Faith And Reason

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

When you are seeking spiritual faith, what is your approach?

Use the heart (feelings) in isolation on matters of spiritual faith?

Use the mind (logic and reason) in isolation on matters of spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind in a 50/50 ratio on matters of spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind while giving preference to the heart on matters pertaining to spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind while giving preference to the mind on matters pertaining to spiritual faith?

[sjdawg]

When you are seeking spiritual faith, what is your approach?

Use the heart (feelings) in isolation on matters of spiritual faith?

Use the mind (logic and reason) in isolation on matters of spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind in a 50/50 ratio on matters of spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind while giving preference to the heart on matters pertaining to spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind while giving preference to the mind on matters pertaining to spiritual faith?

I think one must employ both faith and logic. 50/50 seems about right to me but I'm an apostate so what do I know?

[mfbukowski]

100% each.

There is no conflict. Even scientists have beliefs they take on faith.

We have to have faith to get out of bed in the morning, that our legs will not suddenly collapse, that the floor will not cave in, etc etc.

You cannot live without it.

Everything requires faith.

[DH]

Well, according to D&C 8:2, the Lord will communicate with us via both our mind and our heart, and that works for me.

When I was young and seeking a testimony, I remember feeling frustrated that so many people said things like they "knew" the Church was true because it "felt good," etc. I was like, well, lots of people feel good about lots of different things. How do they know it isn't just them feeling good about something, rather than God speaking to them? Plus, feelings can so easily be manipulated it's not funny. (Well ok, it can be funny in certain circumstances! LOL)

However, I don't want to discount the heart entirely--it's an important part of who we are and how we communicate. But I also firmly believe that God gave us a brain for a reason, and it should play a large role in our search for truth and not be turned off in the name of faux "faith."

[Deborah]

When I was young and seeking a testimony, I remember feeling frustrated that so many people said things like they "knew" the Church was true because it "felt good," etc. I was like, well, lots of people feel good about lots of different things.

I agree with this. I have a testimony because of spiritual confirmations, but in order to sustain that testimony there has to be something more than the good feelings. I love the logic of the gospel, the eternal nature of it and how it truly is all-encompassing. The doctrines make sense. When I haven't understood something or had questions, my spiritual experiences got me through until I could get the knowledge I needed to understand on an intellectual level as well.

I've been amused when for the first time I went to one of the ex-Mo sites and saw some of the comments. It was so pathetic that those people arrogantly believe they really are better informed and those of us who remain faithful just don't know what they do or we wouldn't remain with our testimonies intact. They really don't get that when we really become grounded in our faith it's after the trial of doubts and then proving in our minds and hearts that what we believe really is the truth.

[Mordecai]

I don't separate the two so much. Our feelings come from our thoughts, for the most part. We can measure how much we genuinely believe our thoughts by assessing our feelings about our thoughts, actually. Feelings are an expression of our most genuine selves, so we certainly need them in all we do.

[blueadept]

As others have said, there needs to be a healthy balance of both regardless of which church you may belong to. I've never been too impressed with those who seem to be heavy in one aspect but show little of the other.

[Libs]

I agree, we should have both, but I don't think faith and reason are "always" compatible (as someone suggested).

Sometimes reason contradicts our faith or, at least, causes us to question. That has been my experience. I am still trying to find that balance.

[HeatherAnn]

I think one must employ both faith and logic. 50/50 seems about right to me but I'm an apostate so what do I know?

That made me laugh' date=' & then think... I imagine & feel that you still use both.

... when we really become grounded in our faith it's after the trial of doubts and then proving in our minds and hearts that what we believe really is the truth.

Yeah, and through that trial our faith becomes deeper, not perfect, but seeing truth in a new exciting & even more comforting way, which makes us open to more truth.

Fig-bearing-Thistle (like the name!),

Thinking & feeling is like an ongoing tug-of-war.

Jesus was a man, "acquainted with grief" - persecuted for standing up for what was right over being popular. He's also considered the "Prince of Peace." Peace is "freedom from disturbance" which ironically comes at a disturbing cost... of this ongoing battle of trying to understand things from as many different intellectual & emotional perspectives as we can. And understanding is the basis of love, our greatest purpose.

[ELF1024]

I agree, we should have both, but I don't think faith and reason are "always" compatible (as someone suggested).

Sometimes reason contradicts our faith or, at least, causes us to question. That has been my experience. I am still trying to find that balance.

Can't have faith without a slight amount of doubt, or it wouldn't be faith, it would be a prefect knowledge.

[CV75]

When you are seeking spiritual faith, what is your approach?

Use the heart (feelings) in isolation on matters of spiritual faith?

Use the mind (logic and reason) in isolation on matters of spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind in a 50/50 ratio on matters of spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind while giving preference to the heart on matters pertaining to spiritual faith?

Use both the heart and mind while giving preference to the mind on matters pertaining to spiritual faith?

