Opinion and Faith

[Bubba_Switzler]

This is an interesting topic that I thought deserved a new thread. So here is how it started:

Truth is a matter of opinion?

Of course, where hard facts are lacking people will form opinions about the truth.

But substitue faith for opinion and you have religion, generally speaking.

God exists (or not), as a matter of fact. But we are (mostly) reduced to faith, i.e. opinion, in the matter.

I think you’re using a very muddy definition of “faith.” Faith is not opinion, not if there is an ultimate Truth and faith in the sense that it is more normally defined is real. If it is not real and there is no absolute truth, then yes, faith is a form of opinion.

I also don’t agree that honest people interested in seeking truth form opinions about truth. Instead, they choose to believe what they are currently convinced is truth. If they are honest seekers, they are open to being convinced in another way (though they may hold to so much evidence that this will be difficult). They do not form opinions because they want to just accept what they understand as objective truth to the best of their ability. Forming an opinion would be to project one’s own desires or feelings upon that which one was convinced was objectively true. Honest people may have their own personal understanding or interpretation of something they hold as independently true, but they will likely not necessarily see a contradiction between how they personally understand or perceive a truth and how another might perceive that same truth.

Faith, on the other hand, involves uniting one’s physical, verifiable experience of the world with less tangible experiences, with the (name removed by moderator)ut from outside intelligence, with the evidence of logic and the less physical senses and intelligences, even where there may be a gap in knowledge. For there is knowledge beyond the physical evidence measurable by science.

So let me begin by noting that opinion is a word with broad meaning. When I compare opinion to faith I do not mean opinion about subjective matters, such as whether dark chocolate tastes good. There are some, of course, who reduce all truth to subjectivity (gravity may be true for you but not for me) but that is not what most people mean when they use the word “opinion”.

On the other hand, there is certainly an element of subjectivity to opinion. But the question is whether there is not a similar subjectivity to faith.

If one were able, for example, to objectively demonstrate the existence of God, thorugh some sort of experiment or observation, say, then there would be no need for faith in God. Theology would just be another branch of science, then.

On the other hand, when people begin with different faiths they are instantly in disagreement and of a disagreement that cannot be resolved by argument and persuasion. For example, Catholics have faith in the infallibility of the magesterium, tradition, and scripture (arguably in that order since the magesterium interprets tradition and scripture) whlie Protestants have faith only in the infallibilty of scripture (and their own interpretation of it, guided by the Holy Spirit).

And, of course, both opinion and faith can be guided by reason and observation, it’s not black and white for either.

So is there really any difference between forming an opinion and adopting a faith?

 

[davidv]

I believe there is a difference. The difference is related to their respective sources. That being faith’s source is external, and an opinion’s source is internal. This is based on my reading of Pope Benedicts Introduction to Christianity. In it he takes nearly a chapter explaining the “I believe” of the creed. My conclusion from ths section was that “faith” is essentially taking a stand on something proposed to us from an external source. This is in contrast to an opinion which is something of ones on making as we consider various bits of information about a particular topic.

 

[fhansen]

Faith is different from opinion because it’s a gift of grace. I believe our faith becomes stronger -and narrower in terms of being more specific- over time as we continue to seek earnestly and are willing to follow the truth no matter where it leads. And that this process, if given the opportunity, will ultimately lead one to faith in the RCC as being the vehicle God has established to reveal the truths of Christianity.

IOW, we grow in unity with Gods’ will as we come to agree with the RCC regarding the truths she proclaims. Of course this is still just my opinion but this is how I’ve experienced it to work. Personal tenets often begin as opinions or even hunches and then God later confirms or solidifies them in one way or another-but none of this can be proven to another human being.

 

[Arandur]

I agree with the other responses, but would add that honest faith, even if it is faith in the wrong thing, is humble and selfless. Opinion is self-centered, originating more fully from the self.

Sola scriptura, for instance, is ultimately opinion-based because it is ultimately based on one’s personal interpretation. It could be faith, but mainly in the sense of faith in someone else’s interpretation.

