Gotta have faith-a-faith-a-faith...

[Robin]

Faith. What is it? It is the mystery behind everything for me. I have started two posts, one asking 'Why religion?' and the other about my experience with the spirit, that have both reached a sort of dead end at the doors of faith.

When no one else would engage the subject, I held court with a Mormon of my own creation. I tried to be fair in representing his views, but the closest thing I got to a response was an apology to the board from creekster for illiciting such an 'inane' response.

Sorry creekster. I'm doing the best I can with what I have.

Perhaps someone else can do better?

I want to know what it means to have FAITH, for I have none. Apparently faith is a necessary part of the purpose of life, so I would like in on it, but I just don't know where to start.

[OhioBlue]

Originally Posted by Robin

Faith. What is it? It is the mystery behind everything for me. I have started two posts, one asking 'Why religion?' and the other about my experience with the spirit, that have both reached a sort of dead end at the doors of faith.

When no one else would engage the subject, I held court with a Mormon of my own creation. I tried to be fair in representing his views, but the closest thing I got to a response was an apology to the board from creekster for illiciting such an 'inane' response.

Sorry creekster. I'm doing the best I can with what I have.

Perhaps someone else can do better?

I want to know what it means to have FAITH, for I have none. Apparently faith is a necessary part of the purpose of life, so I would like in on it, but I just don't know where to start.

I don't know Robin, but I'm guessing you're not getting much play with your posts for other reasons.

Personally, I found your posts on the matter to be interesting if at times compelling. I'm not compelled to agree with your view, per se, but I am compelled by it in that it helps me understand a view that is for obvious reasons not often discussed in, say, EQ meetings or primary. There is a certain reasonableness about what you're saying that I don't mind, nor do I feel the need to be defensive in the face of those comments.

As for your question, I'm not real sure what you're getting at. If you're asking for a logical treatise on the necessity of faith, then surely you recognize the impossibility of your request. Faith, by its very nature, is unreasonable. Irrational. For me, there are times where my ability to reason helps with my faith, or vice versa. But this is correlation, not causation--ie they are still necessarily distinct epistemological positions, or beyond that, ways of trying to arrive at truth.

Kierkegaard and others have had some interesting ideas on the subject: "What we cannot do, according to Kierkegaard, is believe by virtue of reason. If we choose faith we must suspend our reason in order to believe in something higher than reason. In fact we must believe by virtue of the absurd."

Distilling this argument down to my own pragmatic reality, if I only had faith in that which I also arrived at by reason, I'd be lost. I don't think your position is any different, really--you have just deposited your faith into a different source.

So again, I don't know if that's even the question you were getting at. Probably not. But that's what I thought about when I read it, so you get my response. 8)

[All-American]

Let me first redefine the word "faith," according to my own understanding of the concept.

The definition of "faith" is a "belief in things which are not seen, which are true." The word is used most in a religious context, of course, but it isn't its only application. Faith is the motivating influence behind any action that anticipates a result. Anytime you exert the effort to take a step, you only do so because you anticipate the end result of the process-- being one step farther ahead than you were before. This result is the end of the process, and being in the future, it is something which is "not seen"-- you have no guarentee that beneath the area where you are putting your foot, there is a huge cavern (think: Jehovah starts with an I!) or that you will be physically unable to move your foot anyway. There is an infinite amount of variables involved, and there's basically nothing that can't happen to you. One who casts the doubts out of his mind and puts his foot forward anyway, fully expecting to take the step and move forward, has exercised faith.

Perhaps easier to understand is an analogy of a farmer. When he puts the seed in the ground, he has no promise that the seed will grow, that weather won't destroy the crop, that parasites or pests or bunny rabbits won't eat the crop, or however many other things farmers have to deal with. He cannot see what is going to happen to his crop. Anticipating the end result, however, he plants the seed, does all he can to create the hoped for result, and has thus exercised faith.

