No announcement yet.

Religion is not faith based

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Religion is not faith based

    Because christianity is the largest religion, and because we live in a christian society (Sweden is Protestant) we have associated ›religion‹ per se with the abrahamitic religions. Cause its only them we speak of really.

    Sola fide (Latin: by faith alone). . . is a Christian theological doctrine!

    But viewing any other culture through our own has generated stupidity through generation after generation.
    Hay, I dont say I have a total self distance, not that is even desirable, but still.

    The phenomena in west when someone hears about another religion goes something like this:
    - Oh, what do they believe in?

    It speaks for it self really. . .
    Even thinking that belief has anything to do with it will directly lead one to a view of the specific religion which is not remotely similar to the view of those who practice it.
    Ask instead: -what do they do?
    Or how does their social life look like? Even if it is "only" tradition.
    Go and see it, live, not read with protestant eyes! Or at least study religion in a real way(in a university, where they categorize info in a different way)

    And lol, I dont say that "protestants" see it this way. I say that all people, who are raised in a society which is or was protestant is influenced by this.
    Like over 95% of all students here are atheists,
    and my students still have the worlds greatest urge to pin point all religions into what ›they believe in . . .‹ )
    And swedish word for ›belief‹ in the context is the word ›faith‹. Thus ›what do they have faith in‹
    Last edited by SacredNight; February 3rd, 2011, 03:15 PM.
    This will be a good signature one day

  • #2
    Originally posted by Gladeflower View Post
    Sola fide (Latin: by faith alone). . . is a Christian theological doctrine!
    Be careful to use the term Sola Fide in context of its actual Christian meaning. Sola Fide is primarily a doctrine developed by Protestant Christianity as an argument against the Catholic Church's use of Sacred Tradition as a guide as opposed to the Bible alone as a guide for Christian living. Protestants have long opposed Catholicism's promotion of Sacraments (such as baptism and confession) as vehicles of grace and the need for cintinuous application of these Sacraments. For the believer in Sola Fide, one must simply rest in their saving faith, knowing that they have been justified in the eyes of God.

    Soda Fide is merely referencing the fact that "faith alone" is what saves and not works or good deeds and such. For Christians, the faith allows the inflow of Christ's saving grace.

    Sola Fide is one of the "Five Solas" of the Protestant Christian Reformation:

    Sola Scriptura, Soli Deo Gloria, Solo Christo, Sola Gratia, Sola Fide


    (By scripture alone, for the glory of God alone, by Christ's work alone are we saved, salvation through grace alone and justification by faith alone)

    There is the root of Sola Fide as a term. Sola Fide is not a term that demonstrates that Christianity is more faith-based than other theistic isn''s exactly the same. Christianity simply uses a lot of fancy Latin words to say, "You gotta have faith." All other theistic religions require faith, not for any sort of salvation necessarily, but faith is assumed as part of the package of assumptions girding the claims of the religion. Without a "faith" in something beyond the human mind/ego with which one can commune theistic religions are nothing more than feel-good role-playing games...maybe with cool costumes.

    Having said that, I am personally unaware of any religions that don't have faith as a prime componant outside of Eastern paths like philosophical Taoism, and certain Buddhist sects. In the West, non-theistic religions never grew organically as they did in the East. I may be mistaken but I have never heard of any indigenious Western faiths that don't require belief in the reality of God(s), Goddess(es), ancestors, spirits, an afterlife, a soul/spirit, etc. Even in non-theistic Eastern traditions, we are not talking about active atheism but something more like agnosticism or a ambivalence to the existance of gods seeing them as irrelevant to te process of spiritual growth. This ambivalence toward Deity(ies) is a careful part of the spiritual cosmology of these systems and is more non-theistic than atheistic.

    One of the paradoxes of religion is that faith comes first, even a modicum of it, then comes the experience or gnosis that turns simple faith into a profound knowingness that cannot be comprehended by those who haven't shared the same experiencial reality.

    A modicum of "faith" is genrally least enough to allow for the serious possibility of the existance of the "unseen reality" presumed to exist by the religion in question. Active disbelief tends to bar relevatory experiences within the context of a theistic religion. In other words, if you are actively disbelieving in the gods there is a pretty darn good chance that you will prove yourself correct. Sometimes, and I have seen it once or twice, non-believers have experiences in context of a rite that makes them reconsider their position as non-believers. This is quite rare in my experience however.

    )o( Blessed Be,

    Last edited by Sundragon; February 12th, 2011, 03:17 PM.
    Come visit my blog

    Sorcery and Spirit

    where I discuss Magick, Mystical Spirituality and whatever else comes to mind.

    " Wherever you are is home
    And the earth is paradise
    Wherever you set your feet is holy land . . .
    You don't live off it like a parasite.
    You live in it, and it in you,
    Or you don't survive.
    And that is the only worship of God there is."

    - Wilfred Pelletier and Ted Poole


    • #3
      Orthopraxies are not necessarily faith based, as the focus is on what *does* rather than what one *believes*. Faith is not required, nor is belief.

      Can it be argued that faith is a small part of it? Maybe. It's argued all the time within Hellenismos - but for the most part it is agreed that a person of no belief at all can do quite well within the religion.

      Gnosis is great, but not everyone has it. The great mystical experience is wonderful, as well, but not everyone has that, either. One would not be disenfranchised from the religion if they don't have these things, or any sense of *belief* in Deity. Practice is a series of actions done in a certain way. There is nothing that requires belief or faith in order to practice correctly, and it would be wrong to assume that faith is needed in order to practice.

      Historically speaking, this proves true as well...not only for Hellenismos, but the Religio Romana.
      Last edited by Twinkle; February 12th, 2011, 08:10 PM.
      "The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common:
      instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views,
      which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering."