dancing in chains - You need to stop, and reread our debate so far. Perhaps after doing so, you will no longer confuse yourself by trying to argue against claims I have not made.
A little common sense would answer this question rather easily. Since religion is a spiritual matter, obviously faith would help the individual in a spiritual way. I don't think drawing a picture to illustrate this is necessary. Faith is solely the individual's passionate belief in the objective uncertainty (i.e. God). There's no need to rethink what we call faith, because at the end of the day that is what faith is.
Faith has nothing to do with how the individual helps others, that is solely the individual's personal responsibility. Wheter or not someone believes in God has nothing to do with how they treat people, they have to do with how they treat people.
Yes, faith can, and often does, help the individual. Arbitrary faith, without any investigation, is harmful to the individual and those around him. Faith with understanding, on the other hand, should be of great benefit to the individual and those around him.
Faith is not necessarily a 'belief in the objective uncertainty (i.e. God)'. Sure, it can be. Depending on our conception of God, we might take the question of whether or not God exists to be an objective consideration. Or, we might reject the notion of God as an object and in doing so take God out of objective consideration altogether. We might also have faith in something other than God.
I've never claimed the individual is not responsible for the way they treat others. They certainly are responsible as we are responsible for our faith, whatever that faith might be. What I'm claiming is that faith with understanding is good for the practitioner and those around him, and that arbitrary faith, faith without understanding, without consideration, without investigation, is dangerous and causes harm to the practitioner and to those around him. Whatever sort of faith a person has, and how that faith influence himself and others is that person's responsibility.
Do not mistakenly assume I claim that faith is necessary for treating people well. It isn't.
his is true Jesus did not preach a selfish doctrine. However the Golden Rule can be applied to individuals regardless of whether or not they have faith in God. It is not a religious doctrine, it is a humanistic doctrine that has been preached in a multitude of different ways by many different people over the past 2500 years. Jesus did not doctor this up, this can be traced back likely to the time of Socrates or earlier. Not only that but it has since been preached by a multitude of figures throughout history. It is a humanistic doctrine and not a religious one and therefore has nothing to do with whether or not an individual has faith in God.
The fact that we can arrive at the Golden Rule by secular means of reasoning does not mean that Jesus did so. Further, most of the advocates of the Golden Rule, whatever the form, from those thousands of years, advocate that rule in a religious/spiritual context.
Yes, the Golden rule is a humanistic doctrine. However, it is also true that the Golden Rule is a religious doctrine. The Golden Rule does not necessarily have anything to do with faith or God, but often the Golden Rule does. In the case of Jesus' teaching, to claim his teaching of the Golden Rule is somehow not religious is to completely ignore the context of his teaching.
As the example of Jesus preaching "love thy neighbor" is an example of religious teaching, and is a matter of faith on par with love for God; if loving someone is good for the person being loved, faith can
be good for someone other than the individual with faith.
Subjective faith demands that an individual's faith cannot be of benefit to others because if it were it would not be characteristic of subjectivity. The very nature of subjectivity does not care the least about the benefit of others, only the benefit of itself. Therefore since faith is subjective an individual's faith cannot be of benefit to others.
But obviously faith can
benefit people other than he who has faith. Faith does not necessarily benefit others, but it most certainly can. As a matter of faith for billions of people, helping others is paramount. Regardless of your conception of faith as subjective or whatever else, it is a matter of empirical fact that the faith of some people is inextricably connected to helping others.
Having faith in God has nothing to do with being considerate of others. Having faith in God simply means the a passionate belief in the existance of God on an individual basis. Wheter or not someone is considerate of others has nothing to do with a person's faith, it has everything to do with the person just simply being inconsiderate.
Does any of this show that faith cannot
be these things? Obviously in the Christian tradition, having faith and being considerate of others have a great deal to do with one another - they are the two most important commandments.
While faith may not necessarily be tied to how we treat people, faith certainly can, and in many cases does have a great deal to do with how we treat other people.
Faith doesn't cultivate anything.
Then faith isn't anything.
you've been frequently refusing to acknowledge an individual's personal responsibility for their actions, and instead blame them on something that is completely unrelated - their faith in God. The only ones we have to blame for our shortcomings are ourselves, not our faith.
Where have I claim that we are not responsible for our faith?
Really, making things up is not helpful in any discussion.
No, being able to distinguish between subjectivity and non-subjectivity. If something is subjective then the only one that stands to benefit is the individual alone since that is the very nature of subjectivity.
Then do some things for me:
1. Define subjective
2. Show that if something is subjective it can only benefit the individual
Because I fail to realize how being subjective demands that something only benefit the individual. Subjective is relative to objective, the former designating the bias of one perspective, the later being related to objects outside the mind.
Again, I mention the teachings of Jesus as an example. Central to Christian faith is 'love thy neighbor'. Now, if we take your view of subjectivity and faith, we have to say that loving someone does not benefit the person being loved. I think you have some explaining to do.