It is my contention that faith is not blind as though it were an unsubstantiated and ethereal belief in an object in which it is placed, but is in fact the evidence for the absolute truth of its object.
Faith is the evidence of the truth of its object.
If one believes they have faith in something that they don't know beyond a shadow of a doubt to be true, then what they have is blind faith.
Faith is the action and out working of the knowledge of absolute truth.
Blind faith is wishful hoping that something is true, but has no assurance. Blind faith is without substance and is illusory.
Your thoughts?
Originally posted by josephwno.
It is my contention that faith is not blind as though it were an unsubstantiated and ethereal belief in an object in which it is placed, but is in fact the evidence for the absolute truth of its object.
Faith is the evidence of the truth of its object.
If one believes they have faith in something that they don't know beyond a shadow of a doubt to be t ...[text shortened]... true, but has no assurance. Blind faith is without substance and is illusory.
Your thoughts?
that is not what faith means.
faith is holding something to be true without proof.
blind faith is holding something to be true despite proof to the contrary.
Example:
Faith:
"I believe my wife is not cheating on me"
Blind faith:
"I still believe my wife is not cheating on me even though a private detective showed me pictures of her and another man entering a hotel room together"
16 Mar 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziYou are defining "blind faith" as "false faith" which is the faith evolutionists have in Darwin's theory of evolution from ape to man and the billions of years of past history of the earth, when the facts show otherwise.
no.
that is not what faith means.
faith is holding something to be true without proof.
blind faith is holding something to be true despite proof to the contrary.
Example:
Faith:
"I believe my wife is not cheating on me"
Blind faith:
"I still believe my wife is not cheating on me even though a private detective showed me pictures of her and another man entering a hotel room together"
However, it is possible that blind faith can be "saving faith" also. That would be like the faith we Christians have that Christ arose from the dead to provide salvation to all that will believe on Him. 😏
HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
16 Mar 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziHis version is pretty straightforward Hebrews 11:1:
no.
that is not what faith means.
faith is holding something to be true without proof.
blind faith is holding something to be true despite proof to the contrary.
Example:
Faith:
"I believe my wife is not cheating on me"
Blind faith:
"I still believe my wife is not cheating on me even though a private detective showed me pictures of her and another man entering a hotel room together"
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Hebrews 11:1)
So "...faith is... the evidence..."
And you are right. Faith is holding something to be true without proof.
There is a subtlety here, that the holder of faith has all the proof he needs, which is none at all. All he needs to see is that he has faith.
You have to be there, like I once was. Or perhaps, like I thought I once was.
This means there is nothing to be gained by argumentation.
16 Mar 15
Originally posted by JS357
His version is pretty straightforward Hebrews 11:1:
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Hebrews 11:1)
So "...faith is... the evidence..."
And you are right. Faith is holding something to be true without proof.
There is a subtlety here, that the holder of faith has all the proof he needs, which is non ...[text shortened]... erhaps, like I thought I once was.
This means there is nothing to be gained by argumentation.
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
(Romans 10:17 KJV)
16 Mar 15
Originally posted by josephwThere are many things you and I do not agree fully on, but this is the closest yet.
It is my contention that faith is not blind as though it were an unsubstantiated and ethereal belief in an object in which it is placed, but is in fact the evidence for the absolute truth of its object.
Faith is the evidence of the truth of its object.
If one believes they have faith in something that they don't know beyond a shadow of a doubt to be t ...[text shortened]... true, but has no assurance. Blind faith is without substance and is illusory.
Your thoughts?
I endorse the message you present here.
Others, notably atheists, but also some theists, will not get the truth of this and will disagree. They are allowed to disagree, but as usual, that doesn't make them right.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by Zahlanzi
no.
that is not what faith means.
faith is holding something to be true without proof.
blind faith is holding something to be true despite proof to the contrary.
No, I don't think so when we talk about faith in God.
Example:
Faith:
"I believe my wife is not cheating on me"
Blind faith:
"I still believe my wife is not cheating on me even though a private detective showed me pictures of her and another man entering a hotel room together"
No, this is a kind of presumption. If you start to read through the Bible you will see that there is often a distinction between the faith of someone and the presumption of someone.
One of the most striking examples I first noticed was in First Samuel chapters 1,2. The sinful nation of Israel were being bothered by the Philistines. They said to themselves in essence
"Aren't we the people of Yahweh. Let's get the ark of the covenant and march behind it into battle."
They shouted, they hollered, they made all kind of noise assuming that in any spiritual condition the ark of the covenent would assure them victory. Well, the noise they made shook the ground. But when they went out to fight the Philistines, they were sorely trounced and the ark was captured.
When I first read this I said "Hmmm. It didn't work to use that holy object like a magic charm. The Israelites PRESUMED that God would deliver them a Joshua style victory regardless of their estrangement from God.
This was not faith. And this was not the last time they had to learn that lesson. Faith in God is not presumption and it is not treating the this of God as magic charms.
