How personal should faith be?

[Ledger_Damayn]

I didn't bother to utilize the search function, so I apologize in advanced if another topic asks this question.

I am personally Agnostic, and thus, I believe that there is a higher power, but it is undefinable in every facet. As a result, I can't help but feel distaste towards certain religions that place so many boundaries with their "God is this" and "God is that" and "God is not this" and "God is not that."

I digress. By the definition of faith, it is implied that two people cannot share the same faith. However, it is natural that people of similar faiths congregate and share and expound upon their own faiths.

Am I the only one who thinks it's pure hypocrisy then for churches to outline and dictate most aspects of a religion to be followed by their members? By doing so, it becomes less personal, and inevitably, takes the entire point out of believing in the first place. It may just be my opinion, but believing isn't really believing unless the INDIVIDUAL sets their own rules. Following the doctrine and ritual of another takes the attention away from whatever higher power is believed in, and places it in the hands of a mortal.

Maybe I'm overstating the issue. I really don't know. Opinions?

 

[Digital Watches]

I think faith should be very personal.

The faithful should keep it to their gorram selves!

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

^_^ I actually wasn't referring to faith being pressed on people of other religions. I'm already totally against that, and it bugs the living hell out of me when people invade my space to do it anyway.

I was more referring to people of the same religion or denomination.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

I am personally Agnostic, and thus, I believe that there is a higher power, but it is undefinable in every facet.

Then you are a theist by definition.

I digress. By the definition of faith, it is implied that two people cannot share the same faith. However, it is natural that people of similar faiths congregate and share and expound upon their own faiths.

Am I the only one who thinks it's pure hypocrisy then for churches to outline and dictate most aspects of a religion to be followed by their members? By doing so, it becomes less personal, and inevitably, takes the entire point out of believing in the first place. It may just be my opinion, but believing isn't really believing unless the INDIVIDUAL sets their own rules. Following the doctrine and ritual of another takes the attention away from whatever higher power is believed in, and places it in the hands of a mortal.

Yes, churches do a lot more to control people and amass power than they do to help find the nature of life, the universe and everything. I've had plenty of spiritual friends who were discontent with their church because it stifled innovation in their search. The churches' rules opposed their personal search for the divine and mandated an already "revealed" god.

 

[Teebs]

Faith should be as personal as a person would want it, with of course with some people, having no problem expressing it from time to time. (outside of church events).

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

Then you are a theist by definition.

From dictionary.com:

Agnostic (n)-
A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

Theists believe in some form of God. I do not. I think the notion of a god is ludicrous. I do however believe that the odds of the events that made our universe and the conditions for life as diverse as it currently is here are so minuscule that some kind of driving force must have had a part to play to start everything in motion. There's a huge distinction.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

From dictionary.com:

Agnostic (n)-
A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

From Dictionary.com

the·ism [thee-iz-uhm]
–noun

2. belief in the existence of a god or gods

I personally believe that there is a higher power[...]

Game, Set and Match. The winner is The Gamer4Fire! I hope you enjoyed this game. Souvenirs are available in the lobby. A video of this debate will also be available later for a small fee. Please come early and come often. Thank. You. Everyone.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

Theists believe in some form of God. I do not. I think the notion of a god is ludicrous. I do however believe that the odds of the events that made our universe and the conditions for life as diverse as it currently is here are so minuscule that some kind of driving force must have had a part to play to start everything in motion. There's a huge distinction.

For extra emphasis, I'm quoting the second paragraph of my last post.

God =/= higher power. For all I care, or know, "higher power" could just be a singular trigger that starts the big bang, and never exists again.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Now isn't that conveniently ambiguous. However it is pretty clear from your context that by "high power" you are not referring to a trigger but instead to a will or possibly a being.

[...] I can't help but feel distaste towards certain religions that place so many boundaries with their "God is this" and "God is that" and "God is not this" and "God is not that."

[...]

Am I the only one who thinks it's pure hypocrisy then for churches to outline and dictate most aspects of a religion to be followed by their members? By doing so, it becomes less personal, and inevitably, takes the entire point out of believing in the first place. It may just be my opinion, but believing isn't really believing unless the INDIVIDUAL sets their own rules. Following the doctrine and ritual of another takes the attention away from whatever higher power is believed in, and places it in the hands of a mortal.

