Is Faith an Accurate Pathway to Truth?

[and then 36,141]

11 hours ago, psyche101 said:

and I can't unsee that. From a observers view, there's much better explanations than God to explain everything, and religion didn't ever do anything but make my life more difficult. What I'm trying to say is there are those of us who faith let down. The story of Job only cuts it for so long if you know what I'm saying. 

I can say that my time at UM and my exposure to folks like yourself have opened my eyes to a better understanding of why science-based mindsets exist and why religion seems almost abhorrent to them.  I actually agree that the damage done by man-made religions has been catastrophic and I believe that if we ultimately destroy ourselves from this planet it will most likely be due to a religious conflict.  

I have never felt that I was let down by my faith.  In fact, faith only ever gave me strength to deal with things that were simply beyond my abilities at the time.  I didn't use it as an excuse not to learn or grow, I just found peace in the fact that it was okay not to know, right now, why things are as they are.  IOW, to be patient and try my best to be forgiving as much as I can.  I guess that from my POV, those who felt cheated or harmed by attempts to believe in a power greater than themselves, a power that actually planned and set in motion all that is, may have simply gone into the effort with an expectation of it being some kind of magical transaction.  I was guilty of that as a child because I didn't understand enough about the world.  

Christ said to pray to the Father in His name and what one needed, they'd get - basically.  But the major caveat was one had to be doing God's will and even THEN, one had to be willing to take no for an answer.  In short, faith in Christ is about acceptance and trust that while I'm doing my part, He will certainly do His.  In my youth, more often than not, I prayed for things that I wanted and was disappointed.  Today when I ask for a thing - it's not so often anymore - I end that request with a sincere desire that it happen IF it is within His will.

I don't think the bridge between blind faith, as it's called, or empirical proof will be bridged for all until Christ keeps His promise, returns and actually brings real peace to this warlike species.  I don't claim to understand the "cosmic" picture and why things are playing out as they are but I also don't blame a Creator for the choices He allows His creation to make.  I try to comfort myself in the idea that we are being given a very thorough lesson in what it means for us to give in to our baser nature.  He said that when He returned, if he delayed ANY LONGER there would be no flesh left alive.  That word isn't just a synonym for humanity.  It literally meant nothing that was alive would be left if he waited any longer.  

I don't know about you but the lessons that have made the greatest positive changes in my life have been the very painful ones.  If His word is true and scripture is proven then when He returns the population of this planet will be reduced by about 2/3 of what it was when the 7-year peace treaty gets signed by Israel and the "many".  If that was today, we're talking about 4+ billion dead.  I cannot imagine that kind of carnage and devastation.  This world will have become a very dark, much more savage place and that lesson will be so painful that our species might just finally be able to evolve beyond our fears and hatred and become what He wanted of us initially.  That is my deepest hope.

[Guyver 3,022]

4 hours ago, danydandan said:

I don't think we can be discussing Religion, God yeah, but not Religion because in Religion the doctrines are the tangible evidence for their Faith, wouldn't you agree?

No, I wouldn’t necessarily agree with that.  There probably are some people who would think that way, but for me, when I was a religious person, it was the Bible that was my evidence for faith, and my ability to believe it.  For other people, I could hear them state that it is their relationship with God that is the evidence for their faith.  For some others, I think it would be their religious practice that is the evidence for their faith, such as; prayer, bible study, baptisms, outreach/charity work, church attendance, prayers, meditations, worship, vigils, etc.

[Habitat 7,247]

Faith is not the road to truth, in much anything, I would say. The real truth behind religion, is arrived at, only by ultra-realism. Nothing else will suffice. Your entrée to Truth, is by conforming  yourself to  total realism. And a big part of that, is the humble acceptance that there is a great deal you simply don't know. There is no room for positive assumptions (faith) or negative ones (anti-religious scoffers. e.g.). Get real ! There is no other way.

[Grandpa Greenman 10,268]

2 hours ago, and then said:

I can say that my time at UM and my exposure to folks like yourself have opened my eyes to a better understanding of why science-based mindsets exist and why religion seems almost abhorrent to them.  I actually agree that the damage done by man-made religions has been catastrophic and I believe that if we ultimately destroy ourselves from this planet it will most likely be due to a religious conflict.  

 

But are not all religions man made.  The Bible, Koran, Bhagabata  and other books of faith didn't just drop out of the sky, they were written by men. Philosophical truth is almost a nonsensical word.  If there was a single truth, but there isn't, there are as many truths by which one can live their lives as there are books and men proclaiming it. The problem with sacred books they make people think truth comes on silver platter. It don't you have to reason it out, a book is only a man made guide, some better than other, but they are all still a subjective opinion, not truth.  

