(no subject)

[2eclipse]

yesterday i was listening to an interview on the craftlit podcast with heather ordover. she was talking to the two guys who wrote plato and a platypus walk into a bar, a book about philosophy in humor....and these guys are not only into philosophy, they are into theology as well. could we say this is up my alley? why yes, indeed we could.
anyway, they got into a discussion about faith vs. belief and how heather runs into people who say jews don't believe in jesus....which is a flat out ridiculous statement. jews certainly believe there was a man named jesus who lived about 2000 years ago. the romans have records of crucifying him. jews don't believe jesus was the son of God. this is an entirely different statement. which just goes to show that christians are as guilty of not saying what they mean as everyone else.
however, they went on in the interview to talk about whether there is a difference between faith and belief. and this is what was interesting to me, because there is this lovely and brilliant british theologian named e.p. sanders who talks about this exact issue.
english comes from two languages - anglo-saxon and normon french. in many cases this adds great richness to our language due to having many words for the same thing. we have words like pork and beef in addition to swine and cattle. the germans use the same words for both the animal and the food form. as sanders points out, calling our food swine-flesh, as they do, would strike english speakers as gross.
however, there are places in english where one form of speech has simply driven the other out. the case of faith and belief is one of them. we have no verb form of faith. "to believe" has taken its place. we can say "to have faith". but this is passive voice and misses out on the strength of what it means to BELIEVE in something. but in truth, "to believe" has the connotation of opinion, and faith does not. faith is more like the knowledge that comes from the heart, rather than the head. we have faith that our loved ones love us...and it isn't just from their actions, there is faith involved. we have faith in the direction of our govenrment (or maybe not just now). we have faith that people can change...these are not mere issues of opinion. certainly they are issues of opinion, but they are not MERE issues of opinion. there is something else behind what we feel when we care passionately about something we cannot prove. when we see something in a person, but we cannot say what it is. it is knowledge of the heart, not of the head. it is faith.

Comments

[patchhat.livejournal.com]

you say that we have no verb form of faith.... make one.

do a little research into the roots of the word, find out if there's a parallel with another word that does have a verb form. invent or uncover what the verb form should be, and use it.

in todays world, with technology and instant worldwide communication, if the word you invent strikes a chord with others, it'll be passed on and used. i heard that "d'oh" made it into the gorram dictionary... i think you have a really good shot at starting something.

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

i'm not really interested in creating a word for "to faith"....my post was not placed here by way of complaint, but by explanation. i agree that it can be done...but i kinda like the language the way it is.

[lucifermourning.livejournal.com]

interesting post, but i can't say i entirely agree with your points.

we do have faith in things because of evidence - it's just that the evidence we have is not always sufficient or accurate.

i have faith my family loves me because of their actions, their words and the idea of been raised with - that families love each other.

i have faith in the human race's ability to pull itself together and create a better world, because i have seen and read about enough people doing good things, because i have seen evidence of a will to do so, and because i believe history tends toward an increase in the sense of humanity as global and an acceptance of our interrelatedness. i am also temperamentally disposed to hold such evidence higher than evidence to the opposite, because i am an optimist and have difficulty despairing. i recognise that this faith may prove wrong, and it is not as strong as my faith that my family loves me, because i have less evidence, and because i am quite analytical and able to recognise when i am making assumptions.

these things don't come from nowhere, or from some special knowledge in the heart. it's just that our brains don't always process things rationally, and we sometimes need to make assumptions (i can never prove that my family loves me or the human race will survive, but it would be hard for me to get though the day without making some assumptions about these things), based on more or less evidence, analysed in a variety of ways (rationally, emotionally, though other assumptions, through existing beliefs- and probably through some mixture of the above.)

but then i am also suspicious of many arguments for faith, because too often this means people want their faith respect regardless of arguments against it. i am not saying faith is bad, but rather that articles of faith should always be open to rational debate and discussion, not given a special exemption because they are articles of faith.

but then, i would also argue that faith is just strongly held belief. difference of magnitude rather than kind.

