Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jodie.Lynne

Is Faith an Accurate Pathway to Truth?

1,348 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then

 

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I don't think any person who is rational would agree that faith is anything more than truth to the individual who has constructed it. Many consider faith a personal truth, but many also recognise that cannot be evidenced. 

1

I agree completely.  My point is that truth requires evidence for some and faith for others and BOTH situations are acceptable in our existence.  One need not despise science to worship a Creator.

  • Like 7

Share this post


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

“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”

St. Thomas Aquinas 13th century.  500 years prior to the Age of Enlightenment.  

Interesting quote. That would involve "articles" of faith, specified, falsifiable (in principle) propositions. That would mean faith in a dogma, or certain teaching. Faith in God, is not the same thing, at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
19 minutes ago, and then said:

 

I agree completely.  My point is that truth requires evidence for some and faith for others and BOTH situations are acceptable in our existence.  One need not despise science to worship a Creator.

What about when science and faith clash? Some eschew science for faith, some feel there's just more to the story, a sort of God of the gaps argument. When there's direct evidence that contradicts faith, for example, the old Buddhist belief that the moon was lit from within eas well and truly debunked by science, yet I'm sure some devout adherents still believe the original sorry as it is scribed in a sacred text. 

Where do you see the line drawn between faith and evidence? 

I think that there's not as much of a problem with the Religion->Science relationship well, not as much as there used to be, I think it's becoming more of a Science->Religious gap these days. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due

 

I think the clash between science and religion is largely behind us.

Now the challenge has become to appreciate both instead of despising one or the other.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

What about when science and faith clash? Some eschew science for faith, some feel there's just more to the story, a sort of God of the gaps argument. When there's direct evidence that contradicts faith, for example, the old Buddhist belief that the moon was lit from within eas well and truly debunked by science, yet I'm sure some devout adherents still believe the original sorry as it is scribed in a sacred text. 

Where do you see the line drawn between faith and evidence? 

I think that there's not as much of a problem with the Religion->Science relationship well, not as much as there used to be, I think it's becoming more of a Science->Religious gap these days. 

It's a lot like trying to reconcile Grimm's Fairy Tales with a pocket calculator. Lots of luck with that.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
30 minutes ago, Will Due said:

I think the clash between science and religion is largely behind us.

I honestly don't see how. We are just beginning to make grst strides in understanding all that is around us. 

Quote

Now the challenge has become to appreciate both instead of despising one or the other.

The two problems I see here are 

1 - Science erodes religion. Scince Darwins great revelation of a 'third way' removing the previous two options of creation and random accident, religion and science have clearly parted ways to arrive at entirely different conclusions 

And

2 - There is one science, and thousands of religions. If religions cannot agree amongst themselves about a creator or God, how can they reconcile a completely godless concept? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
35 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

It's a lot like trying to reconcile Grimm's Fairy Tales with a pocket calculator. Lots of luck with that.

Great analogy!! 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
4 hours ago, Guyver said:

What is truth?

truth is fact

Share this post


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

Interesting quote. That would involve "articles" of faith, specified, falsifiable (in principle) propositions. That would mean faith in a dogma, or certain teaching. Faith in God, is not the same thing, at all.

How do you see faith in God?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
8 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

truth is fact

Is that a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
2 hours ago, Guyver said:

“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”

St. Thomas Aquinas 13th century.  500 years prior to the Age of Enlightenment.  

St Tom is definitely accurate there, smart dude all around.  To me the quote though takes on a different flavor in this case given the religion.  In a way you could have just stopped the quote at the first comma; of course to a Christian your faith will be a matter of ridicule among infidels, it's pretty close to what the bible says will happen.  Unbelievers are 'swine' and 'fools' (and to be fair, 'loved'; actually come to think of it being a lovable foolish pig I'm not sure is even an insult, it's kinda cutesy, I feel like a kid's stuffed animal), and I think Jesus states that non-believers can't understand his parables.  Pretty sure the bible also says something about how Christians are going to be persecuted and how blessed and righteous they are for it; Paul says flat out that he delights in insults, for Christ's sake (literally and exclamationally).

