Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was a Christian for nearly twenty years, and I routinely used the word "faith" just like everyone else. But I never actually thought about what the difference is between faith and belief. What do you think it is?
Personally, I think faith is simply a belief that is not entirely sensitive to the evidence. Consider the following:
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to situations where we have belief but don't have knowledge. I believe things that I don't know all the time, and I simply call that "belief."
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to beliefs about things that can't be seen. I have beliefs about oxygen, chemistry, nuclear forces, etc. that I wouldn't describe as faith.
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to beliefs that exist in situations that could go "either way." In nearly every other scenario, I just call these beliefs "beliefs".
Just to be clear, "belief" simply means something I hold to be true. I believe that I am typing on the City Data forum right now, and I believe my wife thinks I'm good-looking. Anything we hold to be true, whether justified or not, is a belief. If you hold the tenets of Christianity to be true, why do you call it a matter of faith?
The only explanation that seems plausible to me is that "faith" refers to beliefs that we arrive at through alternative epistemological routes. In other words, we don't arrive at faith simply by analyzing the evidence, as we do in most cases of belief. If that is true, why is faith a good thing? Shouldn't we aim for ordinary belief?
I was a Christian for nearly twenty years, and I routinely used the word "faith" just like everyone else. But I never actually thought about what the difference is between faith and belief. What do you think it is?
Personally, I think faith is simply a belief that is not entirely sensitive to the evidence. Consider the following:
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to situations where we have belief but don't have knowledge. I believe things that I don't know all the time, and I simply call that "belief."
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to beliefs about things that can't be seen. I have beliefs about oxygen, chemistry, nuclear forces, etc. that I wouldn't describe as faith.
It can't simply be that "faith" refers to beliefs that exist in situations that could go "either way." In nearly every other scenario, I just call these beliefs "beliefs".
Just to be clear, "belief" simply means something I hold to be true. I believe that I am typing on the City Data forum right now, and I believe my wife thinks I'm good-looking. Anything we hold to be true, whether justified or not, is a belief. If you hold the tenets of Christianity to be true, why do you call it a matter of faith?
The only explanation that seems plausible to me is that "faith" refers to beliefs that we arrive at through alternative epistemological routes. In other words, we don't arrive at faith simply by analyzing the evidence, as we do in most cases of belief. If that is true, why is faith a good thing? Shouldn't we aim for ordinary belief?
Faith is belief that is acted on as after all even the demons believe.
KJV James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
I think having faith is about doing things that show faith rather than a mere believing
Jas 2:14 My brothers, what is the gain if anyone says he has faith, but he does not have works? Is the faith able to save him?
Jas 2:15 But if a brother or a sister is naked and may be lacking in daily food,
Jas 2:16 and any one of you say to them, Go in peace, be warmed and filled, but does not give them the things the body needs, what gain is it?
Jas 2:17 So also faith, if it does not have works, is dead being by itself.
Jas 2:18 But someone will say, You have faith, and I have works. Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith out of my works.
Faith is belief that is acted on as after all even the demons believe.
KJV James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Faith is belief in action.
But I act on a lot of my ordinary beliefs. For example, if I believe it is going to rain later in the day, I take an umbrella with me. Should I instead say that I have faith it is going to rain? Intuitively, I would say no.
But I act on a lot of my ordinary beliefs. For example, if I believe it is going to rain later in the day, I take an umbrella with me. Should I instead say that I have faith it is going to rain? Intuitively, I would say no.
Having faith in something means that you believe in it even though you do not see it at the moment and you take actions that show that you believe it.
If I say I have faith that a ladder will hold my weight, it is just a belief until I actually stand on it and show by my actions that I do have faith.
Having faith in something means that you believe in it even though you do not see it at the moment and you take actions that show that you believe it.
If I say I have faith that a ladder will hold my weight, it is just a belief until I actually stand on it and show by my actions that I do have faith.
But I act based on my beliefs all the time, even if I can't see the justification for those beliefs at the moment. I drive down the road in my car based on my belief that the laws of physics have not changed, even though those laws are invisible to me.
It would seem that your response would lead us to the conclusion that "belief" and "faith" are essentially interchangeable. It seems strange to me, though, to say I have faith that my ladder will hold me or that I have faith the laws of physics haven't changed.
I think the issue of how beliefs interact with action can better be explained by pointing to the stakes of being wrong compared to the justification of a given belief. For instance, imagine I walk into a restaurant and ask the server if the chicken dish has any nuts in it. He responds "No, I'm pretty sure it doesn't." I might form the belief that the chicken dish has no nuts in it, but whether I eat the chicken dish entirely depends on what will happen if my belief is false. If I simply don't like nuts, my belief probably has good enough justification to order the dish. If I will possibly die from an allergic reaction, however, I need more justification than the words of the server. In both cases I have belief, but whether my beliefs are actionable or not depends on the strength of the justification for my belief. I don't see where faith is needed to explain either scenario.
My experience has been faith is a precursor to belief.
Interesting. Could you explain? Did you have faith in X even if you didn't believe X? If so, did you act on X at the time? I can't imagine acting on a premise I didn't even believe to be true.
But I act on a lot of my ordinary beliefs. For example, if I believe it is going to rain later in the day, I take an umbrella with me. Should I instead say that I have faith it is going to rain? Intuitively, I would say no.
Well faith in general can apply to anything, such as you list. However Faith in Biblical terms refers to acting on our belief in God, as He wishes, not just claiming to know Him, but do nothing more.
But I act based on my beliefs all the time, even if I can't see the justification for those beliefs at the moment. I drive down the road in my car based on my belief that the laws of physics have not changed, even though those laws are invisible to me.
It would seem that your response would lead us to the conclusion that "belief" and "faith" are essentially interchangeable. It seems strange to me, though, to say I have faith that my ladder will hold me or that I have faith the laws of physics haven't changed.
I think the issue of how beliefs interact with action can better be explained by pointing to the stakes of being wrong compared to the justification of a given belief. For instance, imagine I walk into a restaurant and ask the server if the chicken dish has any nuts in it. He responds "No, I'm pretty sure it doesn't." I might form the belief that the chicken dish has no nuts in it, but whether I eat the chicken dish entirely depends on what will happen if my belief is false. If I simply don't like nuts, my belief probably has good enough justification to order the dish. If I will possibly die from an allergic reaction, however, I need more justification than the words of the server. In both cases I have belief, but whether my beliefs are actionable or not depends on the strength of the justification for my belief. I don't see where faith is needed to explain either scenario.
No belief is that you can drive down the road, Faith is actually driving on it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
