Thanks for that PP
this might pose a couple of questions to you T, and its only an hour pal 😉
Interesting reading, and for once (maybe just once) we can be objective and answer the argument put before us about “what is faith?”.
I don’t think we need to define it per se, or interpret the narrative purely for the fact that this thread has shown a diverse belief in what we term as “faith”
I’d like to think that over the years of being on here that a form of faith (whatever that is) brings us lot together on a forum in the middle of nowhere. Faith in what I really don’t know. But we do collectively come together and argue the toss about a million and one subjects. Subjects that do involve a faith of some sort or some level.
I’m not so sure Dracs posting of a thread really defined my lack of faith in humanity, more it a small example of a group of humans that have helped or assisted an-other human out at a time in need. That goes on daily at a small level, small groups dotted across the horizon reaching out across a small platform.
IMO the great Gnusmas thread settled, for a small moment, my lack of faith, but then it was gone and nothing collective replaced it.
I am obvz thinking more holistically than a few random events, and whilst being shown “events” still doesn’t bring me back to having a faith in Humanity in all its wild and courageous wonder.
Its an argument that’s as old as when Humans first stood up and threw sticks at others, and it will continue to be an important metaphysical question posed by many.
It’s reassuring to read that some have sought “faith” in a religion, or belief system. If that suits them, and they do it willingly then I applaud them.
As is, I’m sitting in my favourite pub garden drinking a pint of my favourite beer whilst watching a hot air balloon being launched..
I have a belief that it will land, but no faith in it.
Rational thought is based around evidence and facts. Faith is by definition irrational
And that is why it is ultimately pointless trying to debate religion with those who 'believe'. Its not a level playing field when one side gets to play the "you wouldn't understand because you have to have faith" card.
this might pose a couple of questions to you T, and its only an hour pal 😉
Is that a spoof video? It’s really bad if not 😳
..., the Bible is not a bad starting point for a civilised communal society, which is definitely something to be be respectful and faithful to
All of the Bible, or just the bits you want to pick as a good starting point for a "civilised communal society"? There's plenty of stuff in the Bible that I don't really want to see in a civilised society.
Religious faith ultimately boils down to do you believe or not? Everything else is just an intellectual construct to try and lend weight to that act of personal belief.
I was brought up as a practising (and voluntary) Christian, but as I got older, I became an atheist. There was no great revelation. I just gradually realised I didn't really believe any of it, and without that belief the whole thing just crumbles away, because there's no subjective evidence to contradict the absence of faith. If you decide to believe the world is flat, there's a lot of inconvenient scientific evidence you have to rationalise, but becoming an atheist was very easy for me. The world kept spinning, and if anything it actually made a bit more sense.
Pissing myself laughing at some of the atheists on this thread thinking they're more rational than the religious.
Pissing myself laughing at some of the atheists on this thread thinking they’re more rational than the religious.
Classy
Classy
I believe it was Pauline Calf who said 'Class is like the clap. Either you've got it or you haven't.'
you wouldn’t understand because you have to have faith
This is demonstrably true though, just read the thread!
Pissing myself laughing at some of the atheists on this thread thinking they’re more rational than the religious.
Can't speak for others, but I can't claim to be more rational than anyone else. I just don't believe. That's about all there is to it for me.
If molgrips did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. 🙂
However, he is a rare beast and not representative. It's all very well asking everyone to be respectful, but human nature means that's an impossibility.
Getting angry when people fail to meet such high standards is pointless and destructive.
I'm not sure I have faith in anything but love, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
We all need something irrational to believe in, as the Panther said earlier. But we all believe in different irrationalities and expecting others to respect those beliefs is futile and will only lead to anger and conflict.
Embrace your irrationality, but don't expect anything but ridicule.
It's just the way of things.
Pissing myself laughing at some of the atheists on this thread thinking they’re more rational than the religious.
Seriously though; does rationality even come into it? I don’t see anyone being ‘more rational’ than anyone else; it’s an irrelevance. Rationality doesn’t really come into the faith equation, and that’s okay.
I stand by my assertion that faith is a (strongly held) opinion, put on a pedestal, though, and it’s not meant in derogatory manner. I don’t have any problem with most opinions/faiths, until the opinion or faith impacts upon myself or my loved ones.
Rational thought is based around evidence and facts.
You mean bounded rationality? 😀
That is first year undergraduate module where "rationality" is considered something we strive to attain but constantly sidetrack by our emotion or ego.
