Faith: I find this concept interesting because it is so important to religion. Religions utilize faith to encourage or enforce the belief in something that is difficult to believe. In this way, faith is required for a religion to function. For example, having faith allows one to believe in something that wouldn't normally happen, such as Moses receiving instructions from a burning bush. Faith also allows one to believe in something that is not provable due to the passage of time, such as biblical events that occurred so long ago that evidence of them no longer remains. And of course, having faith allows one to believe in something that cannot be proven, such as a deity that is invisible. Without faith, there would be little belief in the unbelievable aspects of religion, and religion would die.
But there is a darker side to faith. The people of a religion tend to use faith like putty to fill in the gaps of their ignorance. What they do not know, they can simply "have faith in". For example, when asking someone if they know what their church is doing with their tithes, they usually don't know and will instead have faith that their contributions aren't being misused. (If they even know what a tithe is.) Or when asking someone how one receives the Holy Spirit, they usually don't know and will instead have faith that the Holy Spirit will descend upon them if they are worthy. So forth and so on. This hardly seems like the proper application of faith.
Although the deepest levels of their ignorance may not be excusable, the people are not entirely to blame. The priests encouraged this ignorance to exist, and even forced it upon the people in the past. For evidence, I refer to the following:
While the printing press provided the technology for the distribution of the Bible, the fact that the church's Bible was written in Latin was another barrier to its access by the common people. John Wycliffe (1320-1384) was the first to translate the Bible into English, and created a great deal of controversy that led to his trial in 1377--but the matter did not really come to a head until the printing press was invented and William Tyndale started distributing English Bibles in relatively large numbers. The reaction from the establishment church culminated with the the exhumation and burning of Wycliffe's body 44 years after his death and the strangulation and burning of Tyndale in 1536. The battle was not really settled until 1611, well over two centuries after Wycliffe's bible, with the complete liberation of the whole text by King James.
Why did the priests force this ignorance upon the people? They did not want the people to be able to read the bible because it would remove the people's need for the priests. They did not want the people to know that their bodies were their temples, which allowed them to worship anywhere, not only at churches. (Which would cause them to lose the tithes.) They did not want the people to know that Jesus Christ specifically forbade the swearing of oaths, which would destroy the foundations of their government and society (including ours now) in which they were so deeply involved. And of course, they didn't want the people to find the countless contradictions that destroy the credibility of the bible. The priests needed the people to stay dependent on them, which was how they derived their power over the people.
On a side note: Knowing that the priests of that time also acted as the lawyers and courts, one can see the similarity between the church's reaction to the bible being printed and lawyers of this time attacking anyone who uses their knowledge without their permission. (Called "practicing law without a license".) It was then, and still is now, nothing more than a protection of power.
Do religions deserve the faith of the people? First let us first ask, "what is faith"? Look at these two definitions and note how different they are:
1. Religious definition: A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny.
2. Wikipedia definition: Faith is the confident belief or trust in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, concept or thing.
The main difference that you will probably note is that the religious definition completely excludes trust, while the other definition emphasizes it. I find this interesting, because in my opinion, faith is the natural outcome of trust in someone or something. How can the religious definition avoid trust? We must assume that it is because they have no choice; trustworthiness is a product of evidence, and evidence is the one thing that religions tends to be lacking in. So they strip out "trust" as a requirement for faith, but refuse to use the word "blind", even though blind faith is required to have faith without trust.
So back to the original question: Do religions deserve the faith of the people? We can answer that question by asking, "are the religions trustworthy"? What are your answers?
Last edited by Truthseeker on Tue Oct 05, 2010 5:10 am; edited 2 times in total
A lot of people seem to forget that churches and priests/ministers are not even necessary. You can be christian and have absolutely nothing to do with a church or its associated hierarchy. As I have said before, I don't think it is religion itself that is the problem. It is the churches and the way they can manipulate people.
Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:02 pm
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8624 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
The Bible itself is a problem, and it's true a Christian doesn't need those things. They're still manipulated with the same sick ideologies.
Why did the priests force this ignorance upon the people? They did not want the people to be able to read the bible, because it would remove the people's need for the priests. They did not want the people to know that their bodies were their temples, which allowed them to worship anywhere, not only at churches. (Which would cause them to lose the tithes.) They did not want the people to know that Jesus Christ specifically forbade the swearing of oaths, which would destroy the foundations of their government and society (including ours now) in which they were so deeply involved. And of course, they didn't want the people to find the countless contradictions that destroy the credibility of the bible. The priests needed the people to stay dependent on them, which was how they derived their power over the people.
The ancient mysteries were enticing to many people. People so badly wanted to be initiated and find out the answer to the mystery that they would endure humiliating rituals and take oaths pledging their life to the order, understanding they would be punished with death or torture if they betrayed their oaths.
