Belief, faith, doubt

[ScottA]

In my view, there is much misunderstanding of the concept of faith, especially how it relates to belief. This all stems from the fact that we often don't know how our beliefs are formed. We are aware of some influencers on how our beliefs are formed such as our intellect or our upbringing, but we are not aware of all influencers. We overestimate how much we consciously choose our beliefs and underestimate how much our subconscious influences what we believe. This, of course, is inevitable.

Since a lot of religion operates outside of the intellect, you find that people will believe something but they do not have a conscious awareness of why they believe it. This is an uncomfortable feeling so naturally people will consciously investigate a reason for their belief. The popular explanation to satisfy this uncertainty is to attribute it to 'faith' since faith is something that seems to be valued and of high importance, so essentially you can kill two birds with one stone.

However, faith is not a reason for belief. We believe something because we believe it. If we don't consciously understand exactly why we believe something, then that just means we don't know how that belief formed, not that we believe it based on faith. The idea that if we don't intellectually understand why we believe something, then it must be because of faith is a misconception.

What is faith then? Faith is to investigate or pursue something that we don't have a belief in or at least don't completely believe in. Faith is actually oppositional to belief and can only be exercised outside of the bubble of our current beliefs. Doubt, resistance, and uncertainty are requirements for faith because they are indicators that we are operating outside of that bubble, in the darkness of non-belief.

To summarize, we can't have faith in our spiritual/religious beliefs since these beliefs require nothing to preserve them. We can only have faith in what threatens our beliefs. If you never allow yourself to detach from your beliefs, if you don't embrace doubt, then you don't embrace faith, and don't exercise faith. Faith isn't about protecting or preserving your existing, stale and tired hope; it's about trusting that if you allow yourself to feel exposed and step into the darkness of vulnerability, then you will find/be given a better hope. Then, when that new hope becomes stale and doubt shows back up, you exercise faith again.. and again.

Belief, is the conclusion of unsubstantiated, but convincing thought.

Faith, is the hope of those same unsubstantiated beliefs.

And the commonly overlooked position, is that of actually knowing.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

Edit: it's complicated

 

[zippy2006]

We believe something because we believe it.

Huh? To believe something on faith is to believe it on the basis of a witness.

What is faith then? Faith is to investigate or pursue something that we don't have a belief in or at least don't completely believe in. Faith is actually oppositional to belief and can only be exercised outside of the bubble of our current beliefs.

Faith and belief are essentially synonymous. Your definition of faith is rather different from what dictionaries and Christians say.

Doubt, resistance, and uncertainty are requirements for faith because they are indicators that we are operating outside of that bubble, in the darkness of non-belief.

It seems to me that in your post you often come close to the truth but miss it. Doubt, resistance, and uncertainty are not requirements for faith (although they often exist alongside faith). We could say that faith precludes knowledge in the strict sense, but it does not preclude certainty.

As to your idea that most beliefs are not consciously generated, you are right. Christianity has always held that faith comes from God, not man.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

As to your idea that most beliefs are not consciously generated, you are right. Christianity has always held that faith comes from God, not man.

Let me try from another angle. Would you agree that when there is agreement with what we believe both subconsciously and consciously, then there is no faith being exercised?

Faith is accessed when we are consciously choosing to believe something without really believing it (at a subconscious level). It's like temporary delusion. Jesus is recorded to have said, "Congratulations to the one who came into being before coming into being."

I am saying that once a belief is formed at a subconscious level, even if that belief is suddenly on shaky ground, then consciously reaffirming that belief is not faith, it's attachment. Again, faith is consciously believing something that we have never believed at a subconscious level.

I realize my understanding is different than that of Christianity and conventional wisdom. If it wasn't, I would never have bothered to make this thread. For me, this stuff isn't theory or indoctrination; my viewpoint comes from discovery.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Faith and belief are essentially synonymous.

I think you'll find that's a controversial view...

 

[zippy2006]

Let me try from another angle. Would you agree that when there is agreement with what we believe both subconsciously and consciously, then there is no faith being exercised?

No, I would not. As I said in my last, to believe something on faith is to believe it on the basis of a witness. Faith in a witness leads to belief in the things provided by that witness.

Faith is accessed when we are consciously choosing to believe something without really believing it (at a subconscious level). It's like temporary delusion. Jesus is recorded to have said, "Congratulations to the one who came into being before coming into being."

I think you're mistaken, and I don't think Jesus ever said that. Do you have a source?

Again, faith is consciously believing something that we have never believed at a subconscious level.

And I am saying that if you are true to a dictionary or Christianity, that's just not what faith is.

I realize my understanding is different than that of Christianity and conventional wisdom. If it wasn't, I would never have bothered to make this thread. For me, this stuff isn't theory or indoctrination; my viewpoint comes from discovery.

Words exist for communication. Making up new definitions for existing words is therefore contrary to the purpose of words and language.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

And I am saying that if you are true to a dictionary or Christianity, that's just not what faith is.

Words exist for communication. Making up new definitions for existing words is therefore contrary to the purpose of words and language.

There is what Jesus meant and then there is what Christianity teaches. If it's assumed that those two are the same, then I can see why it would seem to you that I am trying to redefine concepts rather than explain their original meaning in how Jesus used them.

 

[zippy2006]

There is what Jesus meant and then there is what Christianity teaches. If it's assumed that those two are the same, then I can see why it would seem to you that I am trying to redefine concepts rather than explain their original meaning in how Jesus used them.

What Jesus meant? There is what Jesus said, and that is what I am interested in. There are any number of folks who can go on for days about what Jesus "meant" without caring a dime what he actually said or did.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

What Jesus meant? There is what Jesus said, and that is what I am interested in. There are any number of folks who can go on for days about what Jesus "meant" without caring a dime what he actually said or did.

