What is the meaning of faith?
- Thread starter Gaze
- Start date
invisible
On Holiday
- MBTI
- none
I think that faith is a decision. "I can't be certain of the truth, but this is the path that I have chosen." It's like being faithful to a relationship - it's not a consistent state of being so much as it is a willingness to continually rededicate the self to the path. It can involve all sorts of questioning and uncertainty, there is no need to flawlessly believe... the crucial element of faith is the willingness to choose to keep believing, even when there's no way of knowing. I think it does require a willingness to value this sort of practice as being inherently good or worthy, without necessarily leading to an ultimate truth. Kind of like the pop song "The Climb" by Miley Cyrus.
invisible
On Holiday
- MBTI
- none
I think that the condition of faithlessness would affect quality of life. I'm not necessarily talking about religion at all. (I am an atheist.) But how are you supposed to figure out what to do without believing that anything can be valuable? It seems like you would just become a sensual creature, guided to keep moving through life by pleasure alone. Wouldn't that involve quite a lot of difficulty?
- MBTI
- ENFP
- Enneagram
- 947 sx/sp
To me, the willing abandonment and end of reason.
Relief from the pain of being human and living in this world.
If studies are to be believed, yes. Negatively, given higher rates of depression, suicide, and reduced life expectancy.
I find the faith-based positions of theists and atheists untenable, and so I am agnostic.
If that means my life has a greater proportion of “suck,” I accept it. I tried doing it the
other way, and I couldn’t make it work. Add on to that the abuses done to me as both
a child and as an adult by the faithful, and I am done. I now want nothing to do with it.
Well, I want nothing to do with other people in this regard.
I can still read texts alone, and think, and reflect, and question, and wonder.
But in the end, I am not a man of faith. I am a reasonable man.
Cheers,
Ian
Milktoast Bandit
Dominate with compassion...
- MBTI
- MEAT
- Enneagram
- 9
I was looking for something else about this guy, but found this instead. Don't be turned off by the site the article is on. This guy is worth learning about/from.
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2008/08/08/profiles-in-manliness-viktor-frankl/
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2008/08/08/profiles-in-manliness-viktor-frankl/
Tin Man
"a respectable amount of screaming"
- MBTI
- INTJ
- Enneagram
- N
I think this is very true. I think most people question their belief and when it comes down to it just choose to have faith. Even when it doesn't make sense or is contradictary.
I don't know if it affects quality of life. The person I was when I still believed is very different to the person I am now. It's hard to tell if it's affected my life. For a long time I thought my crisis of faith came about in my late teens, but I think it goes back all the way to being a young child and feeling anger at the injustices in the bible that were supposed to be proof of God's love for us. Then learning more about different interpretations, some of the moronic guidlelines the church held onto despite them being harmful and the stupidity of so many esteemed members. And it all snowballed into a rejection of that ideology.
It depends if we want to distinguish "belief" from "faith" -- I think some religious apologetics lean towards what I call a more belief-centric view, which basically says you believe in God because it is more plausible than not.
Faith as distinguished from belief doesn't make sense to me unless it is somehow shown to be "a priori" in nature. That is, when something is fundamental enough to not be explicable by justification and to be futile to deny.
I guess one can argue that faith isn't something you can really talk of, because what we can talk of generally is stuff we can justify to some degree. If one talked of something that is so a priori as above, there wouldn't be much to say.
For example, one could say "I have faith, not belief, in my consciousness" to someone -- and there could be some truth to that-- but the moment you say it, someone could ask you "what do you mean by consciousness" .... and the moment you describe it, you ascribe certain properties to it, and the moment we can show those can be derived from more fundamental properties of physics, you've shown that your "faith" isn't faith .... it's a belief based on derivation.
But, as we can probably see, it is not entirely unjustified to say that the derivation was kind of artificial because it's more likely one failed to describe consciousness or define it than that one's derivation really was suitable -- it probably worked on the properties one listed, but that's it.
So I tend to think what someone has faith in, one can indicate to, but someone who is afraid your faith means X can always think of a way around X, because one can't turn faith into something too concrete (as again, then it becomes justified belief).
This, BTW, is my current thought on things like eastern mysticism's indications -- I do not think it is untrue that achieving ego-transcendence or whatever can be described psychologically as coming to faith in a sense, but any time one indicates the properties of that psychology I think one can start skeptic-ing it (which I find a fun exercise myself, I get the sense this is the kind of thing Ne-bases/doms can enjoy), i.e. finding a loophole or alternate view to escape it really being a priori
I have a negative view of much of organized religion more because it seems like poorly justified belief than faith. The idea that one can mass-manufacture faith seems to wilt before genuine reason, because I tend to think reason runs king in the world of *compelling us* from a third person point of view to accept views. Hence, it seems like genuine faith must concern the first person point of view.
