Faith: Belief vs. Knowing

[Lunitik]

ok, so texts aren't useless and technically you could absorb the wisdom in it's perfection even though it isn't likely because of the imperfection of language, correct?

Yes, this appears accurate. It can be easier to grasp if you do not limit yourself to a single enlightened or spiritual being as well. Often, people are very single minded towards faith, they think that if someone disagrees with their own faith it must be evil. This is not at all useful, the condition of the founders are all the same, only their explanations and terminology is different. People have to understand this if they are not willing to seek a living master.

I agree that being straight has its place, I believe that I can be with you and try to be, but I always want to make sure that the other person is not offended. (There is a difference between being offensive to offend and to be clear)

You should always try to be true at least to yourself, if this means you feel you are rude to others then I must ask how much you think your current path is transforming you? I have said someone is simple minded on these forums and received a warning from a mod, this person was thinking very simply though. We are creating a situation in society where it is impossible to express anything plainly for fear of offending - for me, this only means we are gradually building ego's larger and larger, constantly re-affirming the worst of traits. You have said something important, it is not that you should set about offending, but at the same time you should not worry about offending if you mean what is said. If you are attempting to offend, it is usually because you are too attached - just as this is the reason for becoming offended. I would suggest this is quite poisonous, as are most things related to ego.

Also, since the topic is what it is, you seem to define faith differently than me. For me it is the force that move us from within. Now I have never experienced this so I it is more of an abstract concept for me.
But how do you define it?

I define faith as a belief not founded on truth. You do not know whether anything you have faith in is actually fact, and perhaps it is utterly irrelevant because it provides you with strength. For me, this type of strength is not useful, you have accepted something because the alternative would be a deep fear. You are told you can have great enjoyment after death, exist in pure bliss and paradise. This creates an ease, but it is utterly false. The death that delivers you to this state is not of the body, when you die you simply go back to your original state with no separate consciousness at all. God is the whole, you are a part of that, you experience individuality through attaching to body and mind, but this is utterly false - delusional. There is only one true being, what you call God, this is what I call knowing. When you have experienced truth, you don't need faith because you understand how things really are. When you understand who you really are, what you really are, it is not possible that you can die - you are the eternal, the infinite. For me, the lies of the organized faiths are not even appealing, why do you want to survive individually forever? It is this sense of individuality which is the nature of suffering, there is no meaning in it at all. Manifestation is like an ever-lasting movie for God's entertainment, every role is Him and he is the ultimate purpose to existence. You have become lost in the role, forgotten your real existence, so you need lies to feel comfortable being so small.

 

[Paladin]

You claimed to have seen how I see things, even claiming that you like it. Is that merely from what I have written? Do you deny it?

When you claimed to be enlightened, was it from something that you read? Something you imagined? Real experience? Since you say that your experience is not reality, have you been telling us fibs?

Yes, I deny it. What I meant was that I was interested in your point of view. And I don't claim enlightenment.

 

[luecy7]

Yes, I deny it. What I meant was that I was interested in your point of view.

My point of view is from doing what I do, have done, from the relationships and gifts from others.

And I don't claim enlightenment.

Sorry, I thought I read it somewhere.

 

[luecy7]

To believe is to receive a line of communication to your nervous system back and forth with groups of other life that is not understanding God or their perpetual interests completely. To know is to be participating continuously aware to what is God as Always and to what is interesting to God now. Knowing is occurring when you can no longer us the word believe to describe your circumstance with God or with something God is doing with you or with the life around you.

That is False. Why are you false?

 

[Lunitik]

That is False. Why are you false?

When one truly knows, it is a constant awareness that all is one, it is to sense the celebration in the life force of the plants, the laughter of the breeze as it dances by, the birds singing their song. All of life is joyfully participating in the single largest party there is, yet the ignorant will plan for a tiny party during the weekend. Belief is not knowing, the difference is that belief can be questioned, it can be doubted. When you know something, there is only confirmation, even if you want to prove it wrong you simply cannot. Every time I stepped out onto your balcony, even when I was not smoking, I simply lost myself to this.