[Jodie.Lynne 12,004]

There seems to be some confusion, I hope I can clear up what I meant.

I said "faith without evidence" meaning, one who believes in something without reasonable causes for such belief.

Whether that belief in in old holy books, gods, spectres, spooks or whatever.

I recently watched a youtube video where a woman claimed she was healed of cancer by Jesus because she prayed to him. She found a lump in her breast, believed it to be cancerous, prayed night and day for a week, and the lump disappeared. 

Except.... on being questioned about it, she admitted that she didn't go to a doctor for an examination, or diagnosis either before OR after. She simply decided she had cancer and sought "treatment" from god. THAT is 'faith without evidence', on a whole lot of levels.

There are people who refuse to go to a doctor, or take their kids to one because they believe it is 'god's will' whether they live or die. This is 'faith without evidence'.

 

If I get into my car, insert the key and turn it, I have a reasonable expectation that it will start. Although, it's an older model and I sometimes have my doubts. And sometimes, it doesn't start. But more often than not, it does. This is not 'faith' in the manner I am meaning.

If I toss a coin in the air, I know it will fall back to the ground. This is not 'faith' either, it is a natural consequence of the law of gravity. If the coin doesn't fall to the ground, I would start to wonder and worry why.

 

The second part of my question is about 'truth'. I am not talking about metaphysical truths, I am talking about factual, observable, testable, reliable truths. Water is wet, fire is hot, night is dark, and stars are very distant.

And I am wondering, if 'faith without evidence' leads to truth, as defined above. If faith can lead me to two different answers, is it then, an accurate and reliable path to truth?

 

[Habitat 7,247]

29 minutes ago, Grandpa Greenman said:

But are not all religions man made. 

Is the human psyche, "man-made" ? Religion is a product of the psyche

 

13 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

There seems to be some confusion, I hope I can clear up what I meant.

I said "faith without evidence" meaning, one who believes in something without reasonable causes for such belief.

Whether that belief in in old holy books, gods, spectres, spooks or whatever.

I recently watched a youtube video where a woman claimed she was healed of cancer by Jesus because she prayed to him. She found a lump in her breast, believed it to be cancerous, prayed night and day for a week, and the lump disappeared. 

Except.... on being questioned about it, she admitted that she didn't go to a doctor for an examination, or diagnosis either before OR after. She simply decided she had cancer and sought "treatment" from god. THAT is 'faith without evidence', on a whole lot of levels.

There are people who refuse to go to a doctor, or take their kids to one because they believe it is 'god's will' whether they live or die. This is 'faith without evidence'.

 

If I get into my car, insert the key and turn it, I have a reasonable expectation that it will start. Although, it's an older model and I sometimes have my doubts. And sometimes, it doesn't start. But more often than not, it does. This is not 'faith' in the manner I am meaning.

If I toss a coin in the air, I know it will fall back to the ground. This is not 'faith' either, it is a natural consequence of the law of gravity. If the coin doesn't fall to the ground, I would start to wonder and worry why.

 

The second part of my question is about 'truth'. I am not talking about metaphysical truths, I am talking about factual, observable, testable, reliable truths. Water is wet, fire is hot, night is dark, and stars are very distant.

And I am wondering, if 'faith without evidence' leads to truth, as defined above. If faith can lead me to two different answers, is it then, an accurate and reliable path to truth?

 

Honour the truth, in all things, and truth will be yours. But it is impossible, in the context of "normal" living. We are all feathering our own nest's, one way or another, in our daily lives. That in itself, is a kind of unrealism. JC didn't disappear into the wilderness for 40 days or whatever, for no reason.

[Jodie.Lynne 12,004]

15 minutes ago, Habitat said:

JC didn't disappear into the wilderness for 40 days or whatever, for no reason.

Habitat, how long can a human live without food or water?

Was Yeshua human?

You believe this account to be factual? If so, why?

And how, exactly, do we know what transpired during this 40 day solo trek?

[Habitat 7,247]

2 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Habitat, how long can a human live without food or water?

Was Yeshua human?

You believe this account to be factual? If so, why?

And how, exactly, do we know what transpired during this 40 day solo trek?

It would not have been a trek, but retreat into a safe, quiet, dark place. If it indeed happened, but it is a common thread among the mystics, and all religions have devolved from them, to have undergone a kind of self-imposed, solitary confinement, where there was a minimum of interaction with the world. The story of the Buddha meditating under the tree, is of that order, we should not take it too literally, it is just as likely to be a metaphor for removing oneself from the demands and temptations of the world in general, and the world of people in particular. One might say, a most unnatural thing, but to those that are so called, they may feel there is no alternative.

