Jump to content

What is faith?


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The focus is not on any one particular system of beliefs, rather it is on the belief in a higher power that unites all religions.

The belief in any higher power is unscientific and  simply based on faith with no evidence, as is common in any variety of this higher power.

Quote

The belief in a higher power is a belief about reality itself. It is essentially choosing to personally accept, as truth, of one view of reality over another.

It is a faulty belief based on a fanatical faith/belief/delusion in something that we have no evidence for.

Quote

Faith in a higher power has a higher relevance to the topic of existence, and as such should be treated with a form of legitimacy as a possibile explanation of existence, at the very least.

Our existence and the existence of any life is scientifically answered by the only scientific answer available...Universal Abiogenesis. 

 

Quote

Delusional beliefs do not have any higher relevance in this regard.

Delusional beliefs actually have no relevance in any aspect of knowledge. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 881
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Do you understand that scientists also observe nature and explain it without invoking a God. And do you also understand that nature is entirely  consistent with there being no God? And do yo

My identity and ego forms around the "I" that identifies itself with the mind-body that "I" experience reality through. "I" am identifying with the mind-body that allows me to perceive and intera

! Moderator Note It's quite clear from the OP that the faith discussed in this thread is from believers in religion.   ! Moderator Note

26 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The belief in a higher power is a belief about reality itself.

If belief about reality itself is what they share in common, then why do their beliefs differ so much?

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Belief in an idea about reality cannot be proven with physical evidence as it is based in the abstract and non physical rather than the physical.

Great!!! At last, some progress. In other words just as realistic as pink unicorns and/or magical spaghetti monsters. :D

Quote

Faith of something as abstract and non physical as a higher power cannot be proven or disproven by physical evidence, being abstract.

I had faith in Santa Claus when I was a kid. :P

Quote

Delusions have no such context and as a result cannot be equated with faith.

Of course they can! and will remain equated until you show me evidence that your faith is not a delusion...which as you have said twice you cannot do.

Quote

Rather, one can be led to the path of faith through other ways.

I was raised on this path of faith/delusions, until I reached adulthood and saw the awesome wonder of science, the scientific method, and how it explained without any need for mythical stories.

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Faith in a higher power has a higher relevance to the topic of existence, and as such should be treated with a form of legitimacy

You keep repeating this. I keep asking you why. Do you EVER plan to answer?

I suspect not. I suspect you’re not unlike any other of the countless theists whom I’ve engaged who chose to do little more than evade the difficult questions, but I’m trying hard to give you the benefit of the doubt and respect your stance. You’re not making it easy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iNow said:

You keep repeating this. I keep asking you why. Do you EVER plan to answer?

I suspect not. I suspect you’re not unlike any other of the countless theists whom I’ve engaged who chose to do little more than evade the difficult questions, but I’m trying hard to give you the benefit of the doubt and respect your stance. You’re not making it easy. 

I was responding to another poster's assertions that faith is delusion. I wasn't making a point towards my stance.

And I wouldn't consider myself a theist or anything else. 

1 hour ago, iNow said:

If belief about reality itself is what they share in common, then why do their beliefs differ so much?

Because they started and developed differently.

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Because they started and developed differently.

So belief in Zeus, Thor, Allah, Christ or one of the remaining ~2K gods is all equally valid according to you? How does it make it more or less valid than believing in Santa Claus? We established that you cannot quantify validity of a particular belief basing on the number of followers and even if you could (which you can’t) how would you explain that you can take any particular belief, compare it with the sum of remaining beliefs out there and you will always end up in the minority. Faiths differ significantly, which faith is the correct one?

Edited by koti
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, koti said:

So belief in Zeus, Thor, Allah, Christ or one of the remaining ~2K gods is all equally valid according to you? How does it make it more or less valid than believing in Santa Claus? We established that you cannot quantify validity of a particular belief basing on the number of followers and even if you could (which you can’t) how would you explain that you can take any particular belief, compare it with the sum of remaining beliefs out there and you will always end up in the minority. Faiths differ significantly, which faith is the correct one?

