US... the day is coming, please

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by queequeger

Do you know for sure the next time you sleep something won't kill you? No, not 100%, but are you going to try and stay awake until you ARE sure? You find the most likely solution to a question and move on until there is new information.

Absolutely, and there are faiths that are capable of doing that.

Originally Posted by queequeger

My main point is, that we've learned a lot of new information and it means that the most likely solution is no longer the magic man in the sky... So in conclusion, while I don't know for sure that there isn't a magical man in the sky who created everything "just because," and that in order to test our resolve he has placed mountains of evidence contradicting his descriptions, I can assume well enough to bet my "eternal soul."

Let me say it as clearly as I can: Faith DOES NOT EQUAL a magic man in the sky. It certainly can and does for some people, but for many others, it doesn't. You have taken a single, oversimplified, particularly dogmatic and particularly rare interpretation of Christianity, and defined it as all "faith." It is not.

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Imagining and thinking about stuff is fine. Faith is deciding that they are true, based on criteria that one would not consider trustworthy in any other context.

Ignoring the reliability of your selection criteria isn't much better than ignoring more direct evidence.

What happens when you die? We don't know, and can't know. I choose to have an opinion on the subject, based on my experience of the world and science and my moral sensibilities of how the universe ought to work. Those criteria don't have to be reliable for you; they are reliable enough for me. I often make guesses about everyday occurrences that are nothing more than my best guess given the information I have to work with. I could certainly be wrong, but I have to have a certain amount of faith that my opinion is true, or everything would be at a standstill. Whenever evidence comes along to refute it, I revise my opinion. Just because I have faith in the conclusions I have drawn does not mean I am unwilling to reconsider.

A faith that refuses to acknowledge evidence is foolish. But refusing to make any choices because of a lack of certain evidence can just as easily be taken to unhealthy extremes as well. The husband who has complete and unwavering faith that his wife will not cheat is foolish, but so is the husband who refuses to have any amount of faith that she will not.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

What happens when you die? We don't know, and can't know.

Agreed...

I choose to have an opinion on the subject, based on my experience of the world and science

We don't know, and can't know. World experience and science say nothing about the subject.

and my moral sensibilities of how the universe ought to work.

And this criteria would not be considered reliable for anything else. Anything on which the reliablility could be checked.

I often make guesses about everyday occurrences that are nothing more than my best guess given the information I have to work with. I could certainly be wrong, but I have to have a certain amount of faith that my opinion is true, or everything would be at a standstill. Whenever evidence comes along to refute it, I revise my opinion. Just because I have faith in the conclusions I have drawn does not mean I am unwilling to reconsider.

What you're describing is an educated guess. An educated guess is based on past experience. There is no past experience on which to base a belief about what happens when we die.

[queequeger]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Let me say it as clearly as I can: Faith DOES NOT EQUAL a magic man in the sky. It certainly can and does for some people, but for many others, it doesn't. You have taken a single, oversimplified, particularly dogmatic and particularly rare interpretation of Christianity, and defined it as all "faith." It is not.

That's such a cop out. You say it's "not that simple," but what is it then? Having "faith" that your wife won't cheat is unrelated to a faith in god, because it's still based on available information. If you mean to imply there are religions without a god, this is true of some religions, but it's still irrationality; these religions still believe in a force or balance that is unexplainable and simply "there." And what's worse is they presume to know what the force wants or does. A faceless form that created everything is just as ridiculous as a magic man. And for the record, cf, what version of Christianity (or Islam or Judaism) DOESN'T say that god created the universe? It's not a "particularly dogmatic version of christianity," it is every mainstream version of religion.

Belief that there is ANYTHING we won't eventually understand (barring destruction of mankind), meaning paranormal or supernatural, is irrational. We've repeatedly explained the unexplainable, and we'll do it again.

So if I missed some description of the word "faith" that does not include "believing in something without enough evidence," let me know. Also, fill me in on my presumptions that people of faith believe that god created the universe.