I have talked to you about what you are doing wrong here, your need to control. You try to say it is a sharing of control, or a giving of control to another, always you rely on something being in control though. To know, first there must be a profound let-go, a deep trust in existence to manage your affairs, an absolute yes to all that is presented to you. I have told you I will have to go to court and likely pay a fine, existence has guided me to you, and now I have enough to pay the fine. Existence always watches over those that are willing to flow with the current. Yet, even in this, you want to say it was you that presented the opportunity, how would you present the opportunity if I had never came to this site though?

Simply look, stop holding up your relationships as something which define you, find who you actually are. You hold up your interactions with others thinking these make you holy. The most important relationships in your life are proof this is false though, always an awkwardness, a jealousy in your girls that even when Daddy is home he will be with his friend. You need to evaluate these things based on your constant position about relationships. What need is there for you to be involved in the mans piloting lessons? Why do you want to control him in that, you create dependence in others because you want to subtly control, again, this is not a healthy relationship.

You constantly bring up the Golden Rule, yet I do not see you applying it at all. Of course, your reason will allow you to ignore my attempts to let you see, you might even become offended by what I have said here. Always, you have an answer which is utterly irrelevant, yet you persist towards it to the neglect of the very thing being shown. You have a problem with relating in general, always you want to bring it back to you, giving you a sense of worth.

 

[luecy7]

When one truly knows...

You don't know the future, and you don't know yourself. That is my point with Allelyah, should the person behind it wish to listen.

I will not discredit your statements about me, but I am showing my wife, kids, and others what you have said to see what their reaction is. I saw some anger, dependence, addiction, hatred, dishonesty, competition, and control issues. For example, you are dependent by still living off of your parents at your age. Thanks for sharing. I do think you need help. If you want my help, you know where to find me.

 

[radarmark]

Okay--deep breath.....

From the strictly left-hand brain belief and knowledge and truth and faith work this way. Let A be an event in the Kosmos. Let B be a description of that event. B is true if and only if it accurately describes or corresponds to A (use your own conception of true here). One believes B if and only if one thinks B true. One knows B if and only if one believes B, B is true, and there is a sufficient reason for one to believe B. If one does not have sufficient reason to beleive, one is taking B on faith. This can be taking it as authority (Pi=3 because the bible sez so) or taking it as a guess (23-44-59 will be the winning pick three tonight because I think so).

This is how events and descriptions and individuals are linked by the terms true, belief, know, and faith in common everyday English (and in the not-so-common discourses of philosophers and scientists).

From the right-brain point-of-view it is all pointless. They are words that convey a very limited understanding of what we (grokingly, organically or estoterically or subjectively) believe, know or have faith in. IMHO these terms are oft abused. The key to intersubjective understanding or objectivity (understanding the subjective content of each others' mind) is trying to use the left-hand definitions and saying "metaphorically" or "mysically" or "for me" (or any other of a thousand qualifiers in English) when discussing the right-hand definitions.

Among high plains people (Native Americans of the West), with very few exceptions, the right-hand definitions are used. That is why there are qualifiers like "Yelo" (I believe what I just said to be objectively true) or "Da'at'si" (perhaps, possibly, yes, no, indeterminate). That makes for easier heart-to-heart conversations (again, IMHO).

Panta Rhei!
Everything Flows!

 

[Etu Malku]

Okay--deep breath.....

From the strictly left-hand brain belief and knowledge and truth and faith work this way. Let A be an event in the Kosmos. Let B be a description of that event. B is true if and only if it accurately describes or corresponds to A (use your own conception of true here). One believes B if and only if one thinks B true. One knows B if and only if one believes B, B is true, and there is a sufficient reason for one to believe B. If one does not have sufficient reason to beleive, one is taking B on faith. This can be taking it as authority (Pi=3 because the bible sez so) or taking it as a guess (23-44-59 will be the winning pick three tonight because I think so).

This is how events and descriptions and individuals are linked by the terms true, belief, know, and faith in common everyday English (and in the not-so-common discourses of philosophers and scientists).

From the right-brain point-of-view it is all pointless. They are words that convey a very limited understanding of what we (grokingly, organically or estoterically or subjectively) believe, know or have faith in. IMHO these terms are oft abused. The key to intersubjective understanding or objectivity (understanding the subjective content of each others' mind) is trying to use the left-hand definitions and saying "metaphorically" or "mysically" or "for me" (or any other of a thousand qualifiers in English) when discussing the right-hand definitions.

