Rational Vs. Rationalized Faith

[Roadtoad]

Roadtoad, you might get some insight from George Smith's book, Atheism: The Case Against God. He includes an excellent discussion of "rational faith".

Thanks. Sorry I didn't write back earlier, but things were pretty much going to hell around here. I'll look for that one at the library. (I believe our local branch has it.)

 

[Roadtoad]

what has happened to you and your life is terrible and I would wager that the SOB who molested was not an atheist...likely a God fearing Christian...

And, yes, he was.

 

[Yahzi]

George Smith's book is the one book I would ask a believer to read. My dad sent me books for years: finally, I sent him that one. I said, dad, if you only read one book on atheism, this is the book to read.

He never read it, of course. But he did stop sending me books.

 

[Finella]

Hi, Roadtoad --

That was what I got out of the Bible. Maybe I missed something.

You didn't miss a thing. I remember as a teenager, I was questioning the whole Christian thing. Why, exactly, did Christ have to be nailed to a cross? What did that really have to do with anything? What was the point?

Around that time, my family wound up joining a church who lived to serve. Literally. A little plaque on the door to the church office said: "Jesus first, others next, yourself last." And the priest of that church often preached to serving Christ in every person. It was exactly what I needed to learn about God and faith at that point in my life. It seemed to me that faith was useless unless it motivated you to act -- that whole passage in James was my mantra: "What use is it, my brothers and sisters, if a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says, 'Go in peace, keep warm and eat your fill.' " I realized that the cross wasn't the important thing in Christianity, it was the sympathy, it was the empathy with those who suffer, and thus the willingness to love others.

It was through this experience that I realized what living as a true Christian was like. As I went to college I struggled with my career choice. How would my daily life serve others to the best of my ability? A long story short, I realized my calling to be a music therapist in a community hospital serving the mentally ill, homeless, and drug-addicted in the area. My job is part of my devotion to God, and a celebration of the gifts God has given to me. I also learn every day from the gifts that these troubled people have, too.

I think that, in some ways, yes, atheism can give you some of this assurance, but it's not structured in the same way as a healthy Christian faith is. (And, as you showed with your traumatic experience in the Scouts, just because someone thinks they are a Christian doesn't mean that 1) they actually are; and 2) that they have any of this understanding of how to be a healthy Christian.) I don't sense the depth of this kind of living (in faith) in an athiest view, either. So it doesn't seem to be of an equal quality. But I'm willing to be educated on that matter. I know that what I have found works for me, though.

Thanks for letting me share...

---,---'--{@

 

[Fun2BFree]

Nothing that Finella or Roadtoad has said is the positive part of God belief requires God at all---...scratch beneath what is being said and realize that when a value judgement is being made--regarding depth of existence or happiness or satisfaction it requires reasons to back it up--Reasons---something is good BECAUSE it does such and such...that is rational thinking and NOT faith...Faith would be it is good because I believe it...and it is true because I believe it to be...This is the starting point for evil because the truth or goodness is not subject to reason... that molestor can get fogiveness later...or claim to be doing God's work...but the rational atheist must always profligate himself before reason- which is outside the individuals control.....If people get comfort from believing in myths and superstitions and yet the mythical figure is non-existent then the strength and comfort derived must be realized to have come from within that person---that the individual has the power---just about every sitcom/TV show has an episode where a kid has magical amulet or luck charm that they believe allows them to play ball better or do something better...but by the end of the episode they lose the object or find out one way or another that they do just fine without the "magical" amulet...a good lesson that applies to faith mythology---the comfort and strength our ours...not a gift from Casper the Ghost in the sky....religion ultimately is a power play--to make us feel weak and helpless so we can be expoited by someone else---stop putting us down but realize both our true weaknesses (our inability to determine truth and reality only based on what we individuals believe-our need for independent verification--our need to test reality in as many ways possible) and recognize our true strengths (our resilience and our ability to carry on is a world where we know of our own death) THe religious view is upside down---it assumes our belief makes reality and our gifts are not our own but only given by some made up Godthing

 

[Finella]

Golly, I'm spending a lot of time here today... one last post... honest...

Nothing that Finella or Roadtoad has said is the positive part of God belief requires God at all---...[snip]....religion ultimately is a power play--to make us feel weak and helpless so we can be expoited by someone else---stop putting us down but realize both our true weaknesses (our inability to determine truth and reality only based on what we individuals believe-our need for independent verification--our need to test reality in as many ways possible) and recognize our true strengths (our resilience and our ability to carry on is a world where we know of our own death) THe religious view is upside down---it assumes our belief makes reality and our gifts are not our own but only given by some made up Godthing

"The positive part of God belief" absolutely requires God -- but I can't prove that it is God to you, so perhaps that is why I haven't tried explaining it. I experience God every day, always have, and I hope I always will, but that may change, who knows. I practice contemplative prayer -- meditative silence -- and try to simply be present with God, and I feel that I am. It's one of the ways I experience God every day. But to people who don't believe God exists, this is not something I can prove, and I don't intend to try.

