- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have to admit, I find the writings of prophets and members on the subject of faith a jumbled mass of ideas,, which I call “knowledge unorganized”. As I’ve been reflecting on faith, I would like to propose a Taxonomy of Faith that seeks to identify its different species along discrete lines. This is what I’ve come up with. Faith as the Motivator of Action. Faith as “the moving cause of all action” applies here. This is well documented and discussed, and easily understood. Faith motivates us to do things. It motivates pioneers to cross the plains, unbelievers to pray for testimony, and entrepreneurs to start businesses. What you have faith is does NOT have to be true, it can be an ideal or something that is even downright false — however as long as there is belief in some future state of affairs (which to me, is faith), as long as the individual has enough belief in it to act, it is faith. In education, we call it self-efficacy, meaning the personal belief that effort will lead to results of some kind.
Faith as a State of MindThe definition “faith is mental exertion” applies here. This species of faith is characterized by proactive direction of our thoughts, and therefore, refers to happiness, mental strength and even the application of intelligence. It doesn’t necessarily result in action, but has a big impact on happiness and well-being. One could argue that positive thinking is in this domain of faith. Again, there is no need for the thing the person is exerting their minds upon to be true. People can visualize a situation’s positive features rather than its negatives, or even pacify themselves that a bad situation is actually good in the long run, when perhaps it isn’t. People with positive attitudes exercise this kind of faith. People with negative attitudes also exercise faith, but it is in negative outcomes and does not lead to happiness or well-being.
This kind of faith is based on how we make attributions of the causes of things that happen to use when those causes are not clear. We can choose the direction in which we apply it.
Faith as a Belief in Religious Constructs which are UnseenBecause it’s such a vast area, I think this area deserves a bucket of its own. It’s a lot like category 1 above, but is applied to religious situations. Faith in God, Faith in Jesus, Faith in the Holy Ghost as testifier of truth, faith that tithing leads to blessings, faith that keeping temple covenants provides eternal life some day. Faith in this category leads to action motivated by religious belief, as well as happiness and sometimes, even unhappiness. Further, the religious concept in which the person exercising faith need not be true, as one person will have faith in Mohammend, others in Elohim, and others in the the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
What say ye?
SilentDawning wrote:I have to admit,
I find the writings of prophets and members on the subject of faith a jumbled mass of ideas,, which I call “knowledge unorganized”.As I’ve been reflecting on faith, I would like to propose a Taxonomy of Faith that seeks to identify its different species along discrete lines…What say ye? To me different leaps of faith all look very similar and I would classify them mostly based on what exactly people have faith in. However, these categories can overlap because faith in one specific idea can actually involve faith in several different things at the same time. Here are the most common leaps of faith I can think of:
Faith in Supernatural ClaimsThis is sometimes the only leap of faith that we actually call faith because faith is often associated with religious groups with a long tradition of accepting supernatural claims. Even beliefs about the paranormal are not necessarily called faith in many cases. Popular religious beliefs can understandably require a much greater leap of faith and suspension of disbelief for the average person than beliefs that require little commitment or personal identification with the belief and/or beliefs that don’t sound unusual; but it’s a leap of faith many people are definitely willing to take.
Faith in Ordinary Everyday OpinionsOpinions about things like politics, ethics, history, art, etc. that can’t be accurately measured or tested don’t seem to bother die-hard skeptics nearly as much as religious faith or paranormal beliefs. Personally I think this is simply because these opinions don’t sound too far outside of the ordinary for their taste. I generally don’t remember hearing beliefs like this being referred to as faith at all apparently because they are not specifically religious beliefs but many of these opinions still look like a significant leap of faith to me.
Faith in OthersBasically this involves taking someone else’s word for something because you trust them or don’t see any good reasons to doubt what they say. This type of faith is very useful because we don’t necessarily always have the time, patience, or ability to test or check everything out in detail for ourselves.
Faith in Your Own JudgmentThis is confidence in your own ability to guess right based mostly on speculation or intuition. The book “Blink” by Malcolm Gladwell basically explains how it is perfectly natural for people to go ahead and make quick judgment calls that often actually give better results than carefully analyzing all the available information for a long time ever would. For example, the book told the story of some art experts that thought an expensive sculpture was a forgery long before there was enough information available to prove it. I call this process where you instantly suspect something without necessarily being able to explain exactly why to others in a convincing way the “smell test.”
i can see some aspects of faith you mention, but i am thinking along a completely different line. faith is an agreement to try something out: a hypothesis. i hope for something, say, the book of mormon is true, so i hypoyhesize that it is. so i read and pray about it. i feel good about what i read. my faith is rewarded with a bit of knowledge, that the book has inspired teachings, because as i read them, it inspires my mind, and when i act on the teachings good things happen.
what do i now know? only that hte book of mormon contains inspired writings. i do not know that it is an authentic history, nor do i know anything about how it was translated.
oh, and as i read, i noticed certain anachronisms, the lack of DNA evidence, some of the book is direct quotes from KJV (which would be impossible to be a translation), and that there are wrong teachings (no death before adam, white skin=blessed, black skin=cursed), that i also came to understand (1) this isn’t a literal history, and (2) some things need to be taken with discernment because they are not true.
if I then declare in faith, after having this experience, that the book of mormon is (1) the most correct book, (2) the word of god and therefore inerrant and infallible, or (3) a literal history, then my faith is null and void, because i have faith in declarations that are not true. the flaw is in my declaration of faith, not in the book itself.
faith is not to have complete knowledge in a thing, if we have faith, we hope fo things unseen, which are true.
when we aggregate our faith, convoluting a knowledge that the book for us is inspired, with a universal that every aspect of the book is true, ignoring facts of history, dna, and archaeology,then we are on the path to something other than faith.
i believe that mature faith can have a rich set of things in the church that I accept, trust, and am willing to act upon. these are the things unknown, or unknowable. but while and because I don’t know, i suspend belief or the assertion if knowledge. I believe in god, because i have a feeling there is something out there greater than myself. god the holy ghost feels quite real to me. if we want to use the term Heavenly Father, I accept the term, but i do not know that said being lives in the void of space we now know of as Heaven, and while i accept the LDS definition of why we say HF, i don’t know that this model is accurate. i am not rejecting it, but there us no proof one way or the other: I suspend belief, while accepting the teaching. i have faith, because i accept it, i hope for it, but I do not know.
to me this is why true faith is the essence of the middle way: i recognize i don’t know, but i don’t reject either. if i hope for something, and act trusting it is true: especially as a test to gain more knowledge of the thing’s value — then i have all the faith i need.
faith is not knowledge, and if i hope for something that isn’t true it isn’t faith–it is something else. if i keep acting on something and it sn’t true, it isn’t faith, but insanity.
Well said Wayfarer, again. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.