Faith in a higher power can exist and be discussed irrespective of a religious belief system.

No religion has to be correct in any of their beliefs. The only belief I am discussing is the one that is shared across all religions, and that is of faith in a higher power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Faith in a higher power can exist and be discussed irrespective of a religious belief system.

No i t cannot. Even if you worship a chair which youre sitting on and you are the only follower, it's a religious belief system.

Quote

No religion has to be correct in any of their beliefs. The only belief I am discussing is the one that is shared across all religions, and that is of faith in a higher power.

Here we go again. How does faith in a higher power differ from faith in Christ or Santa Claus?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, koti said:

No i t cannot. Even if you worship a chair which youre sitting on and you are the only follower, it's a religious belief system.

Here we go again. How does faith in a higher power differ from faith in Christ or Santa Claus?

Faith in a higher power can be described as a belief about reality itself in some sense, and so it is not the same as a belief in a thing.

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Faith in a higher power can be described as a belief about reality itself in some sense, and so it is not the same as a belief in a thing.

:D Actually faith/belief/delusions in any unscientific, unevidenced "higher power"  are exactly the same thing despite your continued post after past after post denial and side-stepping, and actually about as useful as tits on a bull.:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Faith in a higher power can be described as a belief about reality itself in some sense, and so it is not the same as a belief in a thing.

How does faith in one supernatural thing (higher power) differ from faith in another supernatural thing (specific god)?

it would be nice if you could stop the dodge/deflect game and actually start engaging by answering. 

Edited by koti
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, beecee said:

:D Actually faith/belief/delusions in any unscientific, unevidenced "higher power"  are exactly the same thing despite your continued post after past after post denial and side-stepping, and actually about as useful as tits on a bull.:rolleyes:

26 minutes ago, koti said:

How does faith in one supernatural thing (higher power) differ from faith in another supernatural thing (specific god)?

it would be nice if you could stop the dodge/deflect game and actually start engaging by answering. 

I thought I already answered this.

35 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Faith in a higher power can be described as a belief about reality itself in some sense, and so it is not the same as a belief in a thing.

Believing in a higher power is not the same as believing in a thing, rather it can be described in a way as being a belief about reality itself. This makes it different than believing in a physical thing or entity.

I have been answering while you seem to fail to understand how the statements that I make relate to your questions.

It would be nice if you could stop the accusation game.

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

I thought I already answered this.

Believing in a higher power is not the same as believing in a thing, rather it can be described in a way as being a belief about reality itself. This makes it different than believing in a physical thing or entity.

I have been answering while you seem to fail to understand how the statements that I make relate to your questions.

It would be nice if you could stop the accusation game.

Saying that something is diffeferent because its different is not a viable answer. You can repeat it as many times as you want but it will stay that way. 

„Believing in reality itself” is in direct contradiction with faith in the supernatural by the way. Your answer doesn’t make any sense.

Edited by koti
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, koti said:

Saying that something is diffeferent because its different is not a viable answer. You can repeat it as many times as you want but it will stay that way. 

35 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

I thought I already answered this.

Believing in a higher power is not the same as believing in a thing, rather it can be described in a way as being a belief about reality itself. This makes it different than believing in a physical thing or entity.

I clearly didn't say that it was "different because it's different". Stop straw-manning me.

19 minutes ago, koti said:

„Believing in reality itself” is in direct contradiction with faith in the supernatural by the way. Your answer doesn’t make any sense.

I will only say that such a statement is debatable, though it would not be a discussion for this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Believing in a higher power is not the same as believing in a thing, rather it can be described in a way as being a belief about reality itself

This makes little sense. Your "higher power" is a thing, so believing in a higher power is the same as believing in a thing.

And even if you describe it as a a "belief about reality itself" it is still just a (baseless) belief.

48 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

I have been answering while you seem to fail to understand how the statements that I make relate to your questions.

That is because your answers make no sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

I thought I already answered this.

All you have done is offer your boring repeated rhetoric on your faith/belief/delusions, and the associated crusade you seem to be on. Again I once believed and had faith in Santa Claus before I grew up.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Strange said:

This makes little sense. Your "higher power" is a thing, so believing in a higher power is the same as believing in a thing.