My experience with God is that God shows me how wonderful I am -- not how weak and helpless I am! I may feel weak and helpless about myself, but through God's eyes, I see that I actually am a good and strong person who can learn through my mistakes, and who can continually grow into a better person. I was not raised in a faith tradition that taught me humanity was inherently evil -- quite the contrary, I was taught that humanity forgot that it was created and loved by God, and thus became evil.

Part of what helps me carry on in a difficult world is the sense that God is there and ultimately All is Well. I know others don't require a god to be there, and they seem happy. All I can say is that to be true to myself, I know God is there in my experience.

Sorry if this detracts from the original question... but I wonder, Roadtoad, if your definition of Personal Revelation, which you say is the crux of Rationalized Faith, is what I am describing above. If so, it seems that you view this as a negative way to experience belief. If it is not the same, I'd like to know what you think the difference between my "personal revelation" and the PR you describe in your first post. Just curious what you think.

---,---'--{@

 

[Fun2BFree]

Finella-

How is God in your life any different than a magical amulet which gives the believer in it the same positive feelings you describe...in other words...is it not possible that everything that you give God credit for providing exists without God? Before you say no only God makes it possible because you just know it-please spare me that sort of nonsense...you have already said you cannot prove it to someone who does not believe--it is a non-proveable situation that depends on faith...and so you have to allow that it is POSSIBLE that all of it exists independent of God..that the existence of God is not a requirement or a pre-requisite for anything you said....if God does not exist--(as is the overwhelming likelihood given available evidence---just as many things like dragons, unicorns, etc. can be said to be nonexistent) If God does not exist- can people be happy and deep and satisfied??? The answer is yes....so you cannot rationally say that the things you say are the positive part of God belief actually require that God really exists....GOd and God belief is not necessary for people to live full, deep, satisfied, happy lives...and I would say in general the evidence supports the proposition that God beliefs in general have been an impediment in the way of full, deep, satisfied and happy lives for millions.

 

[Fun2BFree]

I experience God every day, always have, and I hope I always will, but that may change, who knows. I practice contemplative prayer -- meditative silence -- and try to simply be present with God, and I feel that I am. It's one of the ways I experience God every day---(snip)
Part of what helps me carry on in a difficult world is the sense that God is there and ultimately All is Well. All I can say is that to be true to myself, I know God is there in my experience.

So from your own subjective experience the reality of the universe must be as you describe it...it cannot be any other way? It is all about you and what you know and feel, apparently... If you feel that it is so...then it must be so? Wow- no wonder you feel strong and powerful with such a belief...it is the same sense of power Mohammad Atta got from his belief and the Crusaders got from their belief as they slaughtered non-believers...(by the way Finella- I don't mean to attack you personally but you as a representative of a belief system that has been shown to be devoid of reason and divorced from the real universe/world and has reigned havoc and disaster and destruction on the real world.)

Sorry--but while there is a difference in WHAT you think, there is no difference between you and the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in HOW you think....it all comes down to what feels good or right to YOU--and therein lies the problem with faith.

 

[Yahzi]

"The positive part of God belief" absolutely requires God -- but I can't prove that it is God to you, so perhaps that is why I haven't tried explaining it. ---,---'--{@

I think (but am not certain) that what Fun is trying to say is that it is in fact possible to expierence that positive part without possessing a belief in God. Certainly some Buddhists feel the same way, without believing in anything resembling God.

This may be the only way you can experience it, which is why I still support freedom of religion. All we atheists are asking is that you recognize that it doesn't mean it's true, or more to the point, it doesn't mean that it will work that way for everyone.

The Christian who explains the altruistic atheist and the Buddhist by saying, "God works in mysterious ways," is the kind of Christian that a secular, rational society can sustain. It's the ones that explain why the God of Love requires us to stone homosexuals with that passage that secular, rational society must be forever at war with.

One stance is inclusive, and the other is exclusive. If I could summon up Roadtoad's position in one sentence, it would be: Christianity should not be used to exclude.

 

[Loki]

Finella,

It was through this experience that I realized what living as a true Christian was like.

We're probably not going to agree on this of course, I think you've got it backwards! There is no true christian way to live. You *know* how you want to live, what values you want to express through your life, and you assign the label "christian" to them. The exact same values can be found without the label. Perhaps more importantly, other people will apply entirely different values to the exact same label!!