Sure, to counter that we can point out that there's a difference in degree between ridicule and an infidel who just doesn't care, but I think the persecution thing still stands.  Seems like Aquinas should be praising and thankful for this ridicule.  

Edited by Liquid Gardens
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
7 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I honestly don't see how. We are just beginning to make grst strides in understanding all that is around us. 

The two problems I see here are 

1 - Science erodes religion. Scince Darwins great revelation of a 'third way' removing the previous two options of creation and random accident, religion and science have clearly parted ways to arrive at entirely different conclusions 

And

2 - There is one science, and thousands of religions. If religions cannot agree amongst themselves about a creator or God, how can they reconcile a completely godless concept? 

 

I honestly think that science and religion are destined to eventually become married to each other. Two legs are better than one.

Yes, you're right, science is gradually going to remove superstition from life. Religious life too. But I don't see science ever replacing religion as an approach to discovering all life's realities. Religion will always have its place and function. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver

You know, it has occurred to me that if God is everything.....to put in simple terms....then everyone will eventually know everything and nothing.  Because that’s what God would be......right?

So.....I’m just thinking about our ancestors who first domesticated wolves.  You know, they competed with cave bears, dire wolves, the Sabre toothed cat to name a few, over the Pleistocene Megafauna.

In today’s world, people who have dogs walk them - and that is good - but.....they carry around little plastic bags and sometimes rubber gloves so that when little doggie drops a deuce, they can be there to scoop it up.

i mean, I just wonder if the cave men and women who brought us into this world just point at that and laugh....    or if they are so enlightened that they just go, “Awwwwwwhhhh....poor things.  Shame.”

And the truly sad part?  I’m actually glad that today’s people scoop up their own dogs poop so considerately, because I fricken hate it when some dog ****s in my yard.  And I hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
6 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

St Tom is definitely accurate there, smart dude all around.  To me the quote though takes on a different flavor in this case given the religion.  In a way you could have just stopped the quote at the first comma; of course to a Christian your faith will be a matter of ridicule among infidels, it's pretty close to what the bible says will happen.  Unbelievers are 'swine' and 'fools' (and to be fair, 'loved'; actually come to think of it being a lovable foolish pig I'm not sure is even an insult, it's kinda cutesy, I feel like a kid's stuffed animal), and I think Jesus states that non-believers can't understand his parables.  Pretty sure the bible also says something about how Christians are going to be persecuted and how blessed and righteous they are for it; Paul says flat out that he delights in insults, for Christ's sake (literally and exclamationally).

Sure, to counter that we can point out that there's a difference in degree between ridicule and an infidel who just doesn't care, but I think the persecution thing still stands.  Seems like Aquinas should be praising and thankful for this ridicule.  

 

I think he spoke in parables so that all could assimilate the truth contained in them to the level and degree that their experiences in life will naturally allow.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
2 minutes ago, Guyver said:

How do you see faith in God?

With considerable reservation! It depends what you mean by "faith", I would say. Faith that God exists, without any expectation of what that might mean for you, is very different to faith that God will look after you and yours, in this life, which to me is an immature attitude. Faith is one of those words that has so many conflicting connotations swirling around it, as to be not much use.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
7 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

I honestly think that science and religion are destined to eventually become married to each other. Two legs are better than one.

But if they are going in different directions they will tear you apart. There's no parallel lines with religion and science, they don't come to the same conclusion. 

7 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Yes, you're right, science is gradually going to remove superstition from life. Religious life too. But I don't see science ever replacing religion as an approach to discovering all life's realities. Religion will always have its place and function. 

I honestly don't think so. On Nat Geo the other night they predicted Internet world wide coverage by 2025. With information more freely available than ever, more people than ever are going to have a wider choice. I think the fact that so many religions exist will be enough for some to question faith. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
6 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

 

 

What I am interested in learning, is if people think that religious/spiritual faith is an accurate way to determine truth. If one can believe one thing, solely with faith and without evidence, does that not mean that they can believe anything, without evidence?