[Davros of Skaro 7,970]

36 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Habitat, how long can a human live without food or water?

Was Yeshua human?

You believe this account to be factual? If so, why?

And how, exactly, do we know what transpired during this 40 day solo trek?

It's symbolic to Israel's 40 year trek in the wilderness which they consistently fell into temptation, yet Jesus passes with flying colors. 

1 hour ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

I said "faith without evidence" meaning, one who believes in something without reasonable causes for such belief.

The mind is capable of making nonsense make complete sense, and block out information that contradicts it.

 

1 hour ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

The second part of my question is about 'truth'. I am not talking about metaphysical truths, I am talking about factual, observable, testable, reliable truths. Water is wet, fire is hot, night is dark, and stars are very distant.

And I am wondering, if 'faith without evidence' leads to truth, as defined above. If faith can lead me to two different answers, is it then, an accurate and reliable path to truth?

 

Faith is whatever you want to be true can be true, as long as you believe it to be true.

Romans 1:17

"17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, "The one who is righteous will live by faith."'

 

[NewAge1 1,594]

On 30/08/2018 at 6:06 PM, Jodie.Lynne said:

Before we get started, I am talking about 'faith without evidence', in support of concepts for which there is no tangible evidence. Whether those concepts are 'god(s)', ghosts, spirit realms, "higher beings", and the like.

Evidence can be highly subjective. Some people will swear that they had a Christ vision or a mystical experience with Vishnu. For them, that is tangible evidence. Of course that may not be convincing for you and me but I'm pretty sure that faith with evidence is a reality for many people.

Edited September 1, 2018 by NewAge1

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 7:36 AM, Jodie.Lynne said:

As the title states:

Is 'faith' an accurate path to truth?

Before we get started, I am talking about 'faith without evidence', in support of concepts for which there is no tangible evidence. Whether those concepts are 'god(s)', ghosts, spirit realms, "higher beings", and the like.

I am NOT talking about reasonable expectations, confidence in, or reliability in mundane matters. Like one's 'faith' in a spouse's fidelity, or the confidence that one's car will start when the key is turned. These are things that can be proven to be (mostly) true by past performance, history, and knowledge.

 

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?

 

And, just for sh*ts & giggles, I contacted the Vatican. They said that if a thread on UM could be carried out WITHOUT personal attacks on each other, they would qualify it as a miraculous event. Let's see if we can get canonized!

 

I think this demonstrates the problem with the terms faith and truth.

You cannot use faith to find the height of Mt Everest, (although you will need faith to accept the height given  to you by experts) but you can use faith to find out if a god construct can improve your life or if love is a real and powerful force. 

So you can use faith to find truths of the spirit, truths of self and truths gained for experience  eg you can use faith to find out  the truth about  whether  you  are courageous enough to do something.

You cant simply use faith to find  material truths which require objective measurement and assessment 

That is actually why faith exists.

It is a cognitive tool that humans have evolved to find answers where there are no evidence or factual based answers. 

I will have to take your last statement, on faith, as a truth   

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 8:34 AM, psyche101 said:

If faith was the path to truth there would be many paths to many different truths. There are too many gods, and even too many ideas of each God to consider any one of them correct. 

A thing is true or its not. There are not many truths about the same end result. 

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. 

" My wife is the most beautiful woman in the world" 

 True or not ? 

or is your statement about truths being absolute, untrue ?  

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 8:40 AM, Jodie.Lynne said:

Not really, I am wondering why people can believe "A" on faith, but disregard other subjects that have an equal amount of 'proof'.

For instance, some people believe, have faith in, claims of extraterrestrial visitors, but deny 'ghosts', or vice-versa. Some have faith in a deity, by pooh-pooh the belief in intelligent life elsewhere. Some folk swear that various forms of extrasensory abilities are true, but will scoff at the idea of fairies. And some people believe that their god is real and true, on faith, and other peoples god is false.

And that last one, to me, is like arguing over who would win in a fight: superman or the Hulk. IMO, they are all fictional characters, and that is not meant as a slur on believers.

Take the classic argument: Life on Earth began, because

A - God

B - natural causes.

There are, broadly speaking, three camps:

Theists who say A is the answer.

Non-theists who say B is the answer,

And a bunch of folk who try to reconcile both answers by saying "God did it using natural means.

 

So, basically, I'm asking why one would choose to believe in something that they have no evidence for. 

 

People construct beliefs to meet individual psychological and rational  needs, and also  build them around what they already  believe as part of their world view.

Eg a person who believes there is no after, life cannot really believe in ghosts.

