|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:26 pm
Well this isn't a very pagan-ish question per see but I figured I would bring it up anyhow.
Over the summer a friend and I were having a debate about the nature of faith. She believes that part of really having faith and believing in your religion is to believe those belief sets exclusively (an example of this is how the Pope declared that the Roman Catholic Church is the one and only true faith). She thinks that to acknowledge other possibilities or to admit that there could be many options is show weakness in one's belief or to say that one's faith is lacking.
I am more than willing to admit that what I think or believe could be wrong. After all, what I believe and follow are tenants based off of my current experience and knowledge, both of which are subject to change. I know that other people believe what they believe for their own personal reasons too. It is entirely possible that we're both right or wrong or perhaps one of us is right and the other is wrong. None of these acknowledgments change what I think though. Basically I don't think admitting that my beliefs aren't the only ones and that they have no more intrinsic validity than other's differing beliefs have does not lessen my faith in what I think.
What about others thoughts though? Does admitting that there are other possiblilites mean you have less faith in your beliefs? Does acknowledging the potential for faulty beliefs mean you have less faith? And conversely does refusing to acknowledge any fault or lack in your faith make your more faithful?
Just a few musings.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:52 pm
My belief system is based on my experience and what makes sense to me. Reality is different for everyone. What works for me may not work for others. It doesn't matter if what I believe is "right". It matters that what I believe is right for *me*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:21 am
Obscurus My belief system is based on my experience and what makes sense to me. Reality is different for everyone. What works for me may not work for others. It doesn't matter if what I believe is "right". It matters that what I believe is right for *me*. I agree. Everyone has their own matter of what faith, or rules of that faith, or whatever are right for them. Trying to impose it on others or claiming that it' s the only true one isn't any good and doesn't help any one. People make their own decisions for certain reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:12 am
Angel Bruja Obscurus My belief system is based on my experience and what makes sense to me. Reality is different for everyone. What works for me may not work for others. It doesn't matter if what I believe is "right". It matters that what I believe is right for *me*. I agree. Everyone has their own matter of what faith, or rules of that faith, or whatever are right for them. Trying to impose it on others or claiming that it' s the only true one isn't any good and doesn't help any one. People make their own decisions for certain reasons. I agree. Religion and faith are things that don't need to be "correct" to give benefit to an individual, but my question is more along the lines of how does the admittance that your beliefs don't have to be "right" affect your faith. In my mind it makes such faith stronger because you are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of it. You know where you're on shakey ground and you have proof (or some sort of experience) that makes you tend to think X. Obviously for my friend this is not the case. And to be fair to her she has a lot of her afterlife riding on the idea she's right. Perhaps this is something that a lot of sky based religions run into. I'm more earth based in my faith work. Yeah, there's an after life, but worrying about and working on the after life is what I do when I get there. Today I worry about where I am here and now. One question for Angel though. While I agree that people shouldn't impose there religion on other what if a practitioner just thought they were the one and only true faith and they didn't try to convert anyone. Do you still have an objection to that kind of faith? Also consider the proposition from their vantage point. Person B has grown up in a culture that predominately supports the morals, ideals, and Holidays of their faith. They live in a strongly religious community where the idea that they are the one true and right faith is constantly reinforced. Person B becomes friends or even friendly acquaintances with you. They learn you are of another faith and therefor you are going to suffer grievous harm for all eternity. It can be an annoying mind set. It can be presumptuous. It can be offensive and sometimes just plain mean, but I think for the most part it is a completely understandable one. I understand that these people really think they are doing what is right by me and even if it isn't anywhere near that I can see where they are coming from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:10 pm
blindfaith^_^ Angel Bruja Obscurus My belief system is based on my experience and what makes sense to me. Reality is different for everyone. What works for me may not work for others. It doesn't matter if what I believe is "right". It matters that what I believe is right for *me*. I agree. Everyone has their own matter of what faith, or rules of that faith, or whatever are right for them. Trying to impose it on others or claiming that it' s the only true one isn't any good and doesn't help any one. People make their own decisions for certain reasons. I agree. Religion and faith are things that don't need to be "correct" to give benefit to an individual, but my question is more along the lines of how does the admittance that your beliefs don't have to be "right" affect your faith. In my mind it makes such faith stronger because you are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of it. You know where you're on shakey ground and you have proof (or some sort of experience) that makes you tend to think X. Obviously for my friend this is not the case. And to be fair to her she has a lot of her afterlife riding on the idea she's right. Perhaps this is something that a lot of sky based religions run into. I'm more earth based in my faith work. Yeah, there's an after life, but worrying about and working on the after life is what I do when I get there. Today I worry about where I am here and now. One question for Angel though. While I agree that people shouldn't impose there religion on other what if a practitioner just thought they were the one and only true faith and they didn't try to convert anyone. Do you still have an objection to that kind of faith? Also consider the proposition from their vantage point. Person B has grown up in a culture that predominately supports the morals, ideals, and Holidays of their faith. They live in a strongly religious community where the idea that they are the one true and right faith is constantly reinforced. Person B becomes friends or even friendly acquaintances with you. They learn you are of another faith and therefor you are going to suffer grievous harm for all eternity. It can be an annoying mind set. It can be presumptuous. It can be offensive and sometimes just plain mean, but I think for the most part it is a completely understandable one. I understand that these people really think they are doing what is right by me and even if it isn't anywhere near that I can see where they are coming from. I feel that all the paths lead to the same destination. I have a lot of evidence pointing to this, most of it the correspondences between religious or spiritual texts and traditions, as well as archetypes. I think that everyone is on the way to the same place, we just choose different roads to get there. Therefore I don't have to be on the "one true path" because I'm headed for the one true destination regardless. It does strengthen my faith though, knowing that I don't have to constantly strive to meet ridiculous standards, just as long as I know what the message is. The message is simply to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:28 am
