I thought rational meant based on reason? How are desires of the heart "caluulated?"

They can't be. But the idea that they CAN is just another facet of the irrationality of "the faith."

 

[bob0007]

What does having faith mean to you?. Is it a belief in God?, or a God or a higher being?. Or does it mean nothing? Just curious.


Matt

Faith in the Christian churches dogmas, is faith in a false hope, propogated by a false prophet, Paul, around a false gospel (Gospel of Grace), being taught to a deceived group of people. The gospels and creeds of this church, coming from the Nicean Council, which was convened by the beast with two horns like a lamb, Constantine the Great King of Rome, who was to deceive all who dwell on the earth.
As for what faith means, per the gopel of the Kingdom of God, on the other hand, has nothing to do with creeds or dogmas, but is based on action, stemming from a spiritual source within individuals.
Bob

 

[samuiil]

:rainbow1: maybe what people can call themselves a faithful to a religion if:yes::no:
you declare yourself that religion:angel2::angel2::angel2:

 

[MoonWater]

They can't be. But the idea that they CAN is just another facet of the irrationality of "the faith."

Faith isn't about "calculating desires of the heart" and I've never known a person of faith who's attempted such. Perhaps used faith to help discover or fulfill them, but not to calculate them. What makes you think desire calculation is a part of faith?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Belief without reasonable evidence.

OP completely answered by first response.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

Faith isn't about "calculating desires of the heart" and I've never known a person of faith who's attempted such. Perhaps used faith to help discover or fulfill them, but not to calculate them. What makes you think desire calculation is a part of faith?

I don't think so. Others do, see #13.

You should get out more.

 

[Jeremiah]

I thought rational meant based on reason? How are desires of the heart "caluulated?"

When it is more reasonable to move on the hearts command. Are you honestly going to tell me it is never reasonable to follow your heart?

Tell me, why should we think with only half a brain? Let's combine the efforts of the heart and mind.

 

[MoonWater]

I don't think so. Others do, see #13.

I did, it didn't make much sense to me(perhaps you could clarify that post jeremiah?) though from what little I think I understand of it it seemed to be saying that faith can be either rational or irrational depending on the circumstances, which I agree with.

You should get out more.

I grew up around people of faith and all of them had their own views but none of them were using faith to "calculate the desires of their hearts". I also study religion, faith, and philosophy as a hobby and have never come across this concept. I'm not saying people of faith don't do that, I just don't see how their faith has anything to do with it. Unless I'm misunderstanding just what you and Jeremiah mean here by "calculating desires". maybe one of you could explain what you mean?

 

[Jeremiah]

They can't be. But the idea that they CAN is just another facet of the irrationality of "the faith."

You write poems right? How do you choose the most logical and rational word(s) to express yourself?


You are given a choice to live here or to live there.

Your family lives here but a job there.

Would it be more rational to live here or there?


"To be, or not to be: that is the question." - W.S.

If you do not take matters of the heart into consideration in your rationalization then you might as well just kill yourself now. Because there is no reason based "reason" to exist here in this now. The most logical and rational conclusion for preservation of life is desire of life.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

If you do not take matters of the heat [heart?] into consideration in your rationalization then you might as well just kill yourself now. Because there is no reason based "reason" to exist here in this now. The most logical and rational conclusion for preservation of life is desire of life.

If you sincerely believe that (????) I have nothing for you but pity. :sad4:

 

[Jeremiah]

Any "faith" that does not allow for the risk of faith is a mock "faith" or better yet, just poor reasoning. The idea of "God" is absurd and the only way for a person, with completed reasoning, to accept this wild absurdity is with a suspension of disbelief. The only reason for a person to suspend disbelief would be because they have a desire for it. Faith then becomes passion for this "inwardness". The people who secure "God" objectively, with "proof" are accepting "God" not via the heart but they seek a sole path of the mind. Faith that is passion is, then, left behind as people follow faith's illusive doppelganger, "faith".

 

[Jeremiah]

If you sincerely believe that (????) I have nothing for you but pity. :sad4:

Rebuttal me, OmarKhayyam. Give me one good logical reason that is not based on emotions to live.

 

[Valjean]

When it is more reasonable to move on the hearts command. Are you honestly going to tell me it is never reasonable to follow your heart?

Yes.
That's not to say that following your heart might not be the best or most proper choice in a given situation. But it's not reasonable.Your mixing the definitions of reasonable, good, proper and best all together.

Tell me, why should we think with only half a brain? Let's combine the efforts of the heart and mind.

Because only half the brain is capable of thinking or reasoning. The other half perceives and feels.
Again, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with emotional motivations; they're just not reasonable.

 

[Jeremiah]

Yes.
That's not to say that following your heart might not be the best or most proper choice in a given situation. But it's not reasonable.Your mixing the definitions of reasonable, good, proper and best all together.