We choose to build certain beliefs,  because those beliefs meet one or more of our needs, even something as simple as the need to make sense of our world. 

And beliefs can ONLY be constructed where there is not enough evidence to KNOW something, factually , to be true or false .  

[Mr Walker 5,293]

gee there is a lot to like in this thread.  Iv'e given more likes, to more comments here, in 10 minutes, than in the past month. 

[Hammerclaw 23,153]

4 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

There seems to be some confusion, I hope I can clear up what I meant.

I said "faith without evidence" meaning, one who believes in something without reasonable causes for such belief.

Whether that belief in in old holy books, gods, spectres, spooks or whatever.

I recently watched a youtube video where a woman claimed she was healed of cancer by Jesus because she prayed to him. She found a lump in her breast, believed it to be cancerous, prayed night and day for a week, and the lump disappeared. 

Except.... on being questioned about it, she admitted that she didn't go to a doctor for an examination, or diagnosis either before OR after. She simply decided she had cancer and sought "treatment" from god. THAT is 'faith without evidence', on a whole lot of levels.

There are people who refuse to go to a doctor, or take their kids to one because they believe it is 'god's will' whether they live or die. This is 'faith without evidence'.

 

If I get into my car, insert the key and turn it, I have a reasonable expectation that it will start. Although, it's an older model and I sometimes have my doubts. And sometimes, it doesn't start. But more often than not, it does. This is not 'faith' in the manner I am meaning.

If I toss a coin in the air, I know it will fall back to the ground. This is not 'faith' either, it is a natural consequence of the law of gravity. If the coin doesn't fall to the ground, I would start to wonder and worry why.

 

The second part of my question is about 'truth'. I am not talking about metaphysical truths, I am talking about factual, observable, testable, reliable truths. Water is wet, fire is hot, night is dark, and stars are very distant.

And I am wondering, if 'faith without evidence' leads to truth, as defined above. If faith can lead me to two different answers, is it then, an accurate and reliable path to truth?

 

No.

[Sherapy 22,947]

20 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

No.

Ditto, faith as outlined by JLynne leads to circular logic. Or begging the question at best.  

"What is circular reasoning?

 

"Begging the question is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it. It is a type of circular reasoning and an informal fallacy: an argument that requires that the desired conclusion be true"(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question). 

Basically, the "truth" which is just another word for assumption/claim is taken on faith that is not supported by any evidence. 

Edited September 1, 2018 by Sherapy

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 1:30 PM, 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. 

To respond to  couple of your posts 

This view comes for your opinion of religion and your negativity towards it  You just cant SEE that  humans need, and use, both .  Science will NEVER replace religion, belief or faith, although it may make them all better informed.  

There is not actually any real dichotomy between faith and science nor even between religion, per se, and science.

  The point is that science establishes/tests.  facts.

Religion, faith/belief  works outside facts but also determines what we do with the facts science finds for us. 

Why are you surprised that so many religions exist? 

Religion is just a codified form of belief.

Almost every human builds their individual belief construct, and while many build them around existing religions others build their own unique variations.

What surprises me is that there are  not 7 billion different religious beliefs  on the planet 

In a sense there are, because EVERY individual has a slightly unique slant on the belief they build around a relgion.   ie no two Roman Catholics hold IDENTICAL  belief constructs about their Catholicism Each will see it a little bit differently.  

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 2:06 PM, Guyver said:

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

 

What is in your mind (either pain or joy)  is not make believe but it IS your constructed response to events Religions help formalise standardised responses to events and fears, and things like loss and grief.

  A person CAN get through and out of this life unscathed if they develop the right mindset and "coping mechanisms," because our hurt or our joy only exists within our mind  

As to god, i agree entirely, but every human will; see, perceive, and feel about, such a god in a different way.   

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 2:12 PM, 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.

The cage only exists in your mind, because  EVERYTHING  (in human terms )  exists within our self conscious mind 

I guess you are looking at the material aspect of a god, and saying you don't see much evidence of it.

  However if you look at the spiritual power of a god and its effect on the spiritual nature of humans, then yes, it does move mountains  heal the sick    etc 

Does belief in gods move more mountains and heal more sick than if no such belief existed in humanity?

  Most certainly.

Belief motivates humans to perform miracles which would otherwise remain unperformed  because no one had the faith to attempt them.  

[Mr Walker 5,293]

On 31/08/2018 at 2:27 PM, Habitat said:

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.

You summed it up nicely. 

[Mr Walker 5,293]

23 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I guess we don't notice it so much down under. We are still running fibre optic networks in. Bit to go yet, I thought they would have been done years ago, but I was surprised to hear its only just reaching some major suburbs. 