Quote: One question for Angel though. While I agree that people shouldn't impose there religion on other what if a practitioner just thought they were the one and only true faith and they didn't try to convert anyone. Do you still have an objection to that kind of faith? If you don't try to convert anyone, that's fine. Just being aware that there are different beliefs and that there are people who won't agree with you are good enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:40 pm
I get around this by not caring what anyone but myself thinks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:59 am
blindfaith^_^ Does admitting that there are other possiblilites mean you have less faith in your beliefs? Does acknowledging the potential for faulty beliefs mean you have less faith? And conversely does refusing to acknowledge any fault or lack in your faith make your more faithful? Great topic, but I've come to expect such from ya. whee It's a tricky question. On the one hand, I can see a very valid argument being made for the perspective that being open-minded means you have less faith in your own beliefs. By being open to other possibilities, you probably believe that you do not hold claim to the absolute truth. Claming absolute truth, we would probably agree, requires an awful lot more faith and conviction than someone who says, 'well, this is how I see it, but I could be wrong.' While by this we might say the rigid individual is more zealously faithful, it has a tradeoff in that they're also less adaptable. If something comes in to challenge that belief, they're less able to deal with that new information and more often than not, they'll deny that new piece of information completely. To put a spin on this though, you could say it takes faith both to presume you know the absolute truth of the matter AND to know you don't know anything at all. How do you know that there isn't any absolute truth and that it is instead relativistic? There's something else in here that I can feel on the tip of my brain, but it isn't coming out right now. The Resurrection I get around this by not caring what anyone but myself thinks. Somehow, I have a hard time believing you don't care what anyone but yourself thinks. Unless, of course, you're a psychopathic, self-centered a** hole who is wholely maladjusted to living in society with the rest of us (can we say padded walls?) wink We all care what people think... it's more a question of how we deal with that. Why do you feel other people's beliefs aren't relevant to you? In what sittuation might they be? Just to get ya thinkin'. whee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:35 pm
Starlock Great topic, but I've come to expect such from ya. whee *Is highly flattered* Quote: It's a tricky question. On the one hand, I can see a very valid argument being made for the perspective that being open-minded means you have less faith in your own beliefs. By being open to other possibilities, you probably believe that you do not hold claim to the absolute truth. Claming absolute truth, we would probably agree, requires an awful lot more faith and conviction than someone who says, 'well, this is how I see it, but I could be wrong.' While by this we might say the rigid individual is more zealously faithful, it has a tradeoff in that they're also less adaptable. If something comes in to challenge that belief, they're less able to deal with that new information and more often than not, they'll deny that new piece of information completely. Mmmmm. I tend to think that for most people there is much more middle ground than these two versions present. I think if would be hard to never question your beliefs or wonder about their truth, but I also think it would be hard to always realistically acknowledge the possiblilty of another's beliefs. I mean there are plenty of things out there that I really just think are completely crazy. When pushed, sometimes I have to acknowledge that I can't disprove whatever said faith is, but that's not the same as accepting it as feasible. Because as many devote Christians I know point out, tolerating differing beliefs is not the same as accepting or validating them. Quote: To put a spin on this though, you could say it takes faith both to presume you know the absolute truth of the matter AND to know you don't know anything at all. How do you know that there isn't any absolute truth and that it is instead relativistic? That's part of what I love about these kinds of discussions. The actual way you believe could be the most faithful depending on you look at it. Or it could be presumptuous or timid or weak. All depends on the words and the backing explanations. Have to say that Public Relations and "putting spins" on things this year is really beginning to amuse me. The Resurrection I get around this by not caring what anyone but myself thinks. Well that's good, but it doesn't answer any of the questions about faith and doubt. You care about what you think, that's grand. However you still have a certain way of thinking and you must think its the best because you're using it. So what do you think about the nature of doubt in faith? Are you doubtless and why?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:47 pm
blindfaith^_^ The Resurrection I get around this by not caring what anyone but myself thinks. Well that's good, but it doesn't answer any of the questions about faith and doubt. You care about what you think, that's grand. However you still have a certain way of thinking and you must think its the best because you're using it. So what do you think about the nature of doubt in faith? Are you doubtless and why? The only thing I believe or claim to know (when talking in a purely philosophical sense) is that uncertainty is everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:25 am
blindfaith^_^ Mmmmm. I tend to think that for most people there is much more middle ground than these two versions present. I think if would be hard to never question your beliefs or wonder about their truth, but I also think it would be hard to always realistically acknowledge the possiblilty of another's beliefs. Probably on average, yeah. I think we've encountered folk who have been both pretty darn rigid and pretty darn wishy washy on a subject or two in particular. There's also a question of which is more important: questioning or not questioning... or actually acting on those questions. In other words, the difference between a pacifistic Jain who questions their ideal of not killing versus a pacifistic Jain who goes out and decides to eat meat once. We'd probably say the action breaks the faith more than just questioning it... when the questioning translates to action the 'danger' lies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