Faith as distinguished from belief doesn't make sense to me unless it is somehow shown to be "a priori" in nature. That is, when something is fundamental enough to not be explicable by justification and to be futile to deny.
I guess one can argue that faith isn't something you can really talk of, because what we can talk of generally is stuff we can justify to some degree. If one talked of something that is so a priori as above, there wouldn't be much to say.
For example, one could say "I have faith, not belief, in my consciousness" to someone -- and there could be some truth to that-- but the moment you say it, someone could ask you "what do you mean by consciousness" .... and the moment you describe it, you ascribe certain properties to it, and the moment we can show those can be derived from more fundamental properties of physics, you've shown that your "faith" isn't faith .... it's a belief based on derivation.
But, as we can probably see, it is not entirely unjustified to say that the derivation was kind of artificial because it's more likely one failed to describe consciousness or define it than that one's derivation really was suitable -- it probably worked on the properties one listed, but that's it.
So I tend to think what someone has faith in, one can indicate to, but someone who is afraid your faith means X can always think of a way around X, because one can't turn faith into something too concrete (as again, then it becomes justified belief).
This, BTW, is my current thought on things like eastern mysticism's indications -- I do not think it is untrue that achieving ego-transcendence or whatever can be described psychologically as coming to faith in a sense, but any time one indicates the properties of that psychology I think one can start skeptic-ing it (which I find a fun exercise myself, I get the sense this is the kind of thing Ne-bases/doms can enjoy), i.e. finding a loophole or alternate view to escape it really being a priori
I have a negative view of much of organized religion more because it seems like poorly justified belief than faith. The idea that one can mass-manufacture faith seems to wilt before genuine reason, because I tend to think reason runs king in the world of *compelling us* from a third person point of view to accept views. Hence, it seems like genuine faith must concern the first person point of view.
Last edited:
Gaze
Donor
- MBTI
- INFPishy
I think faith is personal, meaning it's a unique relationship with the supreme being. I don't think it's simply a belief, because it wouldn't have substance if was simply a view held by someone without proof of worth or existence. I think belief can enhance faith. It's ongoing. I think it takes going through various experiences to sustain faith.
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
To me “faith” is synonymous with “will”, and “will” is synonymous with the creation of our reality and our ability to manipulate it.
Jesus said you only need a mustard seed of faith to move mountains (Christians correct me if I’m wrong pls).
Faith is the ability to see through to the true nature of what reality really is, that what we see isn’t really representative of reality necessarily.
That consciousness is fundamental to our existence.
We never “began” and will never “end” only transform.
Everything is light...even a “solid” granite rock is made of light at a certain vibration through time/space.
You have particles and neutrinos and all kinds of waves from radio, to cosmic, all passing through your body at the speed of light.
Maybe they communicate with our particles on some unknown level?
Time is not really there at all, it is wholly our perception as we move through space/time to give us points of reference.
That is “faith” to me.
Edit: We understand that our DNA instructs on how a person is made...but what gave the rules to DNA to take the shape that it does? What tells sub-atomic particles to form into atoms to then make molecules and molecules into cells?
Jesus said you only need a mustard seed of faith to move mountains (Christians correct me if I’m wrong pls).
Faith is the ability to see through to the true nature of what reality really is, that what we see isn’t really representative of reality necessarily.
That consciousness is fundamental to our existence.
We never “began” and will never “end” only transform.
Everything is light...even a “solid” granite rock is made of light at a certain vibration through time/space.
You have particles and neutrinos and all kinds of waves from radio, to cosmic, all passing through your body at the speed of light.
Maybe they communicate with our particles on some unknown level?
Time is not really there at all, it is wholly our perception as we move through space/time to give us points of reference.
That is “faith” to me.
Edit: We understand that our DNA instructs on how a person is made...but what gave the rules to DNA to take the shape that it does? What tells sub-atomic particles to form into atoms to then make molecules and molecules into cells?
Last edited:
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2
To me, faith and hope goes hand in hand.
Faith is believing on something without hesitation or proof of its existence. Hope is looking forward to something better/greater just by having faith. -- both doesn't need validation,. Like how different religions believe in the existence of their Gods. Like when you love, you give your faithfulness to them--believing that that love is true and pure and hope that everything will last.
Personally, i view religion as faith and hope, it makes human grounded and helps us get pass the burdens life throws. Believing that there is a higher power. A greater existence that'll help us and look forward to tomorrow.
Mine's not that deep compared to others, but that's pretty much how i think it is. Hehe
Faith is believing on something without hesitation or proof of its existence. Hope is looking forward to something better/greater just by having faith. -- both doesn't need validation,. Like how different religions believe in the existence of their Gods. Like when you love, you give your faithfulness to them--believing that that love is true and pure and hope that everything will last.