Among high plains people (Native Americans of the West), with very few exceptions, the right-hand definitions are used. That is why there are qualifiers like "Yelo" (I believe what I just said to be objectively true) or "Da'at'si" (perhaps, possibly, yes, no, indeterminate). That makes for easier heart-to-heart conversations (again, IMHO).

Panta Rhei!
Everything Flows!

Problem arises in the 'fact' that there A: was an event in the Kosmos first.
This event can be physically measured and therefore evidenced. That said, Faith must be removed from this list, because Faith is the absence of evidence and draws on Hope.

 

[seattlegal]

Problem arises in the 'fact' that there A: was an event in the Kosmos first.
This event can be physically measured and therefore evidenced. That said, Faith must be removed from this list, because Faith is the absence of evidence and draws on Hope.

I submit that faith does not necessarily mean the absence of evidence.

If I turn on the light switch, I have faith that the light will turn on, because that is what usually happens. However, in some circumstances, the light might not turn on due to unforeseen elements such as a burnt out bulb, lack of power, bad switch, etc. One cannot know for sure that the light will turn on until you flip the switch, but you can have faith (assurance) that it will most likely light up, because of the overwhelming evidence from the past that is what happens under normal operating circumstances.

 

[luecy7]

The faith of one person in another person reveals these other definitions to be masturbatory, from my point of view.

 

[seattlegal]

The faith of one person in another person reveals these other definitions to be masturbatory, from my point of view.

Sheesh. No wonder we have so many creation myths about gods masturbating.

 

[luecy7]

Sheesh. No wonder we have so many creation myths about gods masturbating.

Really? Well, when you call it faith to flip your own switch, to turn your own light on?!

 

[seattlegal]

Really? Well, when you call it faith to flip your own switch, to turn your own light on?!

Oy! You must be spending waaaayy too much time away from home.

 

[luecy7]

Oy! You must be spending waaaayy too much time away from home.

"Let there be my light!" Oooooh... aaaaahhh... pretty!

 

[radarmark]

Okay, EM, good point. But what do we call belief in something that is not a fact (by my definitions not having sufficient grounds to believe true, you lack of evidence) but is yet believed? Faith seems good to me. Come up with another term.

Luecy7, good point. But do you see a difference between belief and knowledge? If not, why do the rest of us use two words? There are many examples of "faith in another person" which are not true. For example I had faith in what my first wife told me, but then she decided she liked girls. My faith was unjustified and my belief that she meant to "love, honor, and cherish, forsaking all others" was misplaced?

See, if you can come up with a word for "unjustified" or "mistaken" faith (meaning what you had faith is was not the truth), you may be onto something. Otherwise I beleive you and respect your use of the term "faith"--but it is "right-brained" and subjective leaving someone else (me) without a way to understand it.

Panta Rhei!
Everything Flows!

 

[seattlegal]

Okay, EM, good point. But what do we call belief in something that is not a fact (by my definitions not having sufficient grounds to believe true, you lack of evidence) but is yet believed? Faith seems good to me. Come up with another term.

Luecy7, good point. But do you see a difference between belief and knowledge? If not, why do the rest of us use two words? There are many examples of "faith in another person" which are not true. For example I had faith in what my first wife told me, but then she decided she liked girls. My faith was unjustified and my belief that she meant to "love, honor, and cherish, forsaking all others" was misplaced?

See, if you can come up with a word for "unjustified" or "mistaken" faith (meaning what you had faith is was not the truth), you may be onto something. Otherwise I beleive you and respect your use of the term "faith"--but it is "right-brained" and subjective leaving someone else (me) without a way to understand it.

Panta Rhei!
Everything Flows!

"inferred premise"

 

[radarmark]

Inferred premise = belief in something not true (a fact)
or
Inferred premise = unjustified faith?


Panta Rhei!
Everything Flows!

 

[Lunitik]

You don't know the future, and you don't know yourself. That is my point with Allelyah, should the person behind it wish to listen.

Are you sure I do not?