I do my best to use whatever talents and gifts God has given me, to the fullest. Many people have done this naturally, many need to be reminded, and many need to practice. What some people call the mind others may call logic/reason and others may call faith and others may call heart and others may call spirit (each interchangeably with the other)--so whatever it is I've got, I use it!

[sjdawg]

That made me laugh, & then think... I imagine & feel that you still use both.

I try. Spirituality is still important to me.

[Flyonthewall]

I agree, we should have both, but I don't think faith and reason are "always" compatible (as someone suggested).

Sometimes reason contradicts our faith or, at least, causes us to question. That has been my experience. I am still trying to find that balance.

There are many things found in the scriptures that are done by faith, but not very reasonable:

Looking at a snake on a pole to cure a poisonous bite,

bathing 7 times in a river to cure leprosy,

spitting in the dirt to make mud, rubbing in in a blind man's eyes to cure blindness,

walking on water...etc.

Of course as our faith grows, so too, will our foundation of what is "reasonable" shift.

[Glenn101]

I agree, we should have both, but I don't think faith and reason are "always" compatible (as someone suggested).

Sometimes reason contradicts our faith or, at least, causes us to question. That has been my experience. I am still trying to find that balance.

What about those who live and die never questioning their faith but have the supreme confidence that God knows more than man and will reveal all in His due time?

My mother was a devout woman all of her life. She did not blink an eye at polygamy. She knew Joseph was a prophet of God. It was not just a "good feeling" to her. It was an absolute conviction. She did not worry about science and its discoveries, some of which seemed to contradict the gospel at times, because she had a supreme conviction of the truthfulness of the resurrected gospel.

She was a convert at a young age, before her parents. She had one of the most sublime testimonies I have ever known. She was an intelligent woman in her own right, but confined her reading mostly to the church related material. Maybe she was limited by her choices, as to things earthly, but she dies a beloved woman in her community for her many charitible and compassionate acts. Her neices, nephews, and grandchildren all remeber her, not fondly, but with a reverent love.

If I only learned one thing from her, is that the spiritual witnesses trumps the intellect, and that great wisdom is better than great knowledge.

Glenn

[Libs]

What about those who live and die never questioning their faith but have the supreme confidence that God knows more than man and will reveal all in His due time?

My mother was a devout woman all of her life. She did not blink an eye at polygamy. She knew Joseph was a prophet of God. It was not just a "good feeling" to her. It was an absolute conviction. She did not worry about science and its discoveries, some of which seemed to contradict the gospel at times, because she had a supreme conviction of the truthfulness of the resurrected gospel.

She was a convert at a young age, before her parents. She had one of the most sublime testimonies I have ever known. She was an intelligent woman in her own right, but confined her reading mostly to the church related material. Maybe she was limited by her choices, as to things earthly, but she dies a beloved woman in her community for her many charitible and compassionate acts. Her neices, nephews, and grandchildren all remeber her, not fondly, but with a reverent love.

If I only learned one thing from her, is that the spiritual witnesses trumps the intellect, and that great wisdom is better than great knowledge.

Glenn

Your mother sounds like a wonderful woman. I think it's truly a blessing and a gift to have that kind of unshakable faith. I knew an older woman in my Ward, who was like that. She just recently passed. She had the gift of a very strong faith, and it could be quite contagious, when you were around her. I will miss her very much (but, really, her spirit of faith lives on in all of those she touched)..

[Libs]

There are many things found in the scriptures that are done by faith, but not very reasonable:

Looking at a snake on a pole to cure a poisonous bite,

bathing 7 times in a river to cure leprosy,

spitting in the dirt to make mud, rubbing in in a blind man's eyes to cure blindness,

walking on water...etc.

Of course as our faith grows, so too, will our foundation of what is "reasonable" shift.

This is true. In Christ, all things are possible.

[Libs]

Can't have faith without a slight amount of doubt, or it wouldn't be faith, it would be a prefect knowledge.

Very true.

My struggles have been with more than just a "slight amount of doubt". But, I am recently trying to let some of that go.

It's interesting, because our intellect (reason) can get us into a lot of trouble, if we allow it to, completely, reign over our faith. The Spirit (as knowledge) is a lot more pure and less tainted. The Spirit can show you something that is true, in an instant...and then the intellect can take that same thing and twist it into something ugly and confusing (if you let it). I would like to get back to the more pure spiritual knowledge and wisdom again.

[cinepro]

We have to have faith to get out of bed in the morning, that our legs will not suddenly collapse, that the floor will not cave in, etc etc.

I don't think that's "faith".

For example, if I hold out a deck of cards and ask you to take one, can you have "faith" that you will pick the Ace of Spades? Or do you acknowledge the 1/52 chance?

Likewise, collapsing legs and caving floors are based on physiology and construction engineering, both of which are practical sciences, and the reason you believe your legs won't collapse and the floor will support you is that you have experience and understanding of your abilities and the soundness of the floor.

Understanding the high likelihood of something happening isn't "faith". And redefining religious words to make them apply to naturalistic principles doesn't do religion any favors.

