• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Beliefs as passions

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?
I think it is indisputably true.

I wonder what gave me my passion for reason as an approach to understanding the world. I suspect it was my mother, actually: very much an Enlightenment person.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
I would broadly agree with you. Albeit I think this is not a very good reason to be religious and I would advise people who believe based on such passion and emotion to do way more digging, otherwise I think it's self-deception.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?

I agree with your theory. I have never come across a person who followed a religion out of logic. And, having knocked on the doors of many religious people, I am pretty sure of this.

I used to think that I joined a religion for logical reasons at one point in my life. But then I realised that I joined because I was in a rough period of my life and was looking for purpose and a group to join which was against the grain.

But I think that is the beautiful purpose of religion. It does what science cannot, because science is cold. I believe that the purpose of the concepts of God and Religion is to provide people with hope even in the most hopeless situations. If one believes that a god is on their side, it provides endless and endurable moral, especially when one is less logical thinking and more emotional. I don't think that many humans in history would have had the will to survive if not for God and religion. The growth of Christianity despite intense persecution and the Islamic conquests I think prove that.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?

I think that's true! When things are going along fine you are more inclined to reason. Reason don't always make sense to the heart though. I reckon people have voids in their lives that require a passionate response.
 

Bird123

Well-Known Member
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?



How does your theory hold up on the person who was raised on religion from a very small child and taught to never question, always accept and blindly believe?? Having repeated the religion over and over all their lives they are convinced they have the truth.

If one really seeks Truth, reason had better be leading the journey.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
How does your theory hold up on the person who was raised on religion from a very small child and taught to never question, always accept and blindly believe?? Having repeated the religion over and over all their lives they are convinced they have the truth.

If one really seeks Truth, reason had better be leading the journey.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!
I think if someone is raised in a religion, they are more likely to be emotionally attached to it than to see reason, don't you think?

You would think that if one seeks truth reason would lead the way. But when it comes to religion, it usually isn't. There are of course always exceptions to the rule (or there would never be converts).
 

Good-Ole-Rebel

Well-Known Member
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?

You say 'we' have two ways to reach truths. Who is the 'we'?

Are you trying to define 'faith'?

Faith is faith. It itself is real. If you don't have it....you don't have it. You can't produce it of yourself.

Emotional experience, and problems may surface that faith. But likewise everyone in the world has emotional experiences and problems yet the majority don't turn to God, or Christ. Why do some turn and the majority don't?

You can't make yourself believe what you don't believe. You can lie and say you do...but that is a lie.

Those with Biblical faith, continue, because they cannot stop believing. It is not from them.

Good-Ole-Rebel
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
I'm going to speak in generalities, so realize that I acknowledge the exceptions to the rules.

We have two ways to reach truths. The older way is intuition, an instinctual gut level decision making that is great for survival, but makes a lot of errors. The newer way is reason, a very efficient way, but not always the quickest, best way, nor should it be the only way--by the time you reason it out, the predator has already killed you.

My thesis here is that belief systems are intuitive. I choose to use the word passion, because they involve so much emotion in most cases. Because they are passion rather than reason, they are impervious to rational arguments against them. This is why you don't often see people in forums converting to other religions or flipping sides. At best, we agree to disagree agreeably.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to have reasons for our beliefs. But lets be a little honest that at the core, we really aren't reasoning our way to them.

For example, a person doesn't become an Evangelical with a "born again" experience because they study the Bible first and evaluate the prophecies, and study the archaeological evidences for the validity of the Christian scriptures. Rather, they have problems with their lives, and intuit that this emotional experience will transform them, and they are almost always emotionally moved by an charismatic appeal to their heart. They continue in their faith for reasons of a passion for Jesus, not theological arguments.

What do you think of my theory?

So your intuitive truth need not be factual?
Usually a person equates truth with something factual.

So intuitive truth only needs to be true enough for you to accomplish whatever you need it to accomplish?

IOW, intuitive truth only needs to be correct enough to work for you. That seems a pretty big range from being completely false to being factual. A belief only needs to be in a very minor sense correct in order to be true enough to fit your needs to accept it as truth.

So I'm not trying to criticize, just wonder if this is an accurate view.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
You say 'we' have two ways to reach truths. Who is the 'we'?
people.

Are you trying to define 'faith'?

Faith is faith. It itself is real. If you don't have it....you don't have it. You can't produce it of yourself.
I'm defining that which causes belief. A Jew believes that Moses received the Law from God. A Christian believes Jesus died for his sins. A Muslim believes that Muhammad received the truth from an Angel. You can call that belief faith if you wish.

Emotional experience, and problems may surface that faith. But likewise everyone in the world has emotional experiences and problems yet the majority don't turn to God, or Christ. Why do some turn and the majority don't?
You are misunderstanding my post, thinking that I'm only referring to belief in Jesus. I'm not. My thread is not about whose beliefs are correct. It's about belief IN GENERAL. I'm putting belief in Jesus on par with belief in Krishna or Muhammad, etc. In order to understand my post, you will have to step outside your faith momentarily, and look at it the way a scholar would.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
So far as I can see, beliefs are established in various and sundry ways, but seldom by reason. Reason enters the picture after the beliefs have been established. Only then, it is most often employed to rationalize them.