The esoteric language and writings of the mysteries are meant to conceal one fact. This fact is meant to be hidden from all but the highest level of initiates, but it's really no mystery . The "mystery" of the mystery religions is that there is no mystery. The purpose of creating a Mystery is to allow the creators to lead people, because human reason tends to be suspended when it comes to being involved in something secret and somehow attaining "secret" or hidden information. People will obey those who they believe, on faith, hold this secret knowledge, and if they just do what their told and go along with oaths and silly rituals they too will find out the secret.
The secret is there is no secret, the knowledge held by the upper echelons of the "international priest class" is not super natural. The secret is that if one understands human nature one can manipulate, and so live a parasitic life on the labor of, masses of people should one be so inclined. Perhaps more appropriately called master psychologists, the high level priests understand this very well. They understand that their position of authority is held firmly in place by the faith of the masses. Faith that the priests are trustworthy and benevolent. Faith that they know something more than the average church goer. Faith that they hold the key to "salvation" (whatever that is). Faith that they are needed to get in touch with God or whatever power they happen to claim to work for.
As Truthseeker stated, if the people understood that their body was the temple (as is understood by the priest class and concealed in the esoteric) and that each individual is capable of controlling this body and mind, and thus ridding the mind of demons (which in modern terms is uncontrolled emotion, addictions, etc) and communing with "God" or your own self.
With modern western religion being nothing more than a spin off of the mysteries we have the same situation.
Perhaps Jesus was crucified because he attempted to let people in on this "secret", he himself supposedly being an initiate into the mysteries.
The point is that faith is used to control masses of people. This type of faith, religious, seems to require a lack of knowledge and an inherent trust in authority. But it seems that the people's faith lies more in the humans they trust to lead them than the "higher powers" that they claim to worship.
But how does one account for the faith of educated people? Well, it seems that their faith more closely resembles the Wikipedia definition than the other.
Quote:
So back to the original question: Do religions deserve the faith of the people?
No.
Quote:
"are the religions trustworthy"?
No.
Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:07 am
alexclaton
Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 817 Location: Hell on earth
Re: Faith
peter griffin wrote:
Perhaps Jesus was crucified because he attempted to let people in on this "secret", he himself supposedly being an initiate into the mysteries.
I seriously doubt this person ever existed.... and I seriously doubt if he did that he would be crucified...
Quote:
Quote:
So back to the original question: Do religions deserve the faith of the people?
No.
Quote:
"are the religions trustworthy"?
No.
This!
madthumbs wrote:
The Bible itself is a problem, and it's true a Christian doesn't need those things. They're still manipulated with the same sick ideologies.
And very much so this!
And like Stephan says, faith is basically the belief that error = truth...
Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:08 pm
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8624 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
Gotta love it when we hear someone "loves" jesus. You can be married to someone 10 years thinking you love them then end up hating them. You know a hell of a lot more about them than any of these jesus lovers know about jesus. Maybe this question begs to be answered: "why do you love jesus"? Some might say, Because he paid the ultimate price for our sins so that we may have eternal life. First off, if there was a price: he set it. The Bible clearly indicates that Jesus is the Creator (God). Second, there are I'm sure many people who would make such a sacrifice. 3rd, he refers to Gentiles as "dogs among my children" and has condoned and promoted atrocities against humanity. He's also condemning the majority to eternal damnation rather than just ending their existence.
But why bother? There's little evidence that he even existed outside of fiction.
Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:31 pm
alexclaton
Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 817 Location: Hell on earth
Quote:
"why do you love jesus"?
they love jesus because they never met the guy and only have delusional ideas that this person existed/exists and is the perfect being...
As far as I'm concerned saying you love someone you've never met is the same as saying you hate someone you've never met, basically its just fukin stupid....
i put it this way,not every1 in history could all be stupid because most of them believed there was a jesus christ,so not all of them could have been wrong. what i wonder is why do people resisit god so much,can ppl REALLY prove that god doesnt exist? if some people didnt believe god exists,then y do they fight so hard and r so judgemental to somthing they dont even believe in? its an interesting thing to think about
Tue May 10, 2011 9:50 am
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8624 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
Destruction15100 wrote:
i put it this way,not every1 in history could all be stupid because most of them believed there was a jesus christ,so not all of them could have been wrong. what i wonder is why do people resisit god so much,can ppl REALLY prove that god doesnt exist? if some people didnt believe god exists,then y do they fight so hard and r so judgemental to somthing they dont even believe in? its an interesting thing to think about
Because your god is used as a tool to motivate masses to war, and complacency. The faith leads people to be ignorant and apathetic. It's extremely destructive to our society.
. The "mystery" of the mystery religions is that there is no mystery. The purpose of creating a Mystery is to allow the creators to lead people, because human reason tends to be suspended when it comes to being involved in something secret and somehow attaining "secret" or hidden information. People will obey those who they believe, on faith, hold this secret knowledge, and if they just do what their told and go along with oaths and silly rituals they too will find out the secret.