what is "faith"?

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I'm just gettin' down to the core, "dude". At some point in discussing religion and beliefs, there must be a "leap of faith" in order to believe in God. The supernatural is by definition unexplainable. If you want to call it blind belief, that's cool with me. I however, don't see it that way.

No need to call me "dude", Pink Floyd. I had not the intention to offend you and I was frankly addressing to you with the hope of a reasonable conversation, therefore I called you dude. Excuse me for my mistake.-

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Deep-seated conviction that life is worthwhile.

Hi BdN dude🙂 right

Originally posted by vistesd
My own definition of faith, as I see it in the NT—or in Zen, for that matter—is [b]a stance or attitude of confidence in the face of uncertainty. * I perhaps should add the word “active” or “decisive” to that. I call it a “radical faith” in that it neither requires nor entails “belief” about anything—other than, perhaps, possibility.

I sometimes draw ...[text shortened]... wledge, and the fact that one can reasonably claim to know something without absolute certainty.[/b]

Welcome back my friend!

But is "the stance or attitude of confidence in the face of uncertinty" not a determination status which then it enables you to stand for your beliefs? Isn't this determination the factor that unables you to keep up on your desired track?
No determination means no faith as I mean it, and in this case your are trapped in lethargus -this is the worst foe of the Human.

We know where from this determination springs though;

Originally posted by jaywill
First let me say that there are a few human reactions which are like faith. But I do not feel comfortable speaking of them as faith, ie. the faith talked about in the Bible.

For instance - my father looks a lot like me. When we are together people often speak of the resemblence.

Now he tells me and has always told me that he is my father. Now I re mewhat like radiation.

God's words and God's nearness imparts faith into my heart.

I really do not know that the man who looks like me whom I have always called "Dad" is my real father. But I trust him that he is telling me the truth.

Unless I am reading too much into this, the implication here is that faith is like a belief the evidence for which is good (or maybe even very good) but not perfect. I don't buy that this properly characterizes 'faith' in the way it is often employed. Let's just suppose the evidence you have for the person you call Dad being your father is strong (your official documentation attests to the fact, the testimony of your mother and other friends and family members attests to the fact, your looks and physical characteristics attest to the fact, etc). First off, surely you DO know that the person you call Dad is your father: it's very likely true, you believe it, and the evidence (though maybe not perfect) is sufficient to warrant your belief. Second, I doubt this belief of yours really has much to do at bottom with just trusting his word: suppose the person you call Dad for some reason started denying that he was your father; instead of revising your stance in accordance with what he says you would probably, given your other evidence, only wonder why he would lie about such a thing. Point being, you have good evidence that bears on the truth of the matter, despite what testimony he might give. Moreover, I see no reason why we should entertain the idea that 'faith' is belief in which the evidence is defeasible or less than certain: so many of our beliefs are like this it would render the word 'faith' nearly meaningless, so why bother?

After some thought (and there have also been good discussions on the topic on these boards), I think faith has more to do with acceptance than it does with belief. Relatedly, I think there generally is a volitional dimension to faith that is not indicative of belief. Further, I think 'faith' can often be appropriately applied as an epistemic pejorative, as I think faith can be taken on under very minimal evidential considerations or even in the face of countervailing evidence. For all these reasons, I think bbarr's #3 characterization (S takes P on faith) is one that does a good job encapsulating an everyday notion of faith.

But I [b]trust him that he is telling me the truth.[/b]

Note that the idea of faith as trust in the word (this relates to your quote above as well as other characterizations of faith I have heard on these boards, such as whodey's notion of faith as I recall) can be consistent with bbarr's #3: one can provisionally accept that the word is true and live his life accordingly (and this can occur in the absence of belief per se).

Originally posted by black beetle
Hi BdN dude🙂 right

It doesn't take much to puzzle me, but a question that I keep reverting to regarding faith is Kierkegaard's "Is there a teleological suspension of the ethical?" (from Fear and Trembling, which reads like a bizarre mathematical poem). I find something to relish in that Danish Christian's status as 'god-father of existentialism' (like Iggy Pop was hailed the god-father of punk).