Because only half the brain is capable of thinking or reasoning. The other half perceives and feels.
Again, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with emotional motivations; they're just not reasonable.

"That's not to say that following your heart might not be the best or most proper choice in a given situation." - Seyorni

If it is the "best or most proper choice in a given situation" then it becomes the most rational choice.

"But it's not reasonable.Your mixing the definitions of reasonable, good, proper and best all together." - Seyorni

I am not the one mixing definitions here, Seyorni. It is, Seyorni, that you have confused, with your unreasonable attention on the objective, the actual and subjective.

Take faith in "God" for an example...

In the objectification of "God" there can be no objective security, such an endeavor, when solely for this achievement, is a hopeless task. Thus, as such, it becomes unreasonable and impractical. But, in matters of faith, the importance lies within you; what does your heart sing for? Objective security or subjective superiority? It then becomes prudent to the individual to weight matters of objective security against subjective superiority and decide logically which is most important to them; a choice that needs both the heart and mind working as one. Thus a subjective, rational movement is made. It is illogical & irrational if the goal is objective security but respectively subjectively the heart sings at a most reasonable level.

"Again, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with emotional motivations; they're just not reasonable" - Seyorni

Perhaps not always but then they are not always unreasonable. An emotional base can &, many times, is thee most reasonable one.

If you disagree otherwise then how about answering the questions I gave to OmarKhayyam?

You write poems right? How do you choose the most logical and rational word(s) to express yourself?


You are given a choice to live here or to live there.

Your family lives here but a job there.

Would it be more rational to live here or there?


"To be, or not to be: that is the question." - W.S.

If you do not take matters of the heart into consideration in your rationalization then you might as well just kill yourself now. Because there is no reason based "reason" to exist here in this now. The most logical and rational conclusion for preservation of life is desire of life.

 

[cardero]

What does having faith mean to you?
It means someone has fallen in love with someone else's beliefs.

 

[Valjean]

If it is the "best or most proper choice in a given situation" then it becomes the most rational choice.

No! -- "Best" is not a synonym for rational. Ratiocination is a methodology; an algebra. Rational means arrived ar by reason or logic. That's its definition.

I am not the one mixing definitions here, Seyorni. It is, Seyorni, that you have confused, with your unreasonable attention on the objective, the actual and subjective.

What does that mean: "...unreasonable attention on the objective, the actual and subjective?!" What else remains to attend to?
I'm just pointing out that the meaning of the word "rational" implies "arrived at by reason." I'm not making any value judgements about emotionalism.

Take faith in "God" for an example...

In the objectification of "God" there can be no objective security, such an endeavor, when solely for this achievement, is a hopeless task. Thus, as such, it becomes unreasonable and impractical. But, in matters of faith, the importance lies within you; what does your heart sing for? Objective security or subjective superiority? It then becomes prudent to the individual to weight matters of objective security against subjective superiority and decide logically which is most important to them; a choice that need both the heart and mind working as one. Thus a subjective, rational movement is made. It is illogical & irrational if the goal is objective security but respectively subjectively the heart sings at a most reasonable level.

Sorry, mate. You've lost me.

Perhaps not always but then they are not always unreasonable. An emotional base can &, many times, is thee most reasonable one.

Emotional and reason may well arrive at the same decision, but the methodologies remain different.

 

[spacejanitor]

Any "faith" that does not allow for the risk of faith is a mock "faith" or better yet, just poor reasoning. The idea of "God" is absurd and the only way for a person, with completed reasoning, to accept this wild absurdity is with a suspension of disbelief. The only reason for a person to suspend disbelief would be because they have a desire for it. Faith then becomes passion for this "inwardness". The people who secure "God" objectively, with "proof" are accepting "God" not via the heart but they seek a sole path of the mind. Faith that is passion is, then, left behind as people follow faith's illusive doppelganger, "faith".

To me" Faith "means to believe with one's whole heart, without reservation and without quviocation. In a religious sense my "Faith" that a God exists and that the only way I can get to heaven is thru Jesus Christ. :yes:

For all of us earthly bound creatures having "faith" means that your heart will beat the next beat, that you will be able to draw your next breath. You have "faith" that your loved ones will continue to walk thru the door at the end of the day. You have "faith" that when you turn on the light switch that the light will come on.

"Faith" obviously means different things to different people and one cannot define "faith" with just one definition. Each persons definition of "faith" is true and then false to someone else at the same time.:rainbow1:

Just as I have "Faith" that someone will read this and disagree, I have "faith" that someone will believe.:flirt:

The one constant however with "faith" is that everyone has it in one form or another.:bow:
Matt:run:

 

[cardero]

The one constant however with "faith" is that everyone has it in one form or another.

Find it in me.