5

John 20:29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Hebrews 11:1 Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

2 Corinthians 5:7 For we live by faith, not by sight.

All 3 verses indicate that faith is not-seen. Is faith by definition not-seen?

Would God be happy with a person who believes in His promise (P) to him with 0 physical evidence or worse the evidence is actually against the fulfillment of P?

What kind of physical evidence did Noah have to believe that God was going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens?

God says P to M.
V1: M believes P because God says it and acts accordingly before seeing P fulfilled.
V2: M asks to see evidence that P would come true.
Would God be more satisfied with V1? We need to look at the issue from God's point of view, not from man's point of view.

Can anyone give me a concrete example of blind faith in God after God has spoken P to him?

There is no such thing because blind faith is faith.

  • It would have been, were Jesus never to have performed any miracles within His own lifetime, on the basis of which one could then reasonably believe in (or be open to) the possibility of other future miracles, such as His resurrection (John 20:29) and second coming (Hebrews 11:1). – Lucian May 13 at 14:21
  • 1
    Where, in scripture, do you ever read the expression 'blind faith'. ? The world seeth me no more, but ye see me, is true to this day. – Nigel J May 13 at 16:17
  • The question then becomes what is the difference between faith and the so-called blind faith. – Tony Chan May 13 at 16:48
  • @Nigel we see Jesus today with our spiritual eyes. – Tony Chan May 13 at 18:07
  • 5
    "Blind faith" is faith based on zero evidence. God never askes that of anyone. – Dottard May 13 at 21:38
3

I have been thinking about your question and about what is really at the heart of it. I do not believe the term "blind' faith is really the proper way to express what I believe you are asking, but I think I understand what you are looking for. Allow me, if you will, to first offer this observation about faith and then I will give you an example from Abraham rather than Noah to illustrate my point. If you would still like to see how this show up in the example of Noah, I will be happy to provide that for you.

Faith is from the word πίστις which means 'to be persuaded.' The word is translated in the NT as both faith and belief and reflects two interlocking dynamics. The first is the mental acceptance of a set of facts. The second is the action that responds to that acceptance. Belief is the fundamental structure for salvation but belief is never presented in scripture as exclusively an intellectual exorcise. Biblical faith is more than just a simple acknowledgement of a set of revealed truths. Faith is always presented as a behavior structure that actively responds to the word of God. James makes the point that faith apart from obedience to the will of God is not faith. Faith is legitimized only when it is linked to action. We see this in a number of examples given by the Hebrew writer. In Hebrews 11, belief/faith is inseparably linked to an active response that legitimizes what the mind has accepted as true. Without obedience to the will of God, there is no acknowledgement of faith. By faith those offered as examples of faith did what God commanded. Abraham And his sacrifice of Isaac is one of the examples given by the Hebrew writer.

There are truths we can understand from our observation of the natural world, but there are also truths that cannot be ascertained from our observation of the natural world. An observation of our field of experience will only take one so far. It is impossible for logic to breech the threshold into the eternal dimension of God. That requires the element of faith.

When Abraham acquiesced to offer Isaac, he did not conclude that God could raise Isaac from the dead based on any logical exercise. There is nothing in the world of man that could possibly lead Abraham to conclude through any logical process that someone could be raised from the dead to rejoin the living. Abraham had to look beyond logic to conclude the possibility of a resurrection. Logically, the facts are as follows:

  1. Knife to the throat = an absolute outcome – death.

  2. Fire to the flesh = absolute outcome – total destruction of the flesh.

These have always produced irreversible results – the death and total thermal consumption of the victim.

Abraham's experiences with offering sacrifices told him that sacrifices do not survive the ordeal; not ever! Human logic, based on human experience says, “If I do this my son will be irretrievably dead and gone.” Something was going to have to happen in Abraham's reasoning processes that would transcend the logic of the human experiential index. Abraham faced a logical dilemma - If Isaac is dead, how will the promise be fulfilled. This seems to create a contradiction between the promise and the command.

Abraham based his decision not on any logical assumptions, but upon the faithfulness of God. Abraham’s conclusion reached beyond the boundaries of applied logic – “God is able to raise one even from the dead.” This is certainly not a logical conclusion. How could Abraham possibly know this? He had no physical evidence to support such an extraordinary conclusion. The text never says that this knowledge was ever revealed to Abraham. He had never had a sacrifice get up off the altar and follow him home after the ordeal. He had had no experience with the dead being raised to life. The only thing Abraham’s experience could confirm to him about death was that logically, it is always decisive and irreversible. This is the limit of the logical approach. Abraham had to believe in something he could not see or otherwise prove empirically. But this was not blind faith. This was faith that was rooted in the revealed promise of God to make his descendants as numerous as the stars of the sky. Abraham came to understand that the realization of the promise was not dependent upon Isaac, whether he is dead or alive. The realization of the promise was dependent solely upon the will and the power of God. There were no other antecedent factors. The Hebrew writer confirms for us that faith was the only factor that drove Abraham’s conclusion and moved him to honor God's demand to sacrifice Isaac. The result of this was that God acknowledged Abraham as faithful, not logical.