Anyway, for those interested, it's a worthwhile text.

Several responders have stated that their faith is based upon evidence. But this, to me, raises the question why use the word faith in that circumstance, surely 'belief' is a better fit?
My understanding of the word is as follows:

usage 1.
"I believe that X will do Y" means that I fully expect X to do Y.
"I have faith that X will do Y" means that even though I may have doubts that X will do Y, I have taken the decision to ignore those doubts and act to all intents and purposes as if X will do Y.

usage 2
And in a different context, the meaning is different as in:
"I have faith in X." (Or "I place my faith in X"😉 This means that I am relying on X to do something for me, and I am expressing my confidence that he will do it.
I believe that usage 2 matches what the usage in the Bible when it says that faith in Jesus is required for salvation. Believing that God and Jesus are not sufficient, you must rely upon Jesus doing something for you in the future. In other words if I believe that Jesus exists but am planning to go to hell then I am not placing my faith in Jesus.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It doesn't take much to puzzle me, but a question that I keep reverting to regarding faith is Kierkegaard's "Is there a teleological suspension of the ethical?" (from Fear and Trembling, which reads like a bizarre mathematical poem). I find something to relish in that Danish Christian's status as 'god-father of existentialism' (like Iggy Pop was hailed the god-father of punk).

Anyway, for those interested, it's a worthwhile text.

Oh my honey-tongued obnoxious filthy brother Bosse de Nage,

This goes beyond the ethical and breaks into the Abrahamic religions. The idea that there is "Theopneustos Taxis" in the World, the idea that every existence fulfils any other, the idea that every existence serves the aims and the purposes of the others, well this concept is "forcing" the philosopher to accept that there "must be" a superb and supernatural existence beyond our understanding which It actually created this Wonderful World, this Wonderful Cosmos. Very nice concept -but unfortunally is crashed on the physis of the Nature itself and the philosopher avoids it;

In fact the "God" of the Christians is antinaturalist to the hilt. This exact religion promotes constantly the idea that our very nature is sinful. It is even considered that it 's a sin to have sex before the marriage, that it 's a sin to use birth control products, that the women are lesser species than the men -all the Christian priests are men! There is a clear disctimination too -the Christian religion reproducts discriminative Christians, like our friend epiphenehas who claims proudly that solely the "truly born by God" Christians are men of righteousness -all this is BS big time🙂

Therefore the Christian theologists they appear to have the opinion that the teleological prove, which it makes not tangible the existence of their "God", is a kind of a test for the Human Race; and the drill goes like this:
"God is behind of the miraculous Taxis of the Universe; would in fact the human beings become able to See through this World the Creator, would they become able to See the apocalypse of the God through this miraculous Cosmos, or they will ignore Him with their free will and with bad faith although His existence is well proved indirectly?". Furthermore, in case that will happen the latter, these persons are not blaimed as merely being retarded but as quite clever infidels which they are enemies of the "God" and thus they deserve to be punished.

And then... Welcome to the Abbattoir and enjoy the Sacred Carnage;


PS U nuts?? What's wrong with you and Palynka?? Both of your avatars are horrible, do something!

Originally posted by black beetle

And then... Welcome to the Abbattoir and enjoy the Sacred Carnage;


PS U nuts?? What's wrong with you and Palynka?? Both of your avatars are horrible, do something!

Granted. But I'm not interested in Kierkegaard's Christianity as much as the influence of his thinking on faith on existentialism, the act of will as leap of faith.

'Abattoir' and 'sacred carnage' make me think of the Vienna Actionists. Hmmm ...

Avatar-wise, we, uh, have to see the process through. (But tertiary syphilis is incurable; there's nothing I can do ...

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Granted. But I'm not interested in Kierkegaard's Christianity as much as the influence of his thinking on faith on existentialism, the act of will as leap of faith.