Catholic faith is a faith in authority, as well, one that we believe to be God. Even if you disagree with that, at the least, we’re not relying on the initiative or interpretation of some minister or singular human founder to our religion. At the least, it is a faith based upon millennia of lives, study, practice, and formation from many more spiritual men than I think any other can claim to be.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

It seems to me as if you are painting a black and white picture with Protestants inventing theology out of thin air and Catholics relying on nothing but what came before. Ironically, one of the main complaints that Protestants have against Catholicism is that it has invented traditions that are not found in the NT.

I do agree that there is an important difference between the unity of Catholicism and the disunity of Protestantism. But it seems rather spurious to ascribe this to faith vs. opinion as in Protestants just have opinions but Catholics have faith.

At a minimum, we have to recognize that many individuals have contributed to the advance of Catholic theology and dogma.

 

[davidv]

It seems to me as if you are painting apicture with Protestants inventing theology out of thin air and Catholics relying on nothing but what came before. Ironically, one of the main complaints that Protestants have against Catholicism is that it has invented traditions that are not found in the NT.

ISTM If the differences are between falsehood and truth, they should be painted black and white. But, how does this relate to the topic?

I do agree that there is an important difference between the unity of Catholicism and the disunity of Protestantism. But it seems rather spurious to ascribe this to faith vs. opinion as in Protestants just have opinions but Catholics have faith.

Beside yourself, who else has defined this as a true cause and effect relationship. Could it be that is simply a correlation that is due to some other common cause?

Unity comes from following Christ. If we have true faith, we recognitize Christ and his commands independent of our opinions.

At a minimum, we have to recognize that many individuals have contributed to the advance of Catholic theology and dogma.

 

[Michael_David]

As you said, Davidv, “Unity comes from following Christ. If we have true faith, we recognitize Christ and his commands independent of our opinions.”

If is it faith that recognizes Christ, and we then have experience by this, would that then be our opinion since it was between us and Christ? And, if I find that this is in line with what the Church teaches, is it still an opinion or more so faith confirmed? And, would it be faith to dig further into what the Church teaches, or my opinion that the Church has the Truth? And, if after digging deep into Church teachings, validated with multiple experiences, is my faith then moved to the Church (away from Christ-God), so as it is only faith I have with no opinions?

On a personal basis, faith should remain with God, not moved to other sources here on earth… who do you trust? While opinion becomes my personal beliefs of how such faith has worked for me.

Since there are many “parts to the body” as St. Paul said, will that one-and-same faith lead ‘all’ to the same result? The body yes, but not the ‘part’ that God want’s them to be in that ‘body’. Even though the body is one, as the faith, the parts are different as are the opinions of each part, but all are formed and validated by the same faith… so the same strength that faith has also stands behind the (various) opinions. In this, the tree of faith has many opinion branches, but all of the same tree.

This means that even if one is a right hand and another is the left hand, remembering that both hands work together to hold things, should one be ‘opposed’ with the other because the opinions are not the same? Is the faith?

 

[jkiernan56]

I would start with the question - Is Truth Subjective or Objective?
For me, Truth is Objective.

If a person accepts that Truth is Objective, then I would ask whether Truth is independant of whether I believe it or not. In other words, does Truth stand on its own? Something is true independant of whether I believe it or not.

Having said that - Christianity is based on ONE single objective truth. Did Christ rise from the dead? Is that TRUE or not? When we speak of whether it is true, the context is very important. When we speak of Christ rising from the dead, we have to be very specific as to what we mean. Do we agree on the historical fact that a Person by the name of Jesus was crucified bodily on the cross and was put to death? If yes, then we can discuss what we mean by rising from the dead. The question then becomes - did Christ rise from the dead BODY and SOUL? We do NOT mean did Christ rise in our minds, our hearts or whatever. Is it TRUE or NOT TRUE whether Christ rose body and soul from the dead? On that historical fact, the whole of Christianity and it’s Truth rests.

Correct me if I am wrong, but is the OP really trying to ask - "Is faith a subjective opinion or is it based on objective truth?

Faith is based on objective truth, not subjective interpretation and understanding. Faith is NOT an opinion. It is an acknowledgment of what I have come to know and accept is objectively TRUE.

I love the saying I heard that goes “we believe in the truths of our faith because they are TRUE. The truths of our faith are NOT true because of our belief in them.” We believe because it is TRUE - not it is TRUE because we believe.