How much would you like to back-peddle before surrending to the fact that I am your lord and savior- I mean, concede that I'm right.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

This is a pointless semantics war. But I'll humor you, since you MUST be getting some kind of pleasure from proving people "wrong." And I derive amusement by supporting my point.

I still hold onto the fact that God =/= Higher Power. However, that's not to say a God is not a Higher Power, and a Higher Power cannot be a God. All I implied from saying that is that I do not believe a God exists, but that it must be a higher power and nothing else.

I said higher power in the part that you quoted to be as vague as possible, to be inclusive of all religions and belief systems.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Gamer4Fire FTW!

This is a pointless semantics war. But I'll humor you, since you MUST be getting some kind of pleasure from proving people "wrong."

Actually, right now I am having fun debating with you.

I still hold onto the fact that God =/= Higher Power.

I never said that it wasn't the necessary case, only that your post tended toward god(s) are a higher power and that makes you a theist and not agnostic.

However, that's not to say a God is not a Higher Power, and a Higher Power cannot be a God. All I implied from saying that is that I do not believe a God exists, but that it must be a higher power and nothing else.

"I do not believe in god." "I believe in a higher power that acts like god."

This is self contradictory. You believe in a higher power that is godlike, therefore you are a theist. A rose by any other name...

I said higher power in the part that you quoted to be as vague as possible, to be inclusive of all religions and belief systems.

You referred to your belief in a higher power to be so inclusive.

As much fun as I am having playing with you, I should point out that it is steering your topic way off course, veering it off the side of a cliff. May I suggest you bow out gracefully and try to restrain your topic and pull it back to its original purpose. Or just continue with this debate, makes no nevermind to me. This is the Debate Hall!

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

Actually, right now I am having fun debating with you.

It's mutual. What I was implying from "pointless semantics war" is that it has nothing to do with what the topic is.

I never said that it wasn't the necessary case, only that your post tended toward god(s) are a higher power and that makes you a theist and not agnostic.

"I do not believe in god." "I believe in a higher power that acts like god."

This is self contradictory. You believe in a higher power that is godlike, therefore you are a theist. A rose by any other name...

If I had to define a higher power as far as I could go, I would say that it had the power to start the universe in motion, and possible act as a catalyst for certain critical events to occur. This higher power probably also set the universal constants that everything revolves around, such as gravity and the speed of light.

But that's it. Beyond that, the universe is largely self-runnable under its own laws. If that makes me a theist, then, fine, I'll relent and agree with you.

As much fun as I am having playing with you, I should point out that it is steering your topic way off course, veering it off the side of a cliff. May I suggest you bow out gracefully and try to restrain your topic and pull it back to its original purpose. Or just continue with this debate, makes no nevermind to me. This is the Debate Hall!

I'll gladly go back to topic if other people decide to enter this particular debate. This secondary debate is analogous to be twiddling my thumbs. Since I've already put thought into this mini-debate, I don't really see the need to start an entire new thread for it.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

If that makes me a theist, then, fine, I'll relent and agree with you.

I win, great. Now what?

Oh, I know.

Yes, churches do a lot more to control people and amass power than they do to help find the nature of life, the universe and everything. I've had plenty of spiritual friends who were discontent with their church because it stifled innovation in their search. The churches' rules opposed their personal search for the divine and mandated an already "revealed" god.

 

[forboxgux]

Faith should be as personal as you want it to be.

 

[Caturdayz]

Faith should be as personal as you want it to be.

Forbuoxgux, I would like to discourage you from making 1-liners. While this is not an official thread and 1-liners are not banned here I assume you can. However, this forum is the place for intelligent debate, not obvious analysis.

 

[6footninja]

How personal faith is to somone affects how personal they may be willing to get in "spreading" that faith. Almost all religions demand you to be "personal" with God if you want to avoid burning in flames forever. Its sad, like God doesn't have enough friends, he has to make them by scaring you into it. But ill leave my views on things such as, for another time. Of course it depends on the person involved in the religion as well. Are they willing to get personal? Are they devoted? How much of there life has been consumed with religion? I can't say how personal it should be, because I don't have a faith to lean on. Im a non-believer. I wish it was less personal, at times. It just leads to people invading my privacy for a talk about "the big man upstairs"