It is less often used to challenge them. Albeit a robust and appropriate education has been long recognized as training people to challenge their own beliefs. And sometimes such well-trained people actually do.
 

Good-Ole-Rebel

Well-Known Member
people.

I'm defining that which causes belief. A Jew believes that Moses received the Law from God. A Christian believes Jesus died for his sins. A Muslim believes that Muhammad received the truth from an Angel. You can call that belief faith if you wish.

You are misunderstanding my post, thinking that I'm only referring to belief in Jesus. I'm not. My thread is not about whose beliefs are correct. It's about belief IN GENERAL. I'm referring to belief in general. I'm putting belief in Jesus on par with belief in Krishna or Muhammad, etc. In order to understand my post, you will have to step outside your faith momentarily, and look at it the way a scholar would.

Yet, your definition was incomplete concerning Biblical faith, or faith as defined by the Bible.

And you misunderstand my reply. I am placing Biblical faith as far and above faith in Muhammad or Krishna. If such a faith was ever required of them.

No, I don't need to step outside my faith. Scholar's come and go. Dime a dozen. One day they are right, then they are wrong. But they were 'scholarly' .

Good-Ole-Rebel
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
So your intuitive truth need not be factual?
Usually a person equates truth with something factual.

So intuitive truth only needs to be true enough for you to accomplish whatever you need it to accomplish?

IOW, intuitive truth only needs to be correct enough to work for you. That seems a pretty big range from being completely false to being factual. A belief only needs to be in a very minor sense correct in order to be true enough to fit your needs to accept it as truth.

So I'm not trying to criticize, just wonder if this is an accurate view.
Well, we THINK our intuitions are factual truths. But intuition makes mistakes. For example, we hear a rustling in the bush, and we think Predator. It is better than we err on the side of caution, make a mistake, and not get killed, than to assume what is more probable and reasonable, that it is not a predator, and end up with the improbable and get killed.

Intuition makes mistakes like see faces when there are none there (think happy face or even a colon and parenthesis :) ) or see patterns when prematurely (I pull six yellow items out of a bag and assume that everything in the bag is yellow) and tend to attribute intelligent agency without adequate evidence. Again, it is because seeing faces, noticing patterns and intelligent agency are good survival skills -- they outweigh the mistakes.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Yet, your definition was incomplete concerning Biblical faith, or faith as defined by the Bible.

And you misunderstand my reply. I am placing Biblical faith as far and above faith in Muhammad or Krishna. If such a faith was ever required of them.

No, I don't need to step outside my faith. Scholar's come and go. Dime a dozen. One day they are right, then they are wrong. But they were 'scholarly' .

Good-Ole-Rebel
I'm not talking about "Biblical Faith." As I said in my last post, I'm talking about beliefs in general,, and all religions have beliefs.

There is an advantage to being inside a faith, and an advantage to viewing one's faith from the outside. It is especially advantageous if you can do both. If you can't view your faith from the outside, then this thread is not for you.

Be well.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I agree with the OP. There might be some who are convinced by Pascal's Wager (I realize some object to it) that the reward in believing in God can't lose.

But for most, it's not logical. Some come by experience, some become emotionally attached and some through intuitive perception.

Of course, I'm using the word intuition to mean something other than emotional. Intuition thus is knowing without conscious reasoning.
 

Good-Ole-Rebel

Well-Known Member
I'm not talking about "Biblical Faith." As I said in my last post, I'm talking about beliefs in general,, and all religions have beliefs.

There is an advantage to being inside a faith, and an advantage to viewing one's faith from the outside. If you can't view your faith from the outside, then this thread is not for you.

Be well.

You need to reread your opening statement. You most definitely made 'Biblical faith' the object of your argument.

Oh, this thread is not for me? You use Jesus and faith in Him as an example yet this thread is not for me?

I can view 'Biblical faith' for the faith that it is. Not as your attempting to portray it.

Good-Ole-Rebel
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
You need to reread your opening statement. You most definitely made 'Biblical faith' the object of your argument.

Oh, this thread is not for me? You use Jesus and faith in Him as an example yet this thread is not for me?

I can view 'Biblical faith' for the faith that it is. Not as your attempting to portray it.

Good-Ole-Rebel
I used it as one of many possible examples. I could just as well have used a Jew's belief in the Exodus, or a Muslim's belief in the revelation of the Quran to Muhammad, etc. i just mentally flipped a coin. Had I made this thread about *correct* faith, it would have been about Judaism.
 

Good-Ole-Rebel

Well-Known Member
I used it as one of many possible examples. I could just as well have used a Jew's belief in the Exodus, or a Muslim's belief in the revelation of the Quran to Muhammad, etc. i just mentally flipped a coin. Had I made this thread about *correct* faith, it would have been about Judaism.

No you couldn't. The Jews belief in the Exodus doesn't save them. Where do you get that?

Of the Muslim's, where is faith required to initiate salvation on their part?

Good-Ole-Rebel
 
Top