Lots of us only get  fixed wireless, which, mind you, is more than adequate for a normal household.

My speeds run around 20/25 mps  and that allows me to do everything online  that we we need to eg from running  for several streaming services and down loading at the same time to lesser  loads  I could upgrade to 50 mps down load automatically for free, just by applying but i dont need to and if everyone does it might cause some congestion

This is one of the big advances in human life which has actually reduced costs  I used to pay $ 90 a month for a home phone and no internet many years ago, and then pay quite high charges for phone calls on top .  Now i pay $90 a month and get unlimited downloads free unlimited calls anywhere in Australia from my landline, plus free  access to wifi  on my phone and tablet, at home, at friends/relatives, and at businesses    A friend was in a town in France last month, and domestic internet  there  was running at 700 mps.,  but they have a much higher pop density    

[Mr Walker 5,293]

22 hours ago, and then said:

Vacuous and unconvincing.  EXPLAIN how this mystical "acting differently" brings about such a complex train of events.  I hear this a lot and on a simple, limited prediction it would be possible.  There are too many complex, intricately moving parts to this prediction to just say 'they believe it so they make it happen".

and it is sometimes not that possible 

Eg One night i had a video quality  dream that a whale was caught in a tuna farm in our bay. I was there for a day and, just when the farmers were going to cut the net so it could escape,  it did so itself.  The dream was from an aerial view, as if i was looking down from a helicopter.

Anyway, a couple of days passed by, Then my wife and I were watching the state news, when a report came on of a whale trapped in a tuna farm in our bay Tthe report  swapped to a helicopter footage and  described attempts to get the whale out. and there was my dream playing out identically on the footage from the helicopter 

  It had just been decided to cut the net.  I said to my wife,  " They won't have to.  The whale will get clear by itself. Watch this next bit"  and just then it did so, jumping clear over the pontoons which supported  the netting, submerging them, and sliding over them to freedom. 

The whole scene, filmed from the channel's helicopter, was identical to the dream I had had, including commentary and imagery. 

 There was a gap between the dream and the event, long enough for it to have been impossible for my mind to just be filling in gaps from the real report   eg when I had the dream the whale was not even in the pontoon, and had not  yet even been sighted in the area. 

[Mr Walker 5,293]

21 hours ago, danydandan said:

That's not my point. My point is thinking or believing in something as right, without evidence is faith. Regardless if there are indicators that might suggest your correct and regardless if it's Scientific, Religious or something else.

Yes, religious faith is only a subset of a wider faith-based form of human thinking.

  There are so many unknowns in anyone's life that we HAVE to act on faith in many things. 

[Mr Walker 5,293]

17 hours ago, XenoFish said:

No offense meant to you. But this has to be the dumbest thing I've read today. If all things are from god, this includes everything written above including "the enemy". You can't have your cake and eat it too. Unless there are 2 gods of equal power, then it would depend on which is the least bloodthirsty. But that would require faith. A faith I don't have. To be honest an indifferent and apathetic god would be better than the Christian/Jewish/Muslim god. 

If there is no god and  thus the equivalent of an uncaring apathetic god, then you have your wish.

The state of the world today would then have had nothing to do with god, and all to do with it's non existence 

Edited September 1, 2018 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker 5,293]

17 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Oh man... I've been down this argument before. You're not going to convince anyone you are right. The atheist minded ONLY use "Faith" in regard to religion. They'll say what you are indicating is something else... assurance, knowledge, understanding... Because they will say that faith means no evidence, and people don't drive cars, or use the ATM, or eat a McBurger, or turn on their phone, by way of faith. They do all those things by physically (intrinsically?) understanding the world we live in by way of observation and then expecting what happened before to happen again. They will say faith has nothing to do with it. Even on subjects like Love and Hate, they will put chemical/physical variables on it, and not unevidenced faith.

lol  you are right,

Danydandan is right.

Humans operate almost entirely on faith, based on the tendency to predict the future on the past. Eg when you try to start your car in the morning you don't KNOW if it will start (past performances have NO predictive value in an entirely new event which is to connected to them, otherwise the engine would ALWAYS start)

  But you don't begin by checking the battery, spark plugs, terminals etc.You just hop in and turn the key.

If you  spent every morning checking you would be late for work, so you act on faith and only complain when that faith proves unjustified  because the battery went flat overnight   

You BELIEVE your car will start, even without any specific knowledge and evidences that, on this occasion, it will do so, and you operate on the basis of that belief rather than evidenced knowldge  A lack of that faith/belief would cripple you, like a person with obsessive compulsive disorder.