Jesus taught something that is dependent on our ability to recognize it. It's ALL about the interpretation, which is why he used parables and metaphors.

You've been exposed to my viewpoint and you disagree. That's fine. Engaging beyond this point won't be productive.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

As to your idea that most beliefs are not consciously generated, you are right.

No, I would not. As I said in my last, to believe something on faith is to believe it on the basis of a witness.

Last point: consider the contradiction between the above statements.

 

[Chriliman]

Last point: consider the contradiction between the above statements.

I think he's saying we don't create beliefs from nothing. Our beliefs are formed based on reasons/evidence that we come across in our lives.

Faith would then be trusting in what we believe is true.

 

[zippy2006]

Jesus taught something that is dependent on our ability to recognize it. It's ALL about the interpretation, which is why he used parables and metaphors.

That's true to an extent but it doesn't mean we get to make up things completely separate from Jesus' words. To interpret is to interpret something. To say "Jesus meant x" apart from any object of interpretation is not interpretation at all.

Last point: consider the contradiction between the above statements.

Oh, did I forget to mention that the witness isn't consciously generated? I thought that was rather obvious.

 

[jayem]

One way in which I define God is that God has the greatest intellect of any being in existence. This is how he's capable of conveying the greatest truths.

How can you possibly know if a truth discovery was conveyed by God, or the product of diligent research? Example: James Watson and Maurice Crick found that repeated pairings of specific nucleoside bases attached to a glycophosphate spine would align perfectly into a double helix. Was that a revelation from God, or did it result from their systematic study of DNA crystallography and other biochemical data?

 

[TreasureHunter12]

That's true to an extent but it doesn't mean we get to make up things completely separate from Jesus' words. To interpret is to interpret something. To say "Jesus meant x" apart from any object of interpretation is not interpretation at all.



Oh, did I forget to mention that the witness isn't consciously generated? I thought that was rather obvious.

I think I'm not quite sure what you mean by believing it on basis of a witness?

 

[Chriliman]

How can you possibly know if a truth discovery was conveyed by God, or the product of diligent research? Example: James Watson and Maurice Crick found that repeated pairings of specific nucleoside bases attached to a glycophosphate spine would align perfectly into a double helix. Was that a revelation from God, or did it result from their systematic study of DNA crystallography and other biochemical data?

God conveys eternal truths that resonate to the deepest parts of our being. Science conveys truths that are limited to the material world, such as your example above.

If you think the material world somehow brought about your existence by random chance or some other means other than an eternal creator God, then you'll be satisfied with material scientific answers.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

Again, it is human nature to misunderstand how beliefs are formed. There is always a reason why beliefs are adopted but it is never ONLY because of conscious decision.

I can consciously decide that I am going to believe that a certain religion is true but until my subconscious begins to adopt that belief, then no belief will form. Does that make sense?

When we consciously decide to believe something -- if I decide to fully believe I can jump off the roof of a ten story building and land safely on my feet -- that doesn't mean that I now believe it since my subconscious hasn't adopted that belief. When I step to the ledge of the building my nervous system is going to jack up and that voice in my head is going to start imploring me to step back.. because I don't really believe I can jump off the roof of the building safely.

If you are with me up to this point that ultimately it is our subconscious that determines our beliefs, then what does that mean for your personal definition of faith?

 

[jayem]

God conveys eternal truths that resonate to the deepest parts of our being. Science conveys truths that are limited to the material world, such as your example above.

If you think the material world somehow brought about your existence by random chance or some other means other than an eternal creator God, then you'll be satisfied with material scientific answers.

I certainly do believe that matter/energy and the fundamental forces of nature are all that is or ever was. And puzzling out the mystery of how everything that exists is a function of these simple entities is a wonderful and inspiring challenge that deeply resonates with me. Isn't the material universe awesome enough? Why would you need more?

 

[Chriliman]

Again, it is human nature to misunderstand how beliefs are formed. There is always a reason why beliefs are adopted but it is never ONLY because of conscious decision.

I can consciously decide that I am going to believe that a certain religion is true but until my subconscious begins to adopt that belief, then no belief will form. Does that make sense?

When we consciously decide to believe something -- if I decide to fully believe I can jump off the roof of a ten story building and land safely on my feet -- that doesn't mean that I now believe it since my subconscious hasn't adopted that belief. When I step to the ledge of the building my nervous system is going to jack up and that voice in my head is going to start imploring me to step back.. because I don't really believe I can jump off the roof of the building safely.

If you are with me up to this point that ultimately it is our subconscious that determines our beliefs, then what does that mean for your personal definition of faith?

We're influenced by what we perceive as true, with our conscious mind. Our subconscious picks up on these influences and takes over for us when our conscious is preoccupied with active thought.

You're making it seem like our subconscious has more power than our consciousness, when in actuality, our subconscious derives it's power from our consciousness.

 

[Chriliman]

I certainly do believe that matter/energy and the fundamental forces of nature are all that is or ever was. And puzzling out the mystery of how everything that exists is a function of these simple entities is a wonderful and inspiring challenge that deeply resonates with me.

That's great!

Isn't the material universe awesome enough? Why would you need more?

It is awesome, indeed!

Its not that I need more, it's that if there is more then I want to know what it is because I'm naturally curious.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

We're influenced by what we perceive as true, with our conscious mind.

I'm afraid not. What we consciously perceive to be true is entirely dependent on our subconscious. We don't know this naturally, but only become aware of it through mental (spiritual) development.

You're making it seem like our subconscious has more power than our consciousness, when in actuality, our subconscious derives it's power from our consciousness.

Can you consciously decide to stop your heart from beating? Our subconscious is more powerful than our conscious mind. That does not mean we are powerless by any means.