Blind faith is not Biblical faith
By Joel Furches
Noted British philosopher and humanist Bertrand Russell had this to say of the practice of “faith”:
"Where there is evidence, no one speaks of 'faith'. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence."
Allaboutreligion.org defines Biblical Faith this way :
“Faith is acceptance of what we cannot see but feel deep within our hearts… For Christians, believing is not seeing… Why do we believe, because the Bible tells us so. We were not there when Jesus was crucified, yet we believe. We were not there when Jesus rose again, yet we believe.
“…This is the theological virtue known as faith, believing what we did not see because we know it in our hearts to be true.”
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary gives this definition of Faith:
“Firm belief in something for which there is no proof; complete trust.”
Often Christians feel that they are forced to choose between blind religious trust or intellectual skepticism in opposition to scripture. They either believe or they disobey. Asking questions and seeking support for their beliefs becomes a form of doubt and is seen as a weakness.
'Like' The Poached Egg on Facebook! Follow @ThePoachedEgg The classic teaching on the subject of faith in the Bible comes from the book of Hebrews, and specifically chapter 11 which begins with this definition of faith:
“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.”
Many take this as support to the “belief without evidence” definition of faith.
Among the potential problems with this view of faith is the way it impacts the process Biblical interpretation itself. If faith is, indeed, a spiritual conviction that defies evidential support, then one is free to interpret scriptural passages based on what they feel the passage means. When someone challenges them to back their interpretation up with such tools as cross-referencing or contextual support, that person is asking for evidence, defying their faith and insulting their spiritual conviction. This is exactly the trap that one falls into if one reads Hebrews 11:1 without considering the context in which it is given…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>
Blind faith is not Biblical faith | Examiner.com
RECOMMENDED APOLOGETICS RESOURCES FOR FURTHER READING:
Don't Check Your Brains at the Door: Know What You Believe and Why
Wow. Fundy atheists showing up right on cue. All the time they talk about evidence and if they believe in evidence, then how about this?
Give evidence of a NT Lexicon or a Koine Greek Lexicon that lists the word "pistis" which in the NT is often translated as faith as "Belief without evidence." Please. Give a scholarly source. I don't want to hear new atheist groupthink by people too lazy to research on their own.
Of course, if you have no evidence, please go ahead and admit it. After all, atheists are truly people of faith.
Posted by: Nick | 01/22/2013 at 09:05 PM
Do you really not see the flaw in seeking evidence to support a belief? How about seeking evidence without being invested in the outcome? What you said exposes a huge problem with Christianity, the need to only devote attention to that which suggests a viewpoint in support of your beliefs as opposed to seeking truth and objectivity. It's insane to be so loyal to that which is unproven, being in denial to feel justified in not having the courage to think beyond obedience to dogma.
Posted by: Me | 01/22/2013 at 03:09 PM
If you have evidence then faith becomes redundant. For those who say they have evidence to support their beliefs, they are essentially unfaithful.
Posted by: Me | 01/22/2013 at 03:00 PM