 

[davidv]

As you said, Davidv, “Unity comes from following Christ. If we have true faith, we recognitize Christ and his commands independent of our opinions.”

If is it faith that recognizes Christ,

I believe that our recognition of Christ comes about through our senses and our intellect. Faith is the assent of our will to this recognition that we can trust what we recognize as true. Faith is the “buying into” that which has been presented to us for belief. Faith isn’t the factor in recognition. Faith is the factor in trusting Him.

and we then have experience by this, would that then be our opinion since it was between us and Christ? And, if I find that this is in line with what the Church teaches, is it still an opinion or more so faith confirmed? And, would it be faith to dig further into what the Church teaches, or my opinion that the Church has the Truth? And, if after digging deep into Church teachings, validated with multiple experiences, is my faith then moved to the Church (away from Christ-God), so as it is only faith I have with no opinions?

On a personal basis, faith should remain with God, not moved to other sources here on earth… who do you trust? While opinion becomes my personal beliefs of how such faith has worked for me.

If we live our life based on our opinions, I submit that doing so is placing our “faith” in ourselves, rather than Christ.

Since there are many “parts to the body” as St. Paul said, will that one-and-same faith lead ‘all’ to the same result? The body yes, but not the ‘part’ that God want’s them to be in that ‘body’. Even though the body is one, as the faith, the parts are different as are the opinions of each part, but all are formed and validated by the same faith… so the same strength that faith has also stands behind the (various) opinions. In this, the tree of faith has many opinion branches, but all of the same tree.

This means that even if one is a right hand and another is the left hand, remembering that both hands work together to hold things, should one be ‘opposed’ with the other because the opinions are not the same? Is the faith?

Despite our very different roles in the body of Christ our opinions cannot be allow us to depart from the will of the Head.

 

[Genesis315]

Knowledge of God’s existence is not an object of divine faith, per se. His existence can be known apart from revelation, which is the object of faith–faith is believing what God has revealed solely on the authority of he who reveals it.

Good reading on this topic is Dei Filius from the First Vatican Council under Pope Bl. Pius IX and Fides et Ratio from Pope John Paul II.

 

[Michael_David]

I believe that our recognition of Christ comes about through our senses and our intellect. Faith is the assent of our will to this recognition that we can trust what we recognize as true. Faith is the “buying into” that which has been presented to us for belief. Faith isn’t the factor in recognition. Faith is the factor in trusting Him.

Here we are putting our ‘senses and intellect’ ahead of our faith, or the ‘buying into’ the belief. I believe that faith and truth are good buddies and recognize each other from a distance… then our ‘senses and intellect’ try to make rational what faith has already showed us.

If we live our life based on our opinions, I submit that doing so is placing our “faith” in ourselves, rather than Christ.

Living life is done on all levels of our existence… our search for and recognizing truth is not. The truth and faith comes first, then the opinions and living life follows… although, one could take it further and seek greater truth and faith, which again leads to opinions and living life. It’s the circle of life, depends where one wants to cut-in to it.

Despite our very different roles in the body of Christ our opinions cannot be allow us to depart from the will of the Head.

Yes! As my tree example showed, all of the same trunk.

 

[Arandur]

But it seems rather spurious to ascribe this to faith vs. opinion as in Protestants just have opinions but Catholics have faith.

At a minimum, we have to recognize that many individuals have contributed to the advance of Catholic theology and dogma.

I believe this earlier statement of mine was being charitable and considering the Catholic faith from a Protestant view:
“Catholic faith is a faith in authority, as well, one that we believe to be God. Even if you disagree with that, at the least, we’re not relying on the initiative or interpretation of some minister or singular human founder to our religion. At the least, it is a faith based upon millennia of lives, study, practice, and formation from many more spiritual men than I think any other can claim to be.”

As you say, even if the Catholic faith is somehow not faith directly in Christ of whom the Church is the Body, it is at the least based upon the lives, study, practice, and teachings of a far greater body of spiritual men than any of the other Christian sects (again, with the possible exception of Orthodoxy). This is in my view a large and important difference between Catholicism and other Christian sects that should validate Catholicism much more than any of the other sects, even apart from a direct connection to the guidance of the infallible Holy Spirit.