Personally, i view religion as faith and hope, it makes human grounded and helps us get pass the burdens life throws. Believing that there is a higher power. A greater existence that'll help us and look forward to tomorrow.
Mine's not that deep compared to others, but that's pretty much how i think it is. Hehe
just me
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infj
Not exact on the mustard seed.
Matthew 17 He mentions the mustard seed once. “Because you have so little faith." was said first, so a little faith cannot help move mountains.
Then, He said, "
Why did He use a mustard seed?
Faith must be used, or planted, to become more than "so little".
Matthew 17 He mentions the mustard seed once. “Because you have so little faith." was said first, so a little faith cannot help move mountains.
Then, He said, "
Why did He use a mustard seed?
Faith must be used, or planted, to become more than "so little".
just me
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infj
Remember, if we have something: why do we yet hope for it? We already have more than we can acknowledge.
Asked a friend if he would walk across the lake at a church meeting with me. He sort of agreed to "try". When I heard this, I asked if he would remove his wallet first. He said, of course. Told him that is not faith.
Asked a friend if he would walk across the lake at a church meeting with me. He sort of agreed to "try". When I heard this, I asked if he would remove his wallet first. He said, of course. Told him that is not faith.
t5juyt
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
In the Bible, faith is described as "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." When I first read it, I couldn't wrap my head around it. Three decades later, it makes sense to me on a very profound level.
What purpose do I think it serves? It allows manifestation where it may at first not seem possible.
Does not having it affect quality of life? I believe so, absolutely. Negatively. Without faith, I imagine only relying on things I can detect with my five senses, and affect with my own hands.
What purpose do I think it serves? It allows manifestation where it may at first not seem possible.
Does not having it affect quality of life? I believe so, absolutely. Negatively. Without faith, I imagine only relying on things I can detect with my five senses, and affect with my own hands.
freekundli
Regular Poster
- MBTI
- infjs
According to me meaning of faith is "complete trust or confidence in someone or something."
CindyLou
Get over it
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 6w5
Agree. I recommend Frankl's "Man's Search For Meaning". Definitely worth reading.
CindyLou
Get over it
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 6w5
I don't understand. What do you rely on with faith?
I always felt faith is just referring to something that isn't quite belief, but rather something you feel to exist, but can't really deduce from evidence. It's a kind of "a priori" thing.
Which is why I think there's a grain of truth in the eastern idea of emphasis on consciousness -- even if the whole world were an illusion, even if being awake is an illusion, whatever consciousness is, from some metaphysical point of view, is something you can't intelligibly call an illusion, because even the presence of the illusion seems to postulate it.
The key is that modern science and various philosophical arguments can attack almost any specific notion of consciousness you posit to be real, so it is very hard to define, because in a sense what you define is a convenient framework/ axiomatic system/whatever in which to reason, not something "forced" upon you the way consciousness seems to be. But you can't really deny it even if you can't define it. That has all the characters of "faith" to me.
I also believe this is the root of why many seem to need to posit God as a "personal" agent. If there is one thing requisite to personal, it is some notion of consciousness.
Faith in the sense of believing a *fact* without sufficient evidence is something I cannot ever accept. Firstly because it's bad science, and secondly because it ALSO seems to be untrue to what "faith" should mean. It shouldn't be something you get convinced of -- anything you get convinced of should be a property of reason.
Which is why I think there's a grain of truth in the eastern idea of emphasis on consciousness -- even if the whole world were an illusion, even if being awake is an illusion, whatever consciousness is, from some metaphysical point of view, is something you can't intelligibly call an illusion, because even the presence of the illusion seems to postulate it.
The key is that modern science and various philosophical arguments can attack almost any specific notion of consciousness you posit to be real, so it is very hard to define, because in a sense what you define is a convenient framework/ axiomatic system/whatever in which to reason, not something "forced" upon you the way consciousness seems to be. But you can't really deny it even if you can't define it. That has all the characters of "faith" to me.
I also believe this is the root of why many seem to need to posit God as a "personal" agent. If there is one thing requisite to personal, it is some notion of consciousness.
Faith in the sense of believing a *fact* without sufficient evidence is something I cannot ever accept. Firstly because it's bad science, and secondly because it ALSO seems to be untrue to what "faith" should mean. It shouldn't be something you get convinced of -- anything you get convinced of should be a property of reason.
Martin Luther King, Jr.-- "Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase."
I agree. It is moving forward in Your beliefs and conviction. It benefits one to have something to place faith & hope in....regardless of the unknown outcome of moving foward...
I agree. It is moving forward in Your beliefs and conviction. It benefits one to have something to place faith & hope in....regardless of the unknown outcome of moving foward...