I realized that the cross wasn't the important thing in Christianity, it was the sympathy, it was the empathy with those who suffer, and thus the willingness to love others

These values are neither intriniscally christian, or exclusively christian.

 

[Finella]

Dearest Fun,

I think you are misreading me, and I ask for your patience as I try to explain.

So from your own subjective experience the reality of the universe must be as you describe it...it cannot be any other way? It is all about you and what you know and feel, apparently... If you feel that it is so...then it must be so? Wow- no wonder you feel strong and powerful with such a belief...it is the same sense of power Mohammad Atta got from his belief and the Crusaders got from their belief as they slaughtered non-believers...

If you go back, you will see that I personalize all of my statements for the very purpose of not generalizing to others. I do not know that my "subjective experience" is the true reality of the universe. I do not know that "it is all about what know and feel." Do not make these assumptions of me.

It is precisely this reason why I find it fruitless to explain my experience of God to others -- why I find God necessary to my life. My words never do it justice, and I don't want to come off sounding as if I have all the answers -- I know darn well that I don't. I've never pretended that I did.

It is this which keeps me humble. I know God is far wiser than I, and while I know I am good and loved, I know that I am still human. I know I am very capable of making mistakes. Therefore, I pray and make decisions carefully, sometimes asking others of my faith for help in big decisions.

(by the way Finella- I don't mean to attack you personally but you as a representative of a belief system that has been shown to be devoid of reason and divorced from the real universe/world and has reigned havoc and disaster and destruction on the real world.)

Interesting... but why the comparison to Atta, then? Are you really trying that hard to get a rise out of me?

Sorry--but while there is a difference in WHAT you think, there is no difference between you and the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in HOW you think....it all comes down to what feels good or right to YOU--and therein lies the problem with faith.

I think there is a vast difference. I think there may be some similarities between fundamentalist members of any faith, certainly. But I am not a fundy, and I never claim to know the mind of God.
---,---'--{@

 

[Finella]

I think (but am not certain) that what Fun is trying to say is that it is in fact possible to expierence that positive part without possessing a belief in God. Certainly some Buddhists feel the same way, without believing in anything resembling God.

An interesting point. And I might someday become a Buddhist, or at least come to believe in that approach to existence. And, Ken Wilber seems to think that a Buddhist view of things is a higher developed spirituality than a Christian one. Hm.

This may be the only way you can experience it, which is why I still support freedom of religion. All we atheists are asking is that you recognize that it doesn't mean it's true, or more to the point, it doesn't mean that it will work that way for everyone.

I think this can be the case. I want to believe that everyone is capable of experiencing God, but I know that even if that were true, it would not be in the same way as my experience of God. But, as you quote other Christians, "God works in mysterious ways," and this is the joy of discovering how God works; what are all the facets of God? How is that expressed in creation? It's not always in the way we hope or expect.

The Christian who explains the altruistic atheist and the Buddhist by saying, "God works in mysterious ways," is the kind of Christian that a secular, rational society can sustain. It's the ones that explain why the God of Love requires us to stone homosexuals with that passage that secular, rational society must be forever at war with.

One stance is inclusive, and the other is exclusive. If I could summon up Roadtoad's position in one sentence, it would be: Christianity should not be used to exclude.

Absolutely. Ideally, Christianity should be used to explore the nature of existence and to treasure all that we have.

 

[Finella]

Finella,


We're probably not going to agree on this of course,

Now what makes you say that?

I think you've got it backwards! There is no true christian way to live. You *know* how you want to live, what values you want to express through your life, and you assign the label "christian" to them. The exact same values can be found without the label. Perhaps more importantly, other people will apply entirely different values to the exact same label!!

These values are neither intriniscally christian, or exclusively christian.

These values were taught to me in the context of my faith, so my associations with them are, naturally, Christian. Jesus as a model of these values is still, often, the way that I think of them. Other people will attach different values to them because they were raised in a different "brand" of Christianity. I think part of the problem with calling me a representative of Christianity (as Fun seems to think) is that I am a member of a very small, very liberal Christian denomination -- even compared to other churches in the US! In the world, my "brand" of faith is very rare. So, perhaps it would better to call me a liberal Christian, or even just an Episcopalian.

For the record, I never said that these values were exclusively Christian, but personally, based on how I was taught to be a Christian, I feel there is an ideal Christian life, yes, and I realize that not every Christian would see it that way. Thus is the reality of diverse human life!

---,---'--{@

 

[Fun2BFree]

Dearest Fun,
If you go back, you will see that I personalize all of my statements for the very purpose of not generalizing to others. I do not know that my "subjective experience" is the true reality of the universe. I do not know that "it is all about what know and feel." Do not make these assumptions of me.

