my opinion

Faith=God

with a spouse ,I guess I don t have faith in any man, people change. Its more like you trust them.

There has to be an unconscience want to believe or it wouldn't happen. But if you have a "belief" and look for a reason to believe it you will find it, out of the pure desire to see it. Usually we believe something due to someone we trust telling us that is how it is and then we create the reinforcement for the belief ourselves through our view of the world that comes from inside of us.

was that in anylysis to paralysis?

So in other words, eveyone uses the word wrong when they say that their partner has been unfaithful.

I'll buy that.

But I still think that faith and trust are the same thing. To Trust in the Lord or Have Faith in the Lord are completely interchangeable phrases as far as I'm concerned. They mean precisely the same thing to me.

In this sense the word "trust" means "faith".

Obviously you're thinking more in terms of faith being "belief", but is not belief itself also genuinely nothing more than the expectation that something will turn out to be true?

Dragoness:


I agree with that assertion completely.

One is taught 'X'

One believes 'X' is true without 'proof'(faith)

Then one conforms their understanding(s) relating to 'X' around 'X'

In essence dispelling 'faith' and taking on 'belief'...

Yea, I concur, you read my mind

Faith and trust imply an underlying belief in someone, or something.

Faith is belief without evidence, or when evidence can be shown to refute the belief. Trust is belief in accordance with the preponderance of the available evidence.

All beliefs hinge on some type of evidence, i.e. observation/experience, authority, logic. The big issue is how RIGOROUS that evidence is, in order to sustain a particular belief. For example, I DON'T have faith in evolution theory, I TRUST it.

Abra...

With the given context unfaithful is absolutely a correct term to use concerning infidelity of a spouse...

If thought of in another way we could agree I believe...

Belief is the term with the broadest application in this comparison, and it implies mental acceptance of something as true, even though absolute certainty may be absent.

Faith implies complete unquestioning acceptance even in the absence of proof and especially of something not supported by reason.

Faithful implies steadfast adherence to a person or a thing to which one is bound as by an oath or an obligation[a faithful wife].

Trust implies assurance, often apparently intuitive, in the reliability of something or someone.

As far as belief goes, I feel it is more like what one perceives to be true as a result of their faith in a previous teaching.


EDIT:

Yes...No...???????

Although there should be no difference, when you state you have faith in someone, it does not interpret the same as faith in a religion, right?

Faith in someone, means you are believing them capable of something

Faith in a religion, means you are devote with no questioning of the doctrines

Somehow the translation is slightly different there. But is comes down to belief as the basic element here. Noone can have faith without an undoubitable belief.

If the premise in my earlier post of definitions is accepted, then is faith detrimental to change?

Could one change their belief while maintaining faith in what they had first been taught...

Is the faith then in the belief or the internalization(s) that created the belief?

I believe the only time faith can possibly exist is upon one's initial acceptance of any given notion which is taught without empirical evidence, and is later internalized, thereby building up the 'evidence' which supports their belief by conforming all exposures which relate to the initial teaching that was accepted by faith.

Faith builds belief.

Yes...No...???????

Alright, based on this definition then I belief that 99.9% of people who have hardcore faith in Christianity do so out of fear that if they are wrong their will be retribution to pay. Thou Shalt have no other God’s before me. Therefore, to even question this religion is a sin!

Having said that I firmly believe that most Christians do not have hardcore faith but rather simply go with the flow. It’s the popular religion that the majority of people believe in, so they just go along for the ride. Their faith isn’t a conviction, it’s more of a general acceptance that going along with the masses is probably the best thing to do. Based on the behavior of most people who call themselves Chrisitans, it’s clear that they genuinely don’t really believe in diddly squat. What they are really thinking in there mind is that they’ll find out when they die, and they’ll just hope that God is at least as reasonable and forgiving as they are.

This is actually a pretty good philosophy because if God is not as reasonable or forgiving as an average mortal human then God would be pretty pathetic would he not??? How could mere mortal humans be more forgiving than God???

I think most people are pretty compassionate, and if God is more compassionate than them then they are in great hands. And like I say, if God is not as compassionate as a mere mortal human then what kind of a God would that be? How could God be compassionately inferior to the people he passes judgment on?

In short, the overwhelming vast majority of Christians today believe that God will certainly forgive them for anything they are willing to forgive others for. In fact, if we take the words of Jesus as truth this is precisely what Jesus himself proclaimed,…

Matthew 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

If we can trust Jesus at his word then we know that God will judge us by our own standards, he said so himself if we take Jesus’ word to be the word of God.

In fact, if this is indeed truth then there won’t be any judgment for me at all because I don’t judge others at all despite what some people on the Internet might erroneously claim. So when I get to the gates of heaven there won’t be any trial or questions or judgment, the gates will just open with no questions asks, thus Jesus has proclaimed in his own words.

In this way I have faith in Jesus.

(i.e. I expect him to keep his word)

Abra:

I have no problem at all with your logic in regards to the comparison of God to human concerning the level of compassion and forgiveness.... I actually like it...


As you well know Abra, I do not live inside the box...

I have never fit inside of it... ever...

This notion I present is logical, but it does require a 'pure' definition to be adhered to...

The interchanging of some words loses the discreet differences in meaning... especially in this case...

Should one be able to accept the earlier definitions, then does not my last post spur a curious notion?

They feed each other to me. If you have faith in a belief and all you see, by your own means, will reinforce the belief and then the faith, etc......... Now if the inspirational person who originally fed you the belief lost faith..........that would shake a belief a little, I would think. Also, as with religion, if more people are accepting of the religion, more people seem to be accepting of the religion......so there is a modicum of fitting in that governs it too. The more agreement you get (reinforcement from others) the more your belief feels right and others must be wrong, right? LOL

I got a little off subject there

yesaaa!

I guess I use faith synonymous with hope. I have both en they are inseparable. It is because I have faith that I have hope. For sure!

To all:



This is an interesting discussion, I can only hope the good intent is indeed known...


Let us suppose a situation here, in order to help me explain how I conclude the development of a belief system...

Johnny unwaiveringly accepts what Dad teaches about 'X'.

This establishes Johnny's faith in 'X'. He does not question the reasoning.

Through experience, Johnny occasionally finds himself witnessing a situation('Y') that relates to 'X'.

As a result of his faith in 'X' his perception of 'Y' is affected thereby creating acceptances and/or internalizations('Z') and begin building belief based upon 'Z'.

Time and time again as 'Y' is experienced, Johnny's faith in 'X' will be replaced by belief as a result of the compounding of 'Z'...

Eventually all of the supporting 'evidence', which at first is actually mere perception according to faith, becomes perception according to belief which has been established through 'Z'.


Ok... Zat make sense?

So his faith changed some. People grow en so does your faith.

Faith is the beginning of belief, but how much of one's belief is indeed a product of the faith as opposed to being a product of internalization(s)?

Faith is without empirical evidence...

Belief is a result of the empirical evidence conforming to not only the initial faith, but also the growing internalizations which indeed give birth to more of the same.

It is why one from a different culture has the same zeal over a completely different belief system...

They all start with 'faith'...

They all grow into a belief system according to internalization(s)...

God does not have to be in the equation...

Would that make 'faith' a detriment to learning?