Therefore, rationality is only in the mind of those that consider themselves "rational" but reality is that they are just another emotional views.
can someone please answer my question.
how can millions of people have faith in a magic flame that appears on the same day every year, but none of them are allowed to see this magic flame appear?
or does the chosen holy man have a lighter hidden somewhere to produce the magic flame?
The selfish, they're all standing in line
Faithing and hoping to buy themselves time
Me, I figure as each breath goes by
I only own my mind
Eddie Vedder sums it up in just over 3 minutes.
Of course – there are dicks, there are religious people, the two areas overlap of course
Sometimes they overlap a bit too much!
how can millions of people have faith in a magic flame that appears on the same day every year, but none of them are allowed to see this magic flame appear?
Life is hard.
Believing in something better makes it a bit more bearable.
It doesn't really matter if it's irrational or unprovable - sometimes it even makes it easier. Bad things that happen to us are often irrational and seemingly without reason - the good die young, horrible things happen to the nicest of people.
And shared experiences can be uplifting and life changing - being part of the crowd at sporting events, musical performances, demonstrations, rallies. It makes you realise you are not alone.
Even as an atheist, I felt properly moved at the candlelight vigil at Lourdes and on the occaisions I was part of the crowd at St Peter's in Rome and at Heaton Park when John Paul II said mass.
Also, I've had very positive experiences of receiving support from the Catholic Church when things have gone a bit runny, even though I'm not a believer myself.
I can see the attraction of belief and faith, even though I just can't have that faith myself - it's just not a part of me.
Sometimes I wish it was, life would be a little easier, I think.
In spite of some of the cringeworthy caricatures of the nature of faith and history on this thread, it’s good to see some of the old arguments again. I’ve missed this!
Anyway, apologies for my absence. I’ve been stupidly busy, but will try to address some of the more outstanding points tomorrow.
And no, ton, there is definitely no rational answer to your question.
P.S. Where is Woppit? I’ve been thinking about him recently, and since he hasn’t shown up here yet, am now worried.
Banned. He was a naughty boy.
It’s all very well asking everyone to be respectful, but human nature means that’s an impossibility.
Getting angry when people fail to meet such high standards is pointless and destructive.
That's true, and I don't feel angry. I get irritated when people don't read and think about posts properly tho. But I'm guilty of that too sometimes.
That is first year undergraduate module where “rationality” is considered something we strive to attain but constantly sidetrack by our emotion or ego.
Therefore, rationality is only in the mind of those that consider themselves “rational” but reality is that they are just another emotional views.
Genius!
My wife has had 12 miscarriages.
If there is a God deciding these things, then he is a complete C***
We also have three lovely healthy kids so this isn't a plea for sympathy.
I went to a catholic school, church, was an alter boy. I find the whole concept of religion fascinating and utterly bizarre. I now have no belief, or faith, whatsoever. I don't think I ever really did.I regard organised religion (not faith itself) as cultish and genuinely bizarre.
I love church architecture though.
the Bible is not a bad starting point for a civilised communal society, which is definitely something to be respectful and faithful to
Really - killing homosexuals, stoning people, beating women?
Really – killing homosexuals, stoning people, beating women?
They’re the bits that we are meant to ignore, silly! The way it works is you choose the bits that you like and disregard the rest. Definitely no problem with that at all...
I must point out that faith does not equal organised religion and does not equal christianity.
It really make me laugh tho when some folk try to equate atheism with faith. Its the opposite. atheism is saying - without evidence I will NOT believe.
how can millions of people have faith in a magic flame that appears on the same day every year, but none of them are allowed to see this magic flame appear?
It doesn’t seem that different to belief in some form of god to me. If you choose to believe in the flame I suppose that’s enough and actually seeing it isn’t required. Not a concept I can understand though.
What I find the most bizarre and I genuinely don’t mean to disrespect anyone here is that most organised religions are utterly boring. The big three especially.
If I were to become religious I’d be heading for an old world religion. One with at least a half dozen gods and some stories that actually contain a bit of adventure, peril and action. I suppose it explains the popularity of super hero movies for some. A much more interesting set of characters to worship.
Over evolutionary time humans have developed the ability to see agency where none exists.
We are animals who can make noises and move things so big noises and big movements we can't explain must be made by big things like us; that we can't see.
And thats where gods came from.
Made up explanations for things we couldn't understand extrapolated from things we could.
All of the rest is just window dressing.
A turd of a mistake about how the universe works rolled in glitter and given a big pointy hat (or spire or minaret EDIT or hammer EDIT:).
And we go round in circles wondering about the "mystery" of it all, when there is literally nothing to look for.