| improve this answer | |
  • Thank you for your input. – Tony Chan May 14 at 21:32
  • You are most welcome. – oldhermit May 14 at 21:34
  • Excellent answer. The Hebrew words for believe and faith are action words. They are not an empty intellectual rearrangement of neurons in the brain. – Gina May 15 at 6:51
2

First, "blind faith" is never discussed in the Bible. Christians are not asked to believe or trust on the basis of no evidence.

The greatest passage about faith/belief in the Bible is Heb 11. It is precisely here in Heb 11 that the author marshals a vast amount of evidence that God is faithful - he tells us to look at all the things God has done, and on that basis to trust God for the things not yet seen - the future.

This pattern is repeated often in Scripture - look at how often the Jews rehearsed their history of God's greatness and miraculous dealings; note Ps 105 and 106 and many others. Note the approach of Stephen at his trial in Acts 7, etc.

Now, it is a simple matter of observation that some require more convincing than others - doubting Thomas is the classic example quoted by the OP. In fact, Thomas has plenty of evidence of Jesus' resurrection from the personal testimony of others but refused to believe until he had personal, physical experience. Jesus correctly rebukes Thomas for this approach in John 20:29, simply because it is not possible to do this with everything in life.

(There are many things of everyday life that we must believe on the basis of other's testimony rather than personal experience.)

Having said that, Thomas actually possessed evidence from Jesus Himself because of Jesus' life and miracles in the years before Jesus' death. Thomas (and the other disciples as well) should have known that Jesus would rise from the dead but did not understand.

Jesus blessed those who believe on the basis of the adequate evidence that God provides each of us. John 20:29.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Exactly. The faith of those who have not seen is the faith of someone who has complete confidence that their spouse will be waiting for them when they get off the plane/bus/train even though they can't see their spouse and even if they can't contact them. – curiousdannii May 14 at 6:27
1

With the very good answers already provided, I would just add that God does not expect, nor has He every asked for "blind faith." That phrase is an invention of man.

"And dost thou wish to know, O vain man, that the faith apart from the works is dead? " (James 2:20, YLT)

Our faith in God is demonstrated by our works, our response and answer to His commands. Remember Gideon's requests to have the signs repeated so he could be sure he did not assume or misread the evidence God had presented?

"36 And Gideon saith unto God, `If Thou art Saviour of Israel by my hand, as Thou hast spoken,

37 lo, I am placing the fleece of wool in the threshing-floor: if dew is on the fleece alone, and on all the earth drought -- then I have known that Thou dost save Israel by my hand, as Thou hast spoken;'

38 and it is so, and he riseth early on the morrow, and presseth the fleece, and wringeth dew out of the fleece -- the fulness of the bowl, of water.

39 And Gideon saith unto God, `Let not Thine anger burn against me, and I speak only this time; let me try, I pray Thee, only this time with the fleece -- let there be, I pray Thee, drought on the fleece alone, and on all the earth let there be dew.'

40 And God doth so on that night, and there is drought on the fleece alone, and on all the earth there hath been dew." (Judg. 6:36-40, YLT)

Gideon asked God to provide more than one sign to be fully assured in his own mind of what God wanted Gideon to do. God was patient with Gideon's need to fully know for sure.

And, that is the crux. We cannot have faith in something or someone we do not know. The more we know, the stronger our faith, which results in the actions we undertake to be as God would have us to be, and to stand for Him.

"so then the faith [is] by a report, and the report through a saying of God," (Rom. 10:17, YLT)

| improve this answer | |
0

Believe the context of the verse to Thomas is important - He was referring to all of us who have not seen yet believe in the King of Kings. Hebrews verse defines it.

Jesus’ command is - “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭10:27‬ ‭NIV‬

The key word being ‘and with all your mind’. The Lord wants us to trust Him and love Him completely - heart, soul, might and mind.

So, no this is not about blind faith.

| improve this answer | |
  • Jesus' command is not as you quote. In Luke 10:27 Jesus is there stating what the Law requires. – Nigel J May 14 at 18:26
-1

Faith is when you get up in the morning and get on with it, believing in living, life. St Paul said that we must add knowledge to faith. Faith is only the first rung on the ladder towards spiritual growth.

| improve this answer | |
  • What is blind faith then? – Tony Chan May 14 at 23:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.