I will now click the "Add Reply" button, not out of faith, but because my understanding of computer science and previous experience help me understand the high degree of possibility that it will then post this message. It's not because I have "faith" in my computer and the BB software.

[elguanteloko]

I don't think that's "faith".

For example, if I hold out a deck of cards and ask you to take one, can you have "faith" that you will pick the Ace of Spades? Or do you acknowledge the 1/52 chance?

Likewise, collapsing legs and caving floors are based on physiology and construction engineering, both of which are practical sciences, and the reason you believe your legs won't collapse and the floor will support you is that you have experience and understanding of your abilities and the soundness of the floor.

Understanding the high likelihood of something happening isn't "faith". And redefining religious words to make them apply to naturalistic principles doesn't do religion any favors.

I will now click the "Add Reply" button, not out of faith, but because my understanding of computer science and previous experience help me understand the high degree of possibility that it will then post this message. It's not because I have "faith" in my computer and the BB software.

Excellent post!

[Libs]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Very good post from Cinepro.

But, I also do believe, to some extent, there is a valid comparison between religious faith and faith in our natural & man-made environment.

and the reason you believe your legs won't collapse and the floor will support you is that you have experience and understanding of your abilities and the soundness of the floor.

I do believe we can have that kind of faith in God/Christ/Christianity, because as we live the principles, we can see for ourselves how sound they are, and whether or not they support our lives in a meaningful and productive way. As we live and experience it, our "faith" grows.

[elguanteloko]

I agree with cinepro here but it's worth mentioning that "reason" and "faith" do NOT come in conflict ONLY when you decide either to stop reasoning or to stop having faith in a given issue. To "reason" is to inquire without dogmas though one has to choose at one point or another to go with the best option one can see. Faith, however, is to first accept the dogma and then inquire through the eyes of dogma except about the dogma as worthy of being accepted. Sure, you can have faith that God is working miracles in your life everyday and be a working logician or mathematician. No one said humans were going to be consistent across all issues. I can be very careful at times in some things and very careless in some other things.

(Be it noted, however, that most religious people accept religion first by tradition, second by bad reasoning, IMHO. They don't inquire through the arguments for God first but believe first.)

[elguanteloko]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Very good post from Cinepro.

But, I also do believe, to some extent, there is a valid comparison between religious faith and faith in our natural & man-made environment.

I do believe we can have that kind of faith in God/Christ/Christianity, because as we live the principles, we can see for ourselves how sound they are, and whether or not they support our lives in a meaningful and productive way. As we live and experience it, our "faith" grows.

Any unreasonable OR reasonable belief can grow in this manner. The point is, Libs, that he who seeks reason to the point of excellency will reason about the reasonableness of those points from which he departed and weigh the evidence (rational or otherwise) between his point of departure and other points of departure possible.The religious will only very seldom inquire about them.

[cinepro]

To put it another way, I define "faith" as the difference between our degree of belief, and the degree of belief that would be suggested by rational thought.

For example, if someone presents me with a deck of cards and I have 100% faith that I will pick the Ace of Spades, then 2% of my belief is based on rationality, and 98% is based on Faith. If I then pick the Ace of Spades, I can attribute it to the 2% rational odds or the 98% faith; there's no way to distinguish between the two. If I don't pick the Ace of Spades, then I can say that I never actually had "faith", because "faith" has to come true.

The best (and most religious) solution would be to never pick a card. Then I can live the rest of my life with my faith that I would have picked the Ace of Spades, and no one can ever prove me wrong.

This is all subject to creative redefining of the word "faith" as needed, of course. But in practice, this seems to be how it actually works.

[elguanteloko]

To put it another way, I define "faith" as the difference between our degree of belief, and the degree of belief that would be suggested by rational thought.

For example, if someone presents me with a deck of cards and I have 100% faith that I will pick the Ace of Spades, then 2% of my belief is based on rationality, and 98% is based on Faith. If I then pick the Ace of Spades, I can attribute it to the 2% rational odds or the 98% faith; there's no way to distinguish between the two. If I don't pick the Ace of Spades, then I can say that I never actually had "faith", because "faith" has to come true.

The best (and most religious) solution would be to never pick a card. Then I can live the rest of my life with my faith that I would have picked the Ace of Spades, and no one can ever prove me wrong.

This is all subject to creative redefining of the word "faith" as needed, of course. But in practice, this seems to be how it actually works.

For you, then, does someone need to be conscious that their choice is not the most likely choice in order for their belief to be faith or not?

At least for me, I want to make a distinction between mere reckless belief, being very very sure about the object of your belief, and faith.

[mfbukowski]

This is all subject to creative redefining of the word "faith" as needed, of course. But in practice, this seems to be how it actually works.

At last, you are making some sense.

My point was that every decision has some component of "faith" and some component of "reason". You do the best you can with reason and then take a stab in the dark for the rest. Being in the risk management business, I can tell you all about that

And as far as dogma, science can be just as dogmatic as religion

But as always, it is only a question of definitions, which you seem to realize above.