Faith vs Religion

land195 · #1 2007-10-02, 15:21

Faith = Allowing yourself to believe that there is a supernatural order to the world, and if you surrender yourself to this order, you will benefit from its teachings.

Religion = Takes the faith and organizes it into structured sermon, stories, and rules. Usually includes a hierarchy of teachers, priests, monks, and individuals holding a higher position then the followers.

Is it possible to have faith in way of living, but not let the complexity of religion interfere?

I always tell people, I believe in god, and that there are things in this world that couldn't be possible without a higher power, but I refuse to believe in religion.

My faith is not subject to a religion.

truckfixr · #2 2007-10-02, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by land195

... there are things in this world that couldn't be possible without a higher power....

By all means, please name one thing in the world that is known (as fact) to exist, whose existance requires a higher power.

ArmsMerchant · #3 2007-10-02, 18:36

I think some of the confusion here lies in semantics. Take the word "supernatural." There is nothing "supernatural"-- that which exists in nature is, by definition, natural. This includes everything--birds, bees, gravity waves, quasars, discarnate entities, oracles, whatever.

And "higher power"? Higher than what? We all create our own reality, and are made in the image and likeness of God. What could be higher than that?

xray · #4 2007-10-02, 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmsMerchant

I think some of the confusion here lies in semantics.

Where do you see any confusion as to the the definition of 'supernatural' in this thread?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmsMerchant

Take the word "supernatural." There is nothing "supernatural"-- that which exists in nature is, by definition, natural. This includes everything--birds, bees, gravity waves, quasars, discarnate entities, oracles, whatever.

Oh, I see, you'd like to create confusion regarding the definition of 'supernatural' and claim there's already been some.

The existence of a god that is so complex that he knows all, can do all, has always existed, and is not a product of nature but has himself created the natural laws, can be said to be 'supernatural' by every definition of the word I've ever seen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmsMerchant

And "higher power"? Higher than what? We all create our own reality, and are made in the image and likeness of God. What could be higher than that?

A god who can create actual physical things into existence, created all of us, etc., would be what most people that use the phrase consider a 'higher being'.

land195 · #5 2007-10-02, 23:32

I am not trying to prove there are "supernatural" entities out there.

I am trying to provoke debate regarding the difference between believing something because you personally believe that having faith in will better your life, and your faith is your business and no one else's. And between needing a bureaucratic system to guide you and provide a road path to practicing your faith.

Kind of like the difference between a business owner and the employee.

The business owner created his system, and any action his business (faith) takes, if because of his decision

The employee is part of the same system, but relies on the owner and management to dictate what it should do. If the business (religion) changes the direction, then the employee is expected to follow through.

And again not trying to prove there are "supernatural" entities out there, but to me supernatural means beyond the laws of nature. The laws of nature says everything will come to an end, certain things are set and can't be changed... This entity, whatever it is, can supersede that and might be the creator of the laws themselves.

And I do not consider a god or supernatural entity to be solely the Judeo-Christian concept of an almighty.

xray · #6 2007-10-02, 23:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by land195

The laws of nature says everything will come to an end, certain things are set and can't be changed

Cite?

land195 · #7 2007-10-03, 00:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by xray

Cite?

No I don't have a reference since this has not been proven, its solely my faith, and I won't make anyone believe it.
But what I described is generally accepted by many who share the same faith.

If I could cite it, I'd call it research in the name of science.

KikoSanchez · #8 2007-10-03, 00:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by land195

Faith = Allowing yourself to believe that there is a supernatural order to the world, and if you surrender yourself to this order, you will benefit from its teachings.

Religion = Takes the faith and organizes it into structured sermon, stories, and rules. Usually includes a hierarchy of teachers, priests, monks, and individuals holding a higher position then the followers.

Is it possible to have faith in way of living, but not let the complexity of religion interfere?

I always tell people, I believe in god, and that there are things in this world that couldn't be possible without a higher power, but I refuse to believe in religion.

My faith is not subject to a religion.

By your definitions, it seems you could equate it to:

x(faith) = a
z(religion) = x + b

Therefore, faith is not dependent upon religion, yet religion is dependent on faith. Ergo, it would be problematic, within your definitions, to speak of being religious without faith, yet there is no problem in having faith without religion.

xray · #9 2007-10-03, 02:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by land195

No I don't have a reference since this has not been proven, its solely my faith, and I won't make anyone believe it.

I didn't ask you to cite anything proving your faith. I asked you for a cite that backs up what you said regarding the laws of nature. There are no laws that say "everything will come to an end, certain things are set and can't be changed".

Mindless Xyzzyean · #10 2007-10-03, 11:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by xray

I didn't ask you to cite anything proving your faith. I asked you for a cite that backs up what you said regarding the laws of nature. There are no laws that say "everything will come to an end, certain things are set and can't be changed".

Isn't there commonsense behind that? I was listening to a surmon last night and the Pastor had said there are only 2 infinite entities,
1) Belief in God (or something like that)
2) Having sex - reproduction etc

Nothing else outside of that can be infinite, and commonsense shouldn't always be necessarily backed up and cited. What do you believe?