Then you go on to say-

I know God is far wiser than I, and while I know I am good and loved, I know that I am still human. I know I am very capable of making mistakes. Therefore, I pray and make decisions carefully, sometimes asking others of my faith for help in big decisions.

You KNOW an awful lot that is completely unsubstantiated and not knowable in the sense that a rational person comes to knowledge--everything you state that you know is nothing more than what you have told yourself in your head...like Atta, and Jim Jones, and Koresh, and any neighborhood psychotic person...you happen to arrive at answers to the question that I think any rational person could arrive at without God....and that any rational person should arrive at---the answers are "correct" but the way you got the answer is flawed...remember when you had to "show your work" in a math problem...so the teacher could be sure you were arriving at the answer using a valid method....revealed truth, truth handed down to you as Christian values, your interpretation of the Bible...those are not valid methods and can be shown to be invalid methods over the centuries they have existed because so much of that methodology has led to the WRONG answers....rationality--free from the need to invoke Supreme Beings is still the best path to the RIGHT answers...so my comparison to Atta was not meant to get a rise out of you...it was meant to show you that you are not different in your methodology of thinking IF you think that the truth is arrived at through faith and not reason...

 

[Finella]

so my comparison to Atta was not meant to get a rise out of you...it was meant to show you that you are not different in your methodology of thinking IF you think that the truth is arrived at through faith and not reason...

I do not exclude logic from my faith like some do. It is because of that that I came to this thread -- I wondered about Roadtoad's explanation of Rational Faith, which I believe I can relate to. Because I do incorporate reason into my faith, I do believe it is different than Atta's or any other kind of fundamentalist faith's way of exploring truth.

 

[Finella]

Oh, and btw....

"I know God is far wiser than I, and while I know I am good and loved, I know that I am still human. I know I am very capable of making mistakes."

You KNOW an awful lot that is completely unsubstantiated and not knowable in the sense that a rational person comes to knowledge--everything you state that you know is nothing more than what you have told yourself in your head

Oh, like I'm human and make mistakes?? Everything I said is completely unsubstantiated? Sheesh... I had no idea, all this time I thought I was a member of homo sapiens....

 

[Fun2BFree]

I do not exclude logic from my faith like some do.

This statement alone proves my point--you have created in your own mind a nonsensical unrealistic position that you claim to hold and yet it is not possible...Logic and faith are not compatible. Period. Faith is belief without evidence..logic is the application of reasondon't take my word for it, read about this topoc whicj has been thouroughly covered by numerous great scholars and philosophers including those who chose the path of faith over reason...Immanuel Kant being the most famous....try reading Critique of Pure Reason...you either are applying logic or faith---not both. it is not possible. When you say you are different from Atta it is that you apply logic to how you live not in your faith but in the things you choose to believe...in other words faith is not necessary--and in Atta's example it is destructive...

This is the whole point...if (as you should)you are going to use logic as the ultimate determination of what is right and just (thou shalt not kill--okay; thou shalt stone nonbelievers to death--forget that one---) then just skip the whole Supreme Being nonsense and apply reason all the time.

 

[Yahzi]

Finella
If you can get past the sharp edges in Fun's posts, he has a point. (Ed: yes I know, pot kettle black, hush up now).

Faith only has a role if reason is insufficient to understand the universe.

Your response might be that some truths are too complicated to ever fully know, and can only be hinted at. Artistic truths are the typical example: beauty, etc. However, one does not need faith to appreciate art: simple reason will do.

So Fun's point, that faith is simply superflous, is correct - unless you cripple reason. But if you assert that some things require faith because reason cannot go there... in a few short steps you will be back at Dogma City. If reason does not arbitrate over all truths, then force will.

If you don't stick with reason all the way, then sooner or later you come to a point where reason can't be the arbiter, and then force becomes the deciding factor by default. If you do stick with reason all the way, then you don't need faith for anything.

And no, don't try reading Critique of Pure Reason. Dull and incomprehensible, all at the same time.

 

[Finella]

Hello, Fun and Yahzi...

I wanted you to know that your points are well-taken, and that I will need time to produce a response which I feel will do justice to the ideas I'm trying to convey. Are either of you familiar with Ken Wilber? I'm going to try to succinctly explain some of his theories, but Wilber is not known for being succinct himself, so this is going to be quite a task. I can't even refer you to his website, since it seems that in order to understand even the most basic of the articles there, one has to have read some of his work.

Hang in there... I'll get this out in the next couple days...

---,--'--{@

 

[triadboy]

Finella,

This also relates to discussions we've had on other threads. You do seem to reject logic in your faith.