We're now discussing what human qualities (faith) are necessary to keep fooling ourselves.
Religion.
Maybe not ruining everything but certainly confusing and obfuscating reality for a large number of people, over a long period of time.
Whether or not that's a good thing, seems to be a matter of finely nuanced opinion, rather than a ball-achingly obvious fact?
Weird.
most organised religions are utterly boring. The big three especially.
True; reminded me of this meme...
In all seriousness; I have a question for those who quietly found religion later in life; was there anything specific about (I presume) Christianity hat attracted you to it? Or was it a friendly community of decent people that attracted you, and in order to gain acceptance some from of professed belief was required? Because I would imagine that sort of thing happens all over the world, into all sorts of contradictory faiths.
Which one is the ‘true’ faith?
was there anything specific about (I presume) Christianity hat attracted you to it?
Convenience, There are a number of conveniently located branches near me. I searched on Google for the local branch of the Pastafarians, in order to be touched by the noodly appendage of the Flying Spaghetti Monster but, sadly, there wasn't one.
Or was it a friendly community of decent people that attracted you
Whilst this is undoubtedly a huge attraction,especially for the isolated and the lonely , It wasn't particularly for me. I was already part of that community through other, non religious affiliations.
, and in order to gain acceptance some from of professed belief was required?
Nope. No profession of belief required for admission or acceptance unless you feel inclined to make one of your own accord. Other denominations may differ but in the good ol' Church of Scotland all are welcome. You can make a profession of faith and become a member of the Church but it's not required. There are old ladies in our Church who have been there most Sundays for 7 or 8 decades who have never formally joined.
Because I would imagine that sort of thing happens all over the world, into all sorts of contradictory faiths.
I'd imagine that you're right
Which one is the ‘true’ faith?
Either all of them or none of them.
What I believe is that it's an internal thing. Every mans God is his own to know and any labels applied to it are arbitrary. Could be God, or Allah or Ganesh or Gaia. Doesn't actually matter that much to me.
I think, It's more a question of picking a version where the external, human, elements suit you best. For example I don't particularly hold with the Episcopalian principle that some people hold more God-given authority than others, all the way up the line via a heirarchy to Archbish, Queens or Popes, I prefer the model where the congregation is all equal and the Minister works for them to merely facilitate the proceedings.
Having said all that, I'm no theologian.
Ineffable, innit.
Interesting perspective Perchy. A sort of 'any hole's a goal' attitude to choosing a religion - you just chose the hole most conveniently located.
Question is then - why stick your flag in any of them at all? If your faith is internalised and does not rely on being lured by the virgazl (had to keep the analogy going!) of local ritual and flag waving. Why not stay neutral? I would have thought for someone like you that thinks all of them are basically the same concept with different bells and whistles the centuries of misery caused by one clan's beef over the other would be even more distasteful. You were not indoctrinated into one of them before you were able to make a sentient decision so why do so now?
It really make me laugh tho when some folk try to equate atheism with faith. Its the opposite. atheism is saying – without evidence I will NOT believe.
No - not believing in anything is agnosticism. Atheism is positively believing that God does not exist (as I understand it although the definition varies).
The thing is though, you can't really properly prove one way or the other about the existence of God. It's not provable, and I think it's provably not provable*. Therefore, anyone who positively believes in the non-existence of God is acting on faith just as much as someone who positively does believe. I think most on here are agnostic atheists - as in, you don't [i]believe[/i] in God, but you know you cannot be sure.
* due to the existence of randomness
Question is then – why pin your flag to any of them at all?
Internal motivation is often enhanced greatly by shared experience. I enjoy a pint of beer, but I enjoy it much more in the pub with mates than sat by myself at home. Humans are social creatures. It's nice to sit quietly and listen to a well delivered sermon which might give you cause to reflect on your own actions or consider a viewpoint that you hadn't previously considered. Nobody can provide all their own answer or indeed, their own questions. It is also not, as many on here seem to think, strict adherence to the words of the Bible. It's very much more.... "Here's a story out of a book...what meaning can we take from this that might help us not to be dicks"
Also, there is tea and biscuits.
the centuries of misery caused by one clan’s beef over the other would be even more distasteful.
It is distasteful. Lots of history is.
Is it any different than continuing to hold a British passport despite your condemnation of the horrors perpetrated by the British Empire in days gone past? As far as I am aware, the Church of Scotland has never declared a jihad or embarked on a crusade against the infidels. If they did, i'd probably quit and get my tea and biscuits somewhere else.
