I posted this in GQ, but Dr. Matrix (I think it was) told me that if a thread here didn’t address it, I should repost it here. So, here it is!
I was talking to one of my friends, and we got to talking about God, as she is a devout, but the bible is open to interpretation, type Christian. Anyway, we got to talking, and I brought up many different points to her, and it got to the point where I asked her if she would admit that there was a chance that she was wrong about it. Even a small one? 1%? .001%? Nope, she said! She was absolutly, 100% sure that she was right.
What is it that makes people so absolutly SURE that the religion that they picked (got indoctrinated into) is the right one, out of hundreds, and that the other 80% of the world is wrong, with no evidence to back up their claim, other then a 2000 year old, oft-(mis)translated book, and the word of their parents and preachers. Doesn’t make sense to me…
I think to a believer, religious faith is fundamental to who they are and how they see the world. I believe that i’ll graduate from college, or that my stocks will go up. But if i turn out to be wrong about those beliefs, it won’t destroy my perception of the world. A theist on the other hand has their religion as their foundation for everything. How they see the world and themselves is shaped completely by their faith. It’s near-impossible for them to think they could be wrong about their beliefs, because that would mean their perception of reality is wrong.
No, seriously. My sister had a really dramatic experience that proves to her that a certain element of our particular faith is genuine. (I hasten to add that my sister is rather level-headed and I would not expect her to exaggerate or imagine something.) I’ve had my own (more quiet) experiences that are sufficient “evidence” to me. I wouldn’t automatically expect anyone else to believe me; it’s personal.
No, I don’t think that 100% of my particular faith is correct. I’m sure that some mistakes have been made in interpretation, etc. But the core essence of it—yeah, a lot of us have had personal experiences that have convinced us.
No, the OP is looking for an answer. That’s a tautology. “Having faith in” is just a restatement of “believing in”. The question is why does a given person have faith in a particular set of conclusions given how many other possibilities there are.
Yosemitebabe:
I’ve had “experiences” too, yet undoubtedly didn’t come to exactly the same conclusions as you and Sis as a simple matter of course. Belief in a higher, godlike power is mutual along with other basic beliefs, give or take, but some of the more specific details of various religions are where some serious bones of contention lie.
Does virtually everyone who belongs to a religion have mystical experiences? What indeed does one make of the fact that there is a range of such experiences that pretty much parallels the range of human belief systems?
No, the OP is looking for an answer. That’s a tautology. “Having faith in” is just a restatement of “believing in”. The question is why does a given person have faith in a particular set of conclusions given how many other possibilities there are.
Yosemitebabe:
I’ve had “experiences” too, yet undoubtedly didn’t come to exactly the same conclusions as you and Sis as a simple matter of course. Belief in a higher, godlike power is mutual along with other basic beliefs, give or take, but some of the more specific details of various religions are where some serious bones of contention lie.
Does virtually everyone who belongs to a religion have mystical experiences? What indeed does one make of the fact that there is a range of such experiences that pretty much parallels the range of human belief systems?
Who knows, it might have been more difficult to not come to the conclusion my sister came to, if you had experienced what she experienced. Of course, I’m not saying that you would have come to the same conclusion—I’m just saying it might be a little difficult. (And yes, I’m being coy with the details of her experience, I know. But like I said before, it’s personal.) And yes, I agree—while what my sister witnessed was amazing, it did (of course) require that she be receptive to a spiritual explanation to the event.
And no, her experience wasn’t “mystical”, like have an out-of-body experience, or having a vision. It just was a very unusual (considering the circumstances) event that everyone witnessed, but could not explain (except my sister, who had a personal reason for understanding why it had happened).
It is possible that some people have “experiences” that can’t be explained by drugs, mental illness, or delusion. Some of these experiences are so unusual in nature that even skeptics might have difficulties explaining them. (Of course, I’m not suggesting that some skeptics would come to the same conclusion that my sister did. I’m just saying, the experiences wouldn’t be so easy to dismiss in a cut-and-dried way.)
My “Intro to Theology” teacher taught us that there is no faith without doubt. A reed that does not bend in the wind is bound to break.
Faith is a weird thing, because its very basis is “you cannot prove it, you cannot explain it, you just believe.”
There is nothing besides religion that asks that of you. Imagine me positing an opinion on here like “the entire universe is made up of really tiny green men, so small even a microscope cannot see them” and asking all of you to believe that on the basis of faith.
I would get laughed off the board.
Why can religion get away with that?