I will not discredit your statements about me, but I am showing my wife, kids, and others what you have said to see what their reaction is. I saw some anger, dependence, addiction, hatred, dishonesty, competition, and control issues. For example, you are dependent by still living off of your parents at your age. Thanks for sharing. I do think you need help. If you want my help, you know where to find me.

You saw anger, I was not angry, I simply made a point firmly.
You saw dependence, all is interdependent though, in my case it is just a little more obvious.
You saw addiction, and yet I went 24 hours not even thinking about it.
You saw hatred, I would like to know when.
You saw dishonesty, again, I would like to know when.
You saw competition, I assume you point to running, I simply enjoy pushing myself though.
You saw control issues, and yet the very point of religion is exactly to give freedom.

Your perceptions are really laughable, I would be interested in hearing how you might help me though. I left because you are living a life exactly diametric to what I consider a life worth living. Your whole body language says you absolutely hate life, that you do not even recall what it is to enjoy life...

 

[luecy7]

Are you sure I do not?

Yes. You desire and claim to have freedom.

You saw anger, I was not angry, I simply made a point firmly.

You saw hatred, I would like to know when.

Your point reveals what you hate. Your anger is visible by what you do.

You saw dependence, all is interdependent though, in my case it is just a little more obvious.

You saw addiction, and yet I went 24 hours not even thinking about it.

False, and if you are referring to 24 hours at our place... False.

You saw dishonesty, again, I would like to know when.

With the golden rule, you can find it.

You saw competition, I assume you point to running, I simply enjoy pushing myself though.

So you think of yourself as an achiever?

You saw control issues, and yet the very point of religion is exactly to give freedom.

So you believe it is religion that gives you the freedom to be evil.

Your perceptions are really laughable, I would be interested in hearing how you might help me though.

I must be a comedian then? I will leave it to you to decide and tell me if, when, and how I can be of help.

I left because you are living a life exactly diametric to what I consider a life worth living. Your whole body language says you absolutely hate life, that you do not even recall what it is to enjoy life...

Perhaps? I look forward to the upcoming holiday season when my parents have chosen to fly in and spend a week with us. Their grandchildren are likewise looking forward to that. As you say that you have not talked with your dad in over 10 years, not lifting a finger to do a good deed for him, nor giving a gift in peace to help bury the hatchet, then I imagine that you do enjoy life differently than me. That would be my recommendation: man up and bury the hatchet. You admit to having been rebellious, so why do you still wear it?

Your hatchet is what you are calling "freedom", not that freedom is a hatchet, but that what you call "freedom", is your hatchet. A person with a hatchet can kill or separate themselves from their alleged enemy and say to themselves, "I am free", and indeed it takes freedom to do that. It also takes freedom to bury the hatchet, and if your Dad is still alive, then you have the freedom to do that too. It takes freedom to do work for others, and it takes freedom to partake in relationships, and it takes freedom to contend with a rebellious kid. No shortage of freedom.

Certainly, I could enjoy life by downing a six-pack in a few hours, and smoking cigarettes, or lounging around doing nothing, but I also have the freedom to not do those things. Do you?

 

[luecy7]

Okay, EM, good point. But what do we call belief in something that is not a fact (by my definitions not having sufficient grounds to believe true, you lack of evidence) but is yet believed? Faith seems good to me. Come up with another term.

Luecy7, good point. But do you see a difference between belief and knowledge? If not, why do the rest of us use two words? There are many examples of "faith in another person" which are not true. For example I had faith in what my first wife told me, but then she decided she liked girls. My faith was unjustified and my belief that she meant to "love, honor, and cherish, forsaking all others" was misplaced?

See, if you can come up with a word for "unjustified" or "mistaken" faith (meaning what you had faith is was not the truth), you may be onto something. Otherwise I beleive you and respect your use of the term "faith"--but it is "right-brained" and subjective leaving someone else (me) without a way to understand it.

Panta Rhei!
Everything Flows!

I see a difference between belief, knowledge, and faith, but you seem to prefer to think of two as being the same.

Otherwise I beleive you and respect your use of the term "faith"--but it is "right-brained" and subjective leaving someone else (me) without a way to understand it.

False.