I think some people are more predisposed to believe and have faith. From the very first time I was exposed to the concept of God I remember thinking this is a deeply odd concept. Despite the majesty of the buildings, the incredible charity in God’s word and all the lovely faithful people I never once thought any of it could conceivably be anything more than a cool old myth. I went to Sunday school and the whole thing seemed harmless but weird.
As a 41yr old tired adult who would like my kids to listen to me, for everyone to be nice to each other, and quite frankly, a bit of reassurance that things will all be ok in the end, I get it. It’s completely understandable that our ancestors would have weaved stories to make sense of the world.
I've often heard the phrase 'God is love'. I just thought it a bit of waffle. But if you take it literally it might give a bit of insight into faith*. If you are prepared to think about it. I'm sure some smartarse will pipe up about oxytocin in a minute though.
* it might - I am not an expert, not being a person of faith.
molgrips,
You say provability as in "can't prove it exists" and "can't prove it doesn't" like those are equal sides of a balanced argument.
Like atheism is as much of a "faith" position as theism.
How about no.
If you claim X exists its up to you to prove it.
If I claim that the lack of evidence seems to indicate that it is extremely likely that you are wrong (to an extreme that edges from agnosticism to atheism (or materialism)), its still up to you to prove it does.
I'm sure someone could build a bullshit machine that would generate unlikely, unprovable propositions about the smell of blue and width of infinity and the infallibility of the pope at a rate of a million a day.
Your belief and my lack of belief in the existence or reasonableness of those those things does not make them equally likely to be true and untrue.
Unless you've talked yourself in circles so much that you've vanished up your own fundament. 🙂
agnosticism is not being sure - unproven. Atheism is that there is no god - proven. Whilst I understand absence of evidence is not evidence of absence to me the total lack of any evidence and the lack of attempt to provide any ie faith, shows there is no god given the huge amount of evidence there is no god.
Given that no prophecies in any religion have come true, given that despite a supposed loving god evil clearly exists and given the actions of many in the organised churches its clear and obvious to me that there is no god. thus I am an atheist. I do not believe in the existence of a god - any god
That of course is another factor - all the different christian sects and different religions monotheistic, abrahamic and multitheastic - they cannot all be right.
Scientific method shows no god.
Pudding, you're misunderstanding.
Firstly, I'm an atheist.
Secondly, I'm using logic to pursue a philosophical argument, not trying to convince anyone of anything. My post was aimed at TJ's post where he said that atheism is lack of faith (following on from other posts saying that atheism is a matter of faith). Atheism is belief in the non-existence of God.
Now, like you, I believe it extremely unlikely that God exists. But I'm trying to show that it cannot be [i]conclusively[/i] proven that God does not exist. And without that conclusive proof, atheism therefore is a matter of faith.
If I claim that the lack of evidence seems to indicate that it is extremely likely that you are wrong (to an extreme that edges from agnosticism to atheism (or materialism)), its still up to you to prove it does.
This would be true if I were trying to persuade you of the existence of God. But I'm not.
Scientific method hypothesises no god but is prepared to change this hypothesis if a better peer reviewed theory is presented.
FTFY
shows there is no god given the huge amount of evidence there is no god.
Yep, evidence that the Christian God does not exist. However, speaking as an atheist scientist, there are gigantic holes in our understanding of the universe and reality that could easily accomodate a God or even a whole Pantheon.
Edit;
Exactly. If you're believing something, that is the position. A lack of belief in something is not faith in not believing, or whatever you are trying to suggest. If you don't believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden, then that is not a belief that there are not fairies at the bottom of the garden, its just an absence of belief.
No atheism is not a faith. I do not have to believe something without evidence which is what faith is. Its quite the opposite of faith. Its not believing something without evidence.
Atheism is a rational position
Hypothesis - " God exists"
Evidence - zero
Thus the hypothesis is null. there is no god
Hypothetically, if the thing that believers call God made it abundantly clear that it really existed in a scientifically proven way then it would make faith redundant and end religion for ever. That thing would then be seen as an alien object, feared and probably hated by all of mankind. In other words if you can prove the existence of God it becomes science and ceases to be God.
given that despite a supposed loving god evil clearly exists and given the actions of many in the organised churches its clear and obvious to me that there is no god.
Ah but they (Christians) have an answer for that.
Free will, living in a 'broken' world and (of course) suffering brings people closer to god.
If there was a god and that was their 'belief' then, in human terms, they would be considered some sort of psychopath and/or a complete sadist.
Atheism is not a faith, but it IS a belief system.
How is it? there is no codified system of atheism.