This is clearly different from what theologians consider the term "faith" to mean. The distinction, simply put, is the object of one's faith. One who puts his foot forward exercises faith in his corporal capabilities, while one who plants the crops exercises faith in laws of biology, meteorology, etc. Faith in its religious application is faith in God-- when one does what he can to do what God has asked, he does so with the expectation that he will receive eternal life.

For that reason, I balk somewhat when faith is defined as belief by virtue of the irrational. I don't think that's it at all-- it is simply not allowing what you don't know to overpower what you do know in your search for a desired result. For that reason, even in the religious sense, one is not expected to exercise faith without at least a minimal understanding of the desired result and the means by which an action is to achieve the result.

Faith, to me, is a close relative of Occum's razor. One takes what information is available to him (belief in that which IS seen), evaluates it, comes up with the most simple and sensible explaination of the information, and then acts upon it, notwithstanding the much information that is NOT available to him (that which is NOT seen). Sometimes your evaluation of the data available to you will lead you to different conclusions, and that's fine. You do the best you can with what you're given.

[fusnik11]

hmm....

well having humility, an open heart, a contrite spirit, etc, is probably the place to start....

let me tell you of my experience. as some can tell by the nature of my posts on this site, i have engaged myself in a different type of scholarship concerning my current faith based belief system. it has led me down an interesting and different path that has raised many questions. this weekend during conference as i listened to the ideas expressed and shared i had a experience specific to my needs....

moral of the story each of us needs to find out what increases their personal faith in a power higher than ours. (if so desired) as i found myself honestly seeking answers to difficult questions, and submitted myself to a higher power i found the response i needed, honesty created the question, humility produced the faith required for certain answers....

[Robin]

Originally Posted by OhioBlue

As for your question, I'm not real sure what you're getting at. If you're asking for a logical treatise on the necessity of faith, then surely you recognize the impossibility of your request. Faith, by its very nature, is unreasonable. Irrational. For me, there are times where my ability to reason helps with my faith, or vice versa. But this is correlation, not causation--ie they are still necessarily distinct epistemological positions, or beyond that, ways of trying to arrive at truth.

Kierkegaard and others have had some interesting ideas on the subject: "What we cannot do, according to Kierkegaard, is believe by virtue of reason. If we choose faith we must suspend our reason in order to believe in something higher than reason. In fact we must believe by virtue of the absurd."

Distilling this argument down to my own pragmatic reality, if I only had faith in that which I also arrived at by reason, I'd be lost. I don't think your position is any different, really--you have just deposited your faith into a different source.

So again, I don't know if that's even the question you were getting at. Probably not. But that's what I thought about when I read it, so you get my response. 8)

It is a good response. I suppose the question is this -- what IS faith? It is an irrational something, but what? An irrational belief that compells a specific kind of action? I don't even know where to begin, or how to begin having it. And if a person is starting from nothing, how does one develop true faith without the risk of be taken in by a bunch of religious whackos? If you start by assuming that the end result 'isn't going to make any sense' then why not the Branch Davidian? Why not the Moonies?

How does one start with nothing and get to something? I have so thoroughly 'deprogrammed' myself of Mormonism, that I don't think I could ever go back. Ever. But if it is true, I would LIKE to go back. The terms of understanding the truthfulness of the church just never seemed adequate. And that is where faith comes in.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by Robin

It is a good response. I suppose the question is this -- what IS faith? It is an irrational something, but what? An irrational belief that compells a specific kind of action? I don't even know where to begin, or how to begin having it. And if a person is starting from nothing, how does one develop true faith without the risk of be taken in by a bunch of religious whackos? If you start by assuming that the end result 'isn't going to make any sense' then why not the Branch Davidian? Why not the Moonies?

How does one start with nothing and get to something? I have so thoroughly 'deprogrammed' myself of Mormonism, that I don't think I could ever go back. Ever. But if it is true, I would LIKE to go back. The terms of understanding the truthfulness of the church just never seemed adequate. And that is where faith comes in.

One begins having faith with small, simple experiments, especially when you are unsure of the results. Missionaries, for example, tell investigators to read parts of the book of Mormon, think about them, and pray about whether or not they are true well before he asks for ten percent of their income. When one comes up with a satisfactory answer to that question, everything else about the church falls into place.