“you got to have Faith t’ Faith t’ Faith, baby”
-George Michael
Emotionally, it appeals to her because she has a promise of an afterlife attached to it. She also has the hope of having loved ones with her once again that have died. Believers and unbelievers are just wired differently. Believers tend to believe because emotionally it appeals to them. Unbelievers while I’m sure would like for many things to be true; it doesn’t let that get in the way of thinking rationally and logically about it. Have you asked your friend if it didn’t have the guarantee of an afterlife attached to it, would it still honestly have the same appeal to her?
John
** Faith is believing in something that you know ain’t true.**–Archie Bunker
And, no, spiritual events do not prove anything re. specific faiths - I, as an atheist, have had such moments - still, I have yet to discern divinity at work.
Yosimite - Had you or your sister been raised as Hindus, how do you suppose you would have interpreted the events in question? Taoist? Druids?
Religions are attempts to trade-mark spirituality - I prefer mine unbranded.
So, given specific circumstances, you would have “invented” Dieties of whom you had never heard? (a Taoist would never dream of the Christian trinity - but you, even if you had never heard of Jesus et. al., would have discovered/invented your faith on the spot?)
Has it occurred to you that people have been “discovering/inventing”, and then discarding, religions since human history began?
But YOU, thankfully, have knowledge of the ONE, TRUE, EVERLASTING religion? The ONE religion which will NEVER be discarded?
Sorry, ANY theory which holds that “then history stops” is, literally, incredible
Has it occurred to you that you are sounding incredibly condescending?
Please copy and paste where I said that.
What the hell does that have to do with me?
Listen. You don’t know what “experience” my sister had, you don’t know what the context of the experience is, you don’t know what preceded the experience. You don’t know the experience “proved” to her. You don’t know why she was the only one in a huge group of people who “knew” what it all was about. I’ve been vague, I know. I’ve been distinctly clear from the beginning that I was going to stay vague, because it’s a private matter.
But that doesn’t mean that you get to pull all sorts of wild assumptions out of your ass and assign them to me, or my sister.
one asserting to know the ONE, TRUE religion is in no position to accuse another of condecension.
**
No, seriously. My sister had a really dramatic experience that proves to her that a certain element of our particular faith is genuine.
**
you are the one asserting that there will be/need be no further theological evolution - i.e. history ends
**
and. frankly, my dear, i don’t give a damn what experiences you, your sister, OR your best friend had.
One more time: experiences are INTERPRETED - without a world-view pre-disposing one to a specific interpretation, who knows HOW you, she, whoever, would have interpreted the events?? GET THE POINT? NO PRE-ESTABLISHED RELIGION - NO RE-INFORCEMENT OF SAID RELIGION!
**
You are the one with a religion, and you are accusing ME of assumptions?
Let’s go back to what I actually wrote (emphasis mine):
What would that “certain element” be, pray tell? Do you know? Want to tell me? I didn’t specify, did I? So, tell me, what was the particular element? Is it a big element, or a small element, or some detail, or some vague concept? What is it? Since you seem to be pulling assumptions out of your ass, you tell me what it is.
So, oh wise one, what percentage did I really mean? Do I indicate that I actually know what the percentage is? And which parts do I think are incorrect, and what parts do I think are correct? You tell me!
The “core essence” of what? How specific was I being, do you know? Who am I talking about when I say “us”? People of my specific, narrow denomination, or people of other faiths too? What specific thing are we convinced of? That a God exists? Or something else? You tell me what I meant.
And while you’re at it, please tell me what my sister experienced, and what message she got from it. Don’t let the lack of specific information stop you. It hasn’t so far.
Please copy and paste where I said that. Seriously. Where do you get that? I even said that I know that my faith is not 100% true.
Where do I assert that? You have no idea what my opinion is on the matter.
You didn’t ask me that. You asked me what conclusion my sister would come to had she been raised a Hindu, or some other religion. I said “the same”. Since you don’t know the circumstances of her experience, you don’t know WHY I said “the same”. You don’t even know what her experience told her. You don’t know what led up to her experience. You don’t know diddley.
But, even so, I did say (earlier in this very thread):
But, never mind. Don’t bother reading what I’ve written. Just keep ranting in all caps, and pulling more assumptions out of your ass. No need to change your tactics now.
So, some unspecified event(s) confirmed (in the minds of those involved) some unspecified portion of some (actually unspecified in this thread) religion…
So, for the purpose of this debate:
“Some experiences can re-inforce parts one’s faith”.
I can see the affirmation of the desire to live as re-inforcing pretty much every religion.
Specific events proving a tri-une dieity, are, OTOH, gonna be a bit trickier to agree on.
What the hell does that have to do with me?