perfectly rational faith

[granpa]

detractors often define faith as belief without evidence.
They are completely missing the point.
It is entirely possible to know that something must be true yet still lack faith in it.
In such a case having faith is a perfectly rational thing to do.

True faith is believing in something so strongly that you aren't afraid to analyze that belief objectively.

 

[durangodawood]

...It is entirely possible to know that something must be true yet still lack faith in it......

Could you provide an example of this?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I'm not so sure many theists look at their faith objectively.

A simple objective question to a Christian would be, "have you read the Koran from cover to cover as well as the bible? How do you know it isn't more convincing?"

I know.. I know. That's two questions. But one is the obvious follow up to the first so... there.

Most theists seem to look at the world from a very ethnocentric POV. How could they not? Religious beliefs are the most important parts of a theist's life. They are not to be taken lightly and questioning those beliefs is usually a definite no-no in just about any religion.

Also, faith can't be perfectly rational because humans aren't perfectly rational.

We have a very limited understanding of the world and very limited time to learn about the world so we usually just pick what sounds nice (usually the first thing you hear) and adhere to that belief and hope to god the others aren't right.

 

[JohnLocke]

It is perfectly possible to refuse to believe in a realistic truth.
It is perfectly possible to believe in an unrealistic proposition.

As a great man once said, "The nature of promises is that they are immune to changing circumstances." Similarly, Faith is a belief that is immune to changing circumstances.

The belief in the truth of something that has been empirically proven is simply knowledge.

 

[bhsmte]

detractors often define faith as belief without evidence.
They are completely missing the point.
It is entirely possible to know that something must be true yet still lack faith in it.
In such a case having faith is a perfectly rational thing to do.

True faith is believing in something so strongly that you aren't afraid to analyze that belief objectively.

You lost me.

 

[lesliedellow]

Could you provide an example of this?

I know that 2+2=4 is true, but I am not sure what it would mean to have faith in that fact.

 

[bhsmte]

detractors often define faith as belief without evidence.
They are completely missing the point.
It is entirely possible to know that something must be true yet still lack faith in it.
In such a case having faith is a perfectly rational thing to do.

True faith is believing in something so strongly that you aren't afraid to analyze that belief objectively.

If you can truly analyze a faith objectively and it holds up, why would you need faith to believe in it?

 

[pyramid33]

I'm here to say, it is possible to walk on water.

 

[pyramid33]

I know that 2+2=4 is true, but I am not sure what it would mean to have faith in that fact.

Math is done in faith daily. I understand that 2+2 is 4 and therefore, by faith, I am able to equate it as a normality instead of a doubt.

 

[pyramid33]

Before you respond. You havn't proven wrong, therefore I'm possibly right.

 

[durangodawood]

Math is done in faith daily. I understand that 2+2 is 4 and therefore, by faith, I am able to equate it as a normality instead of a doubt.

By faith? Really?

I put 2 apples and two oranges together over and over and over, and each time I count 4 pieces of fruit.

I call that experience, not faith.

 

[bhsmte]

Before you respond. You havn't proven wrong, therefore I'm possibly right.

Regarding being proven wrong, your own posts sort of take care of that on their own, no additional energy required.

 

[variant]

Before you respond. You havn't proven wrong, therefore I'm possibly right.

Right, it's not people asserting things that should evidence them.

detractors often define faith as belief without evidence.
They are completely missing the point.
It is entirely possible to know that something must be true yet still lack faith in it.
In such a case having faith is a perfectly rational thing to do.

True faith is believing in something so strongly that you aren't afraid to analyze that belief objectively.

The perfection of your rational or rationality escapes me.

If you know something must be true you have evidence.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

detractors often define faith as belief without evidence.
They are completely missing the point.
It is entirely possible to know that something must be true yet still lack faith in it.
In such a case having faith is a perfectly rational thing to do.

True faith is believing in something so strongly that you aren't afraid to analyze that belief objectively.

Actually, true faith requires the realization that dealing with God is different than dealing with our material world.

 

[bhsmte]

Actually, true faith requires the realization that dealing with God is different than dealing with our material world.

Could you expand on that?

What is the difference in your opinion, with dealing with the realities of the world we live in, vs dealing with God?

 

[granpa]

I have faith that the "always existing one" exists.
I am always surprised at how many people don't have that faith.

you see what you want to see
and if you truly want to see what the facts say when they are allowed to speak for themselves
then that is indeed what you will see

 

[PsychoSarah]

I have faith that the "always existing one" exists.
I am always surprised at how many people don't have that faith.

you see what you want to see
and if you truly want to see what the facts say when they are allowed to speak for themselves
then that is indeed what you will see

The question remains, however, who is closing their eyes and who has them open?

 

[bhsmte]

I have faith that the "always existing one" exists.
I am always surprised at how many people don't have that faith.

you see what you want to see
and if you truly want to see what the facts say when they are allowed to speak for themselves
then that is indeed what you will see

Why are you surprised at how many people do not believe in God?

You mention people see what they want to see and I would add to that, people also hear what they want to hear, believe what they want to believe, sometimes irregardless of those facts you mention. If God exists, he has clearly not made himself plain to see or has provided any clear objective evidence he is real, so I would turn this around and say, those who see him or hear him, are seeing what they want to see and hearing what they want to hear.

Gods where invented by man a long time ago and they have been entrenched in society for thousands of years. Be born in one part of the world and you are likely to be a muslim and follow their beliefs, be born in other parts and you are likely to be Christian and follow their beliefs, be born in India and you will likely be Hindu and follow their beliefs. All these believers, see and hear different things about God and they choose to believe them.

Now, the worldly trend for decades, has been that the belief in Gods is declining and their is a strong correlation between; education levels and non-belief in God. That is a fact.

 

[granpa]

The always existing one exists by definition


believing otherwise it's like believing that it's okay to be a thief as long as you don't steal anything

 

[PsychoSarah]

The always existing one exists by definition


believing otherwise it's like believing that it's okay to be a thief as long as you don't steal anything

Prove that anything has always existed.