This is no different than any other scientific experiment. If you have a question about the scientific properties of a substance, you come up with small, simple tests that will demonstrate those properties. The only expectation is that you act according to the results that you get. If any man honestly reads the book of Mormon, ponders what he reads, prays over it, and honestly believes that the thing just cannot possibly be true, I would encourage him to act according to that belief. I would not agree, but I would not take away his right to disagree.

[DrumNFeather]

Robin,

I've thought long and hard for a day or so on how best to answer your questions. I cannot tell if you have a sincere desire to once again find the faith that you lost, or if you're simply patronizing the "faithful" LDS members of this board because in some ways the faith question is one not often easily answered. Exercising my own leap of faith, I'll continue under the idea that you have good intentions.

Lets start with some definitions from Webster's shall we?

Faith: 1- Unquestioning belief, specifically in God. 2- A particular religion. 3- Complete trust or confidence. 4- Loyalty
Faithful: 1-loyal 2-Conscientious 3-Accurate, reliable
Faithless: untrue, dishonest, or disloyal

If you're looking for a definition, you've got it listed above, but faith is so much more than that. Faith is an action word. To have faith in something or someone, you are creating action, if even only mentally. Faith requires us to take our unquestioning beliefs and do something with them, be that go to church, go on missions, drive to work, get married...whatever the case, every action we take is because we're exercising faith that that action will not lead us to a harmful end.

This is, IMO one of the many reasons people can become angry, bitter, and uncomfortable at church and in church settings. Sometimes, we take that leap of faith and it doesn't work out for us. A missionary serves the lord with all his heart, only to come home because of illness. A person is unfairly judged at church because of the way they look. The examples are numerous, but the point is that sometimes we're going to exercise our faith and it isn't going to work out quite like we had thought.

Some Quotes:

"Faith is knowing that there is an ocean because you've seen a brook" - William Arthur Ward

"The way to see Faith is to shut the eye of reason" - Unknown

"You can do very little with faith, but you can do nothing without it." Samuel Butler

"Faith is taking the first step when you cannot see the entire staircase" - MLK Jr.

"Faith is believing when it is beyond the power of reason to believe" - Voltaire

From the Teachings of Wilford Woodruff -

"Faith is the first principle of the Gospel. What is Faith? Paul, in writing to the Hebrews undertakes to explain it. He says that Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen; and to prove this he goes on to tell what different men accomplished through faith {See Hebrews 11}. I look upon faith as one of the most important principles that God has ever revealed to Man."

He continues, "If we had correct understanding we should all see as the Lord does, and should understand how his purposes will be accomplished; but we are to walk by faith and not by sight."

There's much more that President Woodruff and many others have had to say on this subject that is very enlightening, but the point all remains the same, the way we maximize our earthly potential is to have faith that the actions we take on a daily basis are all helping us head towards a greater goal down the road.

You've noted a number of times that you've fallen away from the LDS church, you claim that you've lost your faith in more than one way. Not only do you not associate yourself with the LDS faith, but you also no longer exercise the faith that the LDS church requires of its membership. However, you have exercised some faith throughout this process. Otherwise, why walk away? In walking away, you essentially said, "I've got faith that not participating in the LDS church is the right thing to do."

Even if some here would consider it a misguided use of faith, you still took that leap. Your posts reflect this newfound faith that you have...I've read many of your posts where you claim that you hope that the decisions you've made in regards to leaving the church, work out in the end for you...so again, even in leaving the church, you've exercised faith.

I know that my comments are running long here, but I'd like to go back to your experiences with faith as a child. You might have viewed them as a confirmation from the spirit that things were ok. You cited specifically an experience you had around the death of your grandmother as well as the faith of a child to put out cookies for Santa Claus. In both instances your faith required you to take action which ultimately lead to a confirmation that the action you took was worth it.

Unfortunately, more often than not, faith does not allow us the luxury of proof that we find on Christmas morning when we see that Santa has in fact been in our home and eaten the cookies. Sometimes we don't know where our decisions will lead us, but the one thing that allows us to make those decisions and take those steps is faith.