'Abattoir' and 'sacred carnage' make me think of the Vienna Actionists. Hmmm ...

Avatar-wise, we, uh, have to see the process through. (But tertiary syphilis is incurable; there's nothing I can do ...

OK. I see "faith" merely as a translation of the Greek word "pistis", and there is the quality of "trust" in its meaning. The Kierkegaardian Existence feels deep down a pure Loneliness and Agony, this philosopher sees the Human like an island. I do not feel that way. I try to be responsible and ever motivated. I breath, I love, I live, I work, I have fun, I have problems, I will solve all the problems but the one that will kill me. So what?

Tertiary syphilis; you radiate Hope!

Originally posted by black beetle
OK. I see "faith" merely as a translation of the Greek word "pistis", and there is the quality of "trust" in its meaning. The Kierkegaardian Existence feels deep down a pure Loneliness and Agony, this philosopher sees the Human like an island. I do not feel that way. I try to be responsible and ever motivated. I breath, I love, I live, I work, I have fu ...[text shortened]... e problems but the one that will kill me. So what?

Tertiary syphilis; you radiate Hope!

No doubt it's a question of temperament. Perhaps all philosophical problems are rooted in the Birth Canal Blues.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
No doubt it's a question of temperament. Perhaps all philosophical problems are rooted in the Birth Canal Blues.

rgr that;

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]I really do not know that the man who looks like me whom I have always called "Dad" is my real father. But I trust him that he is telling me the truth.

Unless I am reading too much into this, the implication here is that faith is like a belief the evidence for which is good (or maybe even very good) but not perfect. I don't buy that this prope ...[text shortened]... is life accordingly (and this can occur in the absence of belief per se).[/b]

==================================
But I trust him that he is telling me the truth.

Note that the idea of faith as trust in the word (this relates to your quote above as well as other characterizations of faith I have heard on these boards, such as whodey's notion of faith as I recall) can be consistent with bbarr's #3: one can provisionally accept that the word is true and live his life accordingly (and this can occur in the absence of belief per se).
=======================================

Interesting thoughts there.

One of the strong reasons I believe him is because of the way he has treated me with love. And I him.

"Faith operating through love ... " (Gal. 5:6)

In a biblical sense faith and love are always operatingt together I think.

It should be noted that quite a number of times the biblicxal record from both Old Testament and New, draws a contrast, a distinction between things that look like faith but are not, and faith.

Many many times some kind of "presumption" or "assumption" of man, allbeit sincere, was not the genuine faith that God was looking for.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Several responders have stated that their faith is based upon evidence. But this, to me, raises the question why use the word faith in that circumstance, surely 'belief' is a better fit?

I think that faith is indeed based upon some evidence, albeit circumstantial. The concept of faith to me comes in when such a belief is taken as certain (or near certain).

For example, salvation is seen as an article of faith because Christians are asked to take Jesus' word for it which cannot be seen as more than circumstantial evidence at best.

Originally posted by Palynka
I think that faith is indeed based upon some evidence, albeit circumstantial. The concept of faith to me comes in when such a belief is taken as certain (or near certain).

For example, salvation is seen as an article of faith because Christians are asked to take Jesus' word for it which cannot be seen as more than circumstantial evidence at best.

It seems that faith is rather an emotional status/ force, therefore evidence is not required; everything else follows (beliefs, evidence etc).
Some people need evidence and some not.
The point with faith issues appears to be the one's determination to keep on walking seemingly blindly -to have faith!

Originally posted by black beetle
It seems that faith is rather an emotional status/ force, therefore evidence is not required; everything else follows (beliefs, evidence etc).
Some people need evidence and some not.
The point with faith issues appears to be the one's determination to keep on walking seemingly blindly -to have faith!

“Imagine the perplexity of a man outside time and space, who has lost his watch, his measuring rod and his tuning fork.” Alfred Jarry, Exploits and Opinions of Doctor Faustroll, Pataphysician