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

you make a lot of good points and i will concede one of them. sometimes we do have evidence. i would argue that the evidence by itself is not enough to convince us.
or if it is, it is a bonus, not the reason we really have faith. it is often our introduction to faith, but what it ultimately becomes.
and mainly...this is because i tried throwing fact after fact after fact trying not to believe in God. God didn't make any sense and i wanted him to...and even though i couldn't logically say why...i wound up giving up. i believed whether it made sense or not.

[lucifermourning.livejournal.com]

that depends what you mean by evidence. if you mean evidence in a strictly scientific and factual sense, or you mean good evidence, then no, we don't always have evidence.

so perhaps what i mean is simply reasons. there are always reasons.

personally, i find that evidence is enough to convince me.

this is why i am an atheist.

it is also why i cannot respond very much to your comments about believing in god. if you choose to embrace your desire/instinct/etc. to believe in god, that is your choice. but i can't really see that kind of faith as a good thing.

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

wow.
even over a week later and off the meds this still feels really judgemental.
did you mean it that way? from what i know of you i have a hard time believing you do, but this really hurts.
i do not post these things by way of trying to change your idealogy, but by way of trying to communicate mine, and the richness i find in it. i also do not go to your journal and tell you about how i think atheism is sad and lonely and based on a false premise that everything in this world can be measured by hard, scientific data or some form of empirical evidence...because the truth is that i have never been an atheist, and so i don't know. if you respect the person i am, please try grant me the same respect - that you don't know my experience with faith and therefore cannot properly judge its validity. you don't have to agree. just please be nice about disagreeing.

[lucifermourning.livejournal.com]

i would like to apologise.

the trouble with internets is that sometimes we (or at least i) write things without fully considering how they sound to the reader.

i never meant to offend you or be hurtful and, re-reading my comments, i understand how they came across that way, and i am sorry.

i do struggle with how to feel about faith, as i know people whose faith is a very positive influence on their lives, and have to respect that influence. however, i don't really "get" faith myself, and some expression of "faith" terrify me (e.g. fundamentalists of many religions), which is why i tend to go back and forth in my own mind about how to approach the issue.

i am sorry that i made comments that hurt you.

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

apology more than accepted. i know you as being a kind sort of person, and had a hard time believing you meant your comments that way - but i felt i had to respond.
i completely understand that not everyone gets faith...because i was agnostic for a long time myself and couldn't see the point of christianity. as it is now, i don't have much choice in the matter, but that's okay with me. if you ever have any questions, i am happy to talk, but i don't assume my questions were the the same as yours.
for what it's worth, i am completely in agreement with you about how terrifying fundamentalist ideologies of any kind (including atheism) is. people do horrible things because they believe it is God's will...which is one of the reasons i'm a pacifist. i don't believe i'm fit to know the difference between violence in my name vs. in God's name.

[lucifermourning.livejournal.com]

i think it's probably best for me to not say anymore on the topic, at least over the internet. in person things like tone and expression can come across, but without them i think it's impossible to not sound overly harsh. (e.g. a statement meant to invite response and questioning/explanation sounds like a judgement.)

i do like to talk about religion because it has fascinated me for many years, but it's very hard to have a sensible discussion when you disagree and cannot make your points exactly clear (assuming you care about giving offense!)

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

whatever suits you is fine.
i do have points to make that are clear. they may just not be the ones you are looking for. not everyone has the same issues with religion.

[lucifermourning.livejournal.com]

i wasn't talking about your points! i just don't think i will be able to say what i mean without potentially offending.

i very rarely have religious discussions with religious people, so i am rather wary of saying something that could upset you. i feel like i could either try and explain what i mean, and possibly cause offense, or end the discussion.

YES!

[mamaoknits.blogspot.com (from livejournal.com)]

I love that! I had often taught the corollary--what happened to legal language when two (plus) languages smashed into each other circa Magna Carta...you get things like "Cease and desist" and "Will and Testament"--one from each language. You know...just to be sure everyone understood the law.

But the Swine/Pork thing...I'd not thought of that one.
Nor the Faith and Belief.

I'm gonna be thinking about this for awhile.
Thank you!
Heather
Craftlit.blogspot.com