The Book of Mormon contains a promise that if you ask in faith whether or not it is true, you'll receive an answer. Joseph Smith took the same meaning from James 1:5. Every action you take requires some level of faith, especially when it pertains to matters of religion. I would say that part of why I'm spending valuable work time on this matter is my own faith that somehow I might say something that enables you to understand the principle better and regain a desire to come back to church. Regardless, this experience has improved my faith.

What is faith? Everyone defines it differently, and everyone practices it differently, but as you gain a desire to better understand it, you will also gain the ability to use it without requiring proof of the end result of a faithful action. And that is when we truly begin to understand what faith is.

[Robin]

I just want to quickly thank the people who made an effort to answer my question. I have some follow-up questions, but I don't know when I will have the time to write them. So I just wanted to say thanks, and I will get back to this when I can.

Cheers.

R.F.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by DrumNFeather

Lets start with some definitions from Webster's shall we?

Faith: 1- Unquestioning belief, specifically in God. 2- A particular religion. 3- Complete trust or confidence. 4- Loyalty
Faithful: 1-loyal 2-Conscientious 3-Accurate, reliable
Faithless: untrue, dishonest, or disloyal

If any of these dictionary defs was useful, I wouldn't be bringing this up on CG. My own definition of faith is simple. Faith is what allows otherwise rational men and women to believe in the possibility of God's existence. On this basic level, I can understand faith. As such, God becomes a mandala on which the faithful person can continually perform a simple thought experiment, asking, 'what does it mean to be perfect? What would a perfect being try to do?' Faith becomes the center of continual meditation on things that really seem to matter -- truth, justice, liberty, freedom, charity, desire, and so on. Thus from nothing -- the conceptualization of the existence of God, we gain quite a lot in the form of an incredibly valuable tool. I regret saying that I have no faith, because on THIS level, I DO have faith.

I suppose what I meant when I said I have no faith is the kind of faith that most people on CG have -- a set of irrational beliefs that are extremely DETAILED in their description of an elaborate doctrine with elaborate and specific CEREMONIES that appear to be extremely rooted in a specific time and place, but supposedly have eternal consequences for everyone, based on whether or not we choose to accept them in this life or the next.

Faith in God as a tool to contemplate principles that really seem to matter is something I 'get.' But how one gets from where I am to a man nailed on a cross is a path for which not only can I not see the trailhead, I simply can not understand why that kind of detailed belief in my faith would ever be necessary or desirable.

AA describes the path as a science experiement. But it isn't really anything like a science experiment, because the individual PRESUPPOSES so much detail into the nature of God, and what God literally is. Consider this example --

If someone knocked on my door, and told me that my pitbull was the savior of all the world, and God incarnate, I would think that person was nuts. But I would probably talk with the person for a while, because whackos can be fun. If I asked the man on a mission from Dog for some proof about what he was teaching, the dog person mgiht say, "Don't ask ME if these things are true. Take your questions up with Dog, who answers all questions of those who seek his wisdom."

So I go up to my pitbull and ask her straight up, "Ten Cent... are you teh savior of all the world, and god incarnate?" She barks twice, which everyone knows is the universal dog word for 'yes.' I continue ask my dog questions about her 'divine nature,' and she continues to bark twice for yes, and once for no. After a while I have a pretty good idea about the nature of the Gospel according to 'Ten Cent.'

Question: At what point is it a good idea to start believing that my dog is really God?

Now you might think this story is crazy, but it illustrates the gulf between where I am and where most of you are. Even if Ten Cent DID elaborate on the Gospel of Dog, at no point would I seriously start believing that she was in fact who she claimed to be. At MOST I would simply think, 'wow. This is really an interesting side of dog that I never noticed before. '

[DrumNFeather]

So basically what I'm reading from you is that there is really no satisfactory answer that one could give to your questions of faith...perhaps next time when you ask a question that people might spend time on answering, you should add in that you'll not be satisfied with what they have to say.