 

 

 

determine what truth ? Whether there is any truth to this "thing" that the religious have faith in ?

Share this post


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

With considerable reservation! It depends what you mean by "faith", I would say. Faith that God exists, without any expectation of what that might mean for you, is very different to faith that God will look after you and yours, in this life, which to me is an immature attitude. Faith is one of those words that has so many conflicting connotations swirling around it, as to be not much use.

 

 

I hear you here....but it’s just crazy to me that people don’t understand that the struggle and pain of this life hits everyone.  I mean, no one gets off this fricken rock unscathed, I don’t care who you are.  So, you can sit here and make-believe with your religion, and if that helps you....that’s just fine.  I mean generic “you” of course....but...

These things are just cultural and psychological tactics that people use to survive and don’t even know it.  But whatever.

The fact is that “God” - if he exists and I think he does- is not existant based upon peoples’ thoughts of him, to use the term most comfortable to me.  

God either exists or does not exist and his existence is completely aside from the thoughts of people - logically, and IMHO.

TBC

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver

Certain people say that God is in us, inside.  Well, here’s the deal.  When you walk on water, move a mountain, raise the dead or heal every sick person in a hospital so I can see it, I will be at your feet and you shall be my guru.  Until then, I call BS upon the notion... FWIW.

As far as I’m concerned this life is a prison.  For no matter how lavish the cage may be....a cage is a cage.  So, if God is real, then I wish some believer would explain that instead of blaming it on the devil or “the curse” or “the fall” because as far as I’m concerned that is complete idiocy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

I readily see how people get very annoyed by overtly "religious" people, who for all the world appear to think they have joined a club with benefits, and all the more annoying if they say all they have to do is "believe", and they are "saved". I know nothing about how many get "saved", but if forced to guess, I'd say a tiny %, and the aforementioned god-botherers probably none, despite their professed faith. I have heard several "Christians" say, at various times, that they would turn away from their faith in a heartbeat, if the resurrection could be proved fiction. The resurrection could indeed be fiction, for all I know, but if your faith in God depends on that...….ye of little faith !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

The world is woefully full of people of professed faith, whose faith depends on their anticipation of getting something out of whatever creed they have bought into. I think this is the opposite of the right attitude, a person should only bother God, if they want to get the best out of themselves, in the service of this God. After all, what greater calling could there be ? Otherwise you are like someone who buys a cow, in expectation of being able to milk it, down the line. Otherwise they would not have bothered.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

But if they are going in different directions they will tear you apart. There's no parallel lines with religion and science, they don't come to the same conclusion. 

I honestly don't think so. On Nat Geo the other night they predicted Internet world wide coverage by 2025. With information more freely available than ever, more people than ever are going to have a wider choice. I think the fact that so many religions exist will be enough for some to question faith. 

That would be great, but I rather think that before long the internet will be fragmented into regional webs as authoritarian governments opt out of such unregulated free-flow of information and ideas. Russia and China have already set that unfortunate future in motion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
24 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

That would be great, but I rather think that before long the internet will be fragmented into regional webs as authoritarian governments opt out of such unregulated free-flow of information and ideas. Russia and China have already set that unfortunate future in motion.

Good point, its a steep hill. 

Share this post


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

Certain people say that God is in us, inside.  Well, here’s the deal.  When you walk on water, move a mountain, raise the dead or heal every sick person in a hospital so I can see it, I will be at your feet and you shall be my guru.  Until then, I call BS upon the notion... FWIW.

As far as I’m concerned this life is a prison.  For no matter how lavish the cage may be....a cage is a cage.  So, if God is real, then I wish some believer would explain that instead of blaming it on the devil or “the curse” or “the fall” because as far as I’m concerned that is complete idiocy.

You sound a little depressed ! I would not call BS on the notion, when you have the perfectly valid option, of not having to decide.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
4 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Good point, its a steep hill. 

Ten years ago the internet was like the open range. Now, before our eyes, it's being fenced in, acre by acre. The range wars have already started and all the incessant hacking by government entities will only exacerbate and accelerate the process.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.