Michael, I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at with the whole tree analogy. Are you placing all Christian sects together equally? If truth as an objective absolute and an essential property of God, then Christ’s Church which is his Body must in some way be preserved in truth or God’s truthfulness is undone. You certainly can’t have contradictory essential doctrines, such as exist between certain sects.

 

[davidv]

Here we are putting our ‘senses and intellect’ ahead of our faith, or the ‘buying into’ the belief. I believe that faith and truth are good buddies and recognize each other from a distance… then our ‘senses and intellect’ try to make rational what faith has already showed us.

I’m not sure what you mean with regard to the “putting…ahead”. My point was that without our senses and intellect we would never discover anything to put our faith in.

Living life is done on all levels of our existence… our search for and recognizing truth is not. The truth and faith comes first, then the opinions and living life follows… although, one could take it further and seek greater truth and faith, which again leads to opinions and living life. It’s the circle of life, depends where one wants to cut-in to it.

What do see are the “levels of our existence”. I am not familiar with this terminology in this context. This may explain your statement as to why truth recognition doesn’t occur at all levels.
{snip}

 

[Michael_David]

Michael, I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at with the whole tree analogy. Are you placing all Christian sects together equally? If truth as an objective absolute and an essential property of God, then Christ’s Church which is his Body must in some way be preserved in truth or God’s truthfulness is undone. You certainly can’t have contradictory essential doctrines, such as exist between certain sects.

I am using St. Paul’s “one body with many parts” theme… and in my own view seeing a tree of ‘one trunk with many branches’… all dependent on the same roots for existence. This implying one religion.

Here I’d like to add, one’s faith and one’s religion may differ. How many convert? I do not use belief and opinion interchangeably, nor do I use faith and religion interchangeably. Meaning faith and religion, belief and opinion have different meanings for me.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Unity comes from following Christ. If we have true faith, we recognitize Christ and his commands independent of our opinions.

This is exaclty the sort of thing that has me scratching my head. (By the way, what do you mean exactly by “true faith”?)

Let’s introduce an other term, belief, and try to relate faith and opinion to it. Perhaps that will shed some light.

Consider the statements:

X is true.

I know X is true.

I can prove X is true.

I believe X is true.

I have faith that X is true.

I am of the opinion that X is true.

When I look at these, I see variations with respect to evidence. Some statements (X) are provable, others are objectively true but unknown or even unknowable.

If something is objectively true and provable, then we can discard belief, faith, and opinion. They are unnecessary. We do not need those in math, for example.

Some statements are inherently subjective, matters of simple preference. For these we use “opinion”. But we also use opinion for things that are objectively true or false but unprovable. At a minimum, we will chouch it with the word “believe”, as in “I believe that God exists.”

One thing that is implicit in “opinion” is the recognition that others may hold a different opinion. That is unsurprising in subjective matters but noteworthy in the case of objective, but unprovable, statements.

Faith tends to be used to imply the rejection of other beliefs at least as a matter of consideration for the person stating the faith. thus “I have faith in God” means that you don’t much care what other people think and you will make choices on the basis of that belief.

Well, those are my first thoughts on it.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Correct me if I am wrong, but is the OP really trying to ask - "Is faith a subjective opinion or is it based on objective truth?

Not exactly. But I’m not clear on this myself yet.

Faith is a claim of objective truth. But it is a claim about that which is unprovable (otherwise faith would not be necessary). So the core question is: what do we do with claims that are unprovable?

Now we all know what atheists do with those (or at least, what they claim to do with them). But I’m assuming here that we’re not afraid of making unprovable claims such as “God exists” and living our lives according to them.

So the question here is what are the (perhaps subtle) differences between faith and opinion regarding claims of objective truth?

I would start with the question - Is Truth Subjective or Objective? For me, Truth is Objective.

Correct. God exists or he doesn’t. We just can’t prove God exists.

If a person accepts that Truth is Objective, then I would ask whether Truth is independant of whether I believe it or not. In other words, does Truth stand on its own? Something is true independant of whether I believe it or not.

