Why have you rejected all forms of faith? (page 5)

tetrapod.sapien

with regards religion and spirituality, i have rejected all forms of faith only because of rejecting god. i have rejected god (read: lack of belief) because there is no evidence.

so, AA, i think the god question and the faith question are tied together.

faith died for me with the death of god. it's really quite simple.

and with regards non religious matters, i do not have faith that the TV will turn on, or that the sun will rise. I know that the TV will turn on and that the sun will rise because both have been observed billions of times.

i am going to read through the thread now and see what i am up against.

TS

lonelysheep

I have rejected all forms of faith because I look at what I know is real and guaranteed.

Hope and faith do not have to go hand in hand for me.

Scully

So please don't explain why you don't believe in god, but explain why you have rejected religion/faith of all sorts.

Without having looked at any of the other responses, here is my answer:

Religion - to me - implies depending on an external force or being to determine the outcomes in my life. For as long as I "believed", faith never left me with anything but a sense of unfairness (ie, poor results despite following the "rules"). Once I started believing in myself and having faith in myself, things got exponentially better.

I haven't stopped having faith, per se, I just stopped having faith in God. If God exists, he's just way too busy wreaking havoc with hurricanes and earthquakes and other stuff to give a hoot about me and my family.

doogie

hey tetra. what's up buddy.

I know that the TV will turn on and that the sun will rise because both have been observed billions of times.

so it's being able to observe something that's the difference between faith and knowledge? that's a bit subjective, huh? (billions of people through the centuries would attest that they have observed god's hand in their lives and so their faith is actually a knowledge of his existence...)

i'm just pickin on ya...i think understand what you're saying.

i just think that some of us shy away from the term "faith" because of it's religious/mystical connotations, but technically "faith" is just an expectation of something without facts to support that expectation...doesn't matter if the facts are out there or not...if we personally don't have a grasp of them, then they may as well not exist and a TV turning on is just as mystical and faith based as a belief in god(s).

Caedes

Sorry, no, you don't understand me "correctly". I am not speaking of belief in a "god that is everywhere and in all things"; but rather no beliefs, no conceptual imagery at all, one way or the other. What is conscious-being-ness unveiled of all filters (thoughts and beliefs) of the mind?
Shift attention inward; take away all that can be taken away; look through everything that appears. What, is here now, actual and real, beneath it all?
You are correct in that if I were speaking of another "belief", it would be just more spin. If it is a belief or a concept, it's not what I am referring to. If it can be objectified, it ain't it. If it can be spoken or thought, you're missing it.

I'm afraid what you describe sounds like nothing or tohu va vohu , If you can't even begin to descibe your beliefs/faith/worldview, what use is it? What you say sounds like spin and fustian rhetoric, but I am interested to hear what you really think.

I must confess I am my usual skeptical self and it really just sounds like you don't believe in anything but lack the conviction to say so. For instance you talk about self-awareness without the thoughts and beliefs (or filters) of the mind, this phrase doesn't mean anything except in a spiritual sense since your self-awareness is intrinsically linked to your thought processes from a mechanistic point of view.

Caedes

Not everything can or should be interpreted in strictly rational terms even in this age of rationalism when the heart has gone into the head.

Greendawn even a cynical old rationalist like me knows that you have to appreciate a waterhouse painting with your heart and your head. (I assume your avatar is a waterhouse or one of the pre-raphaelite brotherhood)

billions of people through the centuries would attest that they have observed god's hand in their lives and so their faith is actually a knowledge of his existence...

Doogie, argumentum ad populum tsk tsk

JT

i find this sums it up nicely for me

"Religion is what the common people see as true, the wise people see as false, and the rulers see as useful."
-Roman philosopher Seneca-

onacruse

but explain why you have rejected religion/faith of all sorts.

Who says I have?

imho, the issue is simply to recognize that having, and living by, a "faith" requires that you simply acknowledge that that faith is valid for you, and you alone. I have a "type" of faith which, though it doesn't necessarily conform with the Biblical standard, suffices for me; I don't attempt to impose it on others.

As far as religion is concerned: it is a necessary social function, as are political and economic and military actions.

AlmostAtheist, fwiw, I'm not an atheist.

Kaylen

Because I have nothing left to give

the_classicist

so it's being able to observe something that's the difference between faith and knowledge? that's a bit subjective, huh? (billions of people through the centuries would attest that they have observed god's hand in their lives and so their faith is actually a knowledge of his existence...)

It's not subjective, it's induction. Induction is concerned with probability. Of course, Hume points out we have no rational reason to follow this, so here he introduces the 'problem of induction.'

Why have you rejected all forms of faith?

Share this