And even if you describe it as a a "belief about reality itself" it is still just a (baseless) belief.

That is because your answers make no sense.

If the higher power is not considered to be a physical thing, it only follows that believing in the higher power is not the same as believing in a physical thing.

If considering it as belief than it can have reasoning to support it. However we are discussing faith rather than belief.

4 minutes ago, beecee said:

All you have done is offer your boring repeated rhetoric on your faith/belief/delusions, and the associated crusade you seem to be on. Again I once believed and had faith in Santa Claus before I grew up.

 

All you have done is ignore all of my arguments and respond with the same dismissive statements.

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Faith in a higher power can be described as a belief about reality itself in some sense, and so it is not the same as a belief in a thing.

Faith is nothing more than wishful thinking, in your case, and there's nothing you can say that's going to persuade anyone on this site otherwise. That much must be obvious to you so why do you keep trying?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

All you have done is ignore all of my arguments and respond with the same dismissive statements.

No not ignored...Read and judged them on their logical worth which is zero. Silly repeated, unsupported, unscientific  rhetoric on what you term as faith/belief in a "higher power" which you have been rather careful to not disclose the nature of, so as not to draw more logical dismissivness by most that require some evidence.

27 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

If considering it as belief than it can have reasoning to support it. However we are discussing faith rather than belief.

.......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason#Evolution_of_reason Evolution of reason:   " A species could benefit greatly from better abilities to reason about, predict and understand the world. French social and cognitive scientists Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier argue that there could have been other forces driving the evolution of reason. They point out that reasoning is very difficult for humans to do effectively, and that it is hard for individuals to doubt their own beliefs (confirmation bias). Reasoning is most effective when it is done as a collective – as demonstrated by the success of projects like science.They suggest that there are not just individual, but group selection pressures at play. Any group that managed to find ways of reasoning effectively would reap benefits for all its members, increasing their fitness. This could also help explain why humans, according to Sperber, are not optimized to reason effectively alone. Their argumentative theory of reasoning claims that reason may have more to do with winning arguments than with the search for the truth."

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, beecee said:

No not ignored...Read and judged them on their logical worth which is zero. Silly repeated, unsupported, unscientific  rhetoric on what you term as faith/belief in a "higher power" which you have been rather careful to not disclose the nature of, so as not to draw more logical dismissivness by most that require some evidence.

All you are doing is being dismissive. Why can't you respond with any reasonable counter argument to my posts?
If my posts were really so illogical, it shouldn't be so hard to have an effective counterargument. 

32 minutes ago, beecee said:

.......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason#Evolution_of_reason Evolution of reason:   " A species could benefit greatly from better abilities to reason about, predict and understand the world. French social and cognitive scientists Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier argue that there could have been other forces driving the evolution of reason. They point out that reasoning is very difficult for humans to do effectively, and that it is hard for individuals to doubt their own beliefs (confirmation bias). Reasoning is most effective when it is done as a collective – as demonstrated by the success of projects like science.They suggest that there are not just individual, but group selection pressures at play. Any group that managed to find ways of reasoning effectively would reap benefits for all its members, increasing their fitness. This could also help explain why humans, according to Sperber, are not optimized to reason effectively alone. Their argumentative theory of reasoning claims that reason may have more to do with winning arguments than with the search for the truth."

......So what?

What are you trying to tell me that matters?

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said:

All you are doing is being dismissive. Why can't you respond with any reasonable counter argument to my posts?
If my posts were really so illogical, it shouldn't be so hard to have an effective counterargument. 

1

Everyone has:

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Faith is nothing more than wishful thinking, in your case, and there's nothing you can say that's going to persuade anyone on this site otherwise. That much must be obvious to you so why do you keep trying?

 

 

To quote Jim Jefferies "Have the magic man, don't have the magic man; I don't give a fuck"; why do you?

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Why not?

I'm only asking questions...

But ignoring the answers, so what's the point?

If you want to learn you have to listen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.