Correct again. My faith or opinion may be wrong or misplaced. (I might have faith in my spouse while she’s having an affair.)

Having said that - Christianity is based on ONE single objective truth. Did Christ rise from the dead? Is that TRUE or not? …On that historical fact, the whole of Christianity and it’s Truth rests.

That’s certainly the essential claim of Christianity.

Faith is based on objective truth, not subjective interpretation and understanding. Faith is NOT an opinion. It is an acknowledgment of what I have come to know and accept is objectively TRUE.

You lost me here. Given the ambiguity of the evidence there are those who draw different conclusions regarding the above question. To address the gap in evidence we can employ faith and/or opinion.

So what is the difference between saying that you have faith in the risen Christ and you are of the opinion that Christ rose from the dead?

I love the saying I heard that goes “we believe in the truths of our faith because they are TRUE. The truths of our faith are NOT true because of our belief in them.” We believe because it is TRUE - not it is TRUE because we believe.

Well, who would want to believe in false things? Reasonable people form opinions based on what they believe to be true.

 

[Michael_David]

I’m not sure what you mean with regard to the “putting…ahead”. My point was that without our senses and intellect we would never discover anything to put our faith in.

Again, without faith first, our senses and intellect would be chasing shadows or illusions. Faith sparks the intellect/senses to understand what was just revealed on a far deeper level.

What do see are the “levels of our existence”. I am not familiar with this terminology in this context. This may explain your statement as to why truth recognition doesn’t occur at all levels.
{snip}

As the two commandments refer to, the heart, mind, strength (body). Some today say, body, mind and spirit (soul). If you are reading the Bible and come to understand a truth, the body/senses had nothing to do with it except to read it; the spark happened in the soul and lit-up the mind to understand. Then it is ‘applied’ to one’s living of life, and this is again on all levels.
When one looks at the universe with mere awe, it is the soul that is active; when one looks at it to figure out how far the moon is from the earth, it is the intellect that is active. Different ‘objectives’ happen more so in different parts of our existence. To me, faith resides in the soul, opinion in the intellect.

 

[jkiernan56]

To me, faith resides in the soul, opinion in the intellect.

For me, faith resides in the truthfulness of the object I put my trust in. I believe in the resurrection of Christ not only as a historical event and fact, but also on personal experience that confirms this truth. St. Paul says this is the central truth of our faith. If Christ did not rise from the dead and is not alive, then we are the greatest of fools and liars.

"When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” John 8:12

Honest, genuine faith in what is true and real … DOES result in the “light of life” - an experience of new life in this life and the fullness of life in the next.

Faith is NOT an opinion. What we have faith in is either true or not true. Believing in something does not make that something true just because of our belief in it. What is true or not true is independant of our personal opinions. I have experienced in my life that Christ IS the truth, not just a person with some truth.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I was thinking further about this and I am beginning to suspect that what’s happening is that Catholics are loading the word “opinion” with elements that are unCatholic.

First of all, there is the inherent ambiguity of the word. It is overloaded with meaning. Opinion can mean beliefs about subjective matters such as taste. That violates the notion of objective truth.

Second, it is inherently personal. To form an opinion is to intellectually come to grips with an issue, to consider and weigh the merits of it independently of the opinions of others. That violates the notion of unity of belief.

Thirdly, it implies that understanding is important. The very act of forming an opinion presuposes that it is important to come to an understanding of an issue. That violates the notion of mysterious truth.

The Catholic ideal seems to be inherently authoritarian, albeit the authority of the apostolic successors. Catholics are thus discouraged from forming opinions on theological subjects. Hence the Catholic distinction between faith and opinion, faith being the form of belief that Catholics are to hold. A good Catholic has faith in what the Church says to be true and need not, indeed should not, investigate the matter further for the purpose of forming an opinion, i.e. a subjective, independent, rational understanding.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Faith is NOT an opinion. What we have faith in is either true or not true. Believing in something does not make that something true just because of our belief in it. What is true or not true is independant of our personal opinions.

I don’t know anyone who thinks that forming an opinion causes something to be true. What we have an opinion on is either true or not true (assuming, again, that we are talking about objective matters). What is true or not is independent of our personal faith.