The point of my post is that the careful reader will notice that the Bible develops this distinction - true Faith and Trust in God verses some kind of foolish presumption.
17 Mar 15
Originally posted by Suzianne" They are allowed to disagree, but as usual, that doesn't make them right"
There are many things you and I do not agree fully on, but this is the closest yet.
I endorse the message you present here.
Others, notably atheists, but also some theists, will not get the truth of this and will disagree. They are allowed to disagree, but as usual, that doesn't make them right.
nop. disagreeing doesn't make one right. having some fact to support one's opinion can make one right. in this case, the definition of the concept of faith.
17 Mar 15
Originally posted by sonshipmoses didn't have faith. moses had knowledge. god was speaking TO him, he allowed him to terrorize the people of egypt with bio and chemical weapons.no.
that is not what faith means.
faith is holding something to be true without proof.
blind faith is holding something to be true despite proof to the contrary.
No, I don't think so when we talk about faith in God.
[quote]
Example:
Faith:
"I believe my wife is not cheating on me"
Blind faith:
"I still believe my wife ...[text shortened]... develops this distinction - true Faith and Trust in God verses some kind of foolish presumption.
the character moses KNEW god existed.
we don't know. we have no way of knowing if moses existed, if he did that horrible crap in egypt, if he did wonder the desert for 40 years. we have no proof. some may choose to have faith that it happened.
faith is a personal choice. knowledge is not. knowledge exist whether you believe it or not.
sure, the fact that god exists may be knowledge that we have not discovered for certain yet. until such proof is found, the existence of god is a matter of faith.
17 Mar 15
2 edits
Originally posted by josephwWhen Job was tested, he had every reason to doubt God. Job was praised by the bible for having blind faith in a god that let his family members die, his riches disappear and diseases afflict his entire body... all at the same time, with no knowledge of why this happened, despite Job being nothing but faithful to God.
It is my contention that faith is not blind as though it were an unsubstantiated and ethereal belief in an object in which it is placed, but is in fact the evidence for the absolute truth of its object.
Faith is the evidence of the truth of its object.
If one believes they have faith in something that they don't know beyond a shadow of a doubt to be t ...[text shortened]... true, but has no assurance. Blind faith is without substance and is illusory.
Your thoughts?
Job had nothing to hold on to but blind faith, and in the end was rewarded for it. Christians claim that blind faith isn't what their religion is about, yet that is exactly what their religion endorses. Blind faith is considered a virtue in the bible.
17 Mar 15
Originally posted by vivifyfaith can be defined as "having complete trust in someone". someone that obviously, you know exists. job is in fact someone who had that kind of faith in god, that god would take care of him in the end. even the misfortunes that happened to him.
When Job was tested, he had every reason to doubt God. Job was praised by the bible for having blind faith in a god that let his family members die, his riches disappear and diseases afflict his entire body... all at the same time, with no knowledge of why this happened, despite Job being nothing but faithful to God.
Job had nothing to hold on to but bl ...[text shortened]... that is exactly what their religion endorses. Blind faith is considered a virtue in the bible.
i am not talking about this meaning, but rather the second, which says that faith is believing in something without proof. from there i argue that blind faith is believing in something despite proof to the contrary. blind faith is still believing the global flood happened despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
they are arguing that faith alone can be sufficient proof for something's existence ? i can't even begin to fathom how they think that sounds even remotely intelligent.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by Zahlanzi
moses didn't have faith. moses had knowledge.
Moses had knowledge from his great education in Egypt. But he also had to have faith.
Hebrews 11:24 - "By FAITH Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter. (24)
Choosing rather to be ill treated with the people of God then to have the temporary enjoyment of sin, (25)
Considering the reproach of the Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he looked away to the reward. (26)
Do you see? Moses had faith. Even his fleeing from Egypt after his failed attempt to liberate his brothers, was in faith -
Hebrews 11:27 - "By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king, for he persevered as one seeing the unseen One."
Do you see? He had faith as one "seeing the unseen One"
By faith he instituted the Passover too -
Hebrews 11:28 - "By faith he instituted the Passover and the pouring out of he blood so that the one destroying the firstborn would not touch them."
Moses acted by faith there. He also passed through the Red Sea by faith -
Hebrews 11:29 - "By faith they passed through the Red Sea as through dry land, in which the Egyptians, while making the attempt, were swallowed up."
god was speaking TO him, he allowed him to terrorize the people of egypt with bio and chemical weapons.
You are jumping to another subject.
The immediate thing you need to learn is that Moses did act on faith.
the character moses KNEW god existed.
So what?
All who have faith KNOW God exists pretty much.
What kind of false dichotomy are you attempting to make?
we don't know.
It is alright to speak for yourself.
Moses got to know God existed.
Moses also had faith in this existing God that He would do this or that, according to His promises.
we have no way of knowing if moses existed, if he did that horrible crap in egypt, if he did wonder the desert for 40 years. we have no proof. some may choose to have faith that it happened.
You're jumping around trying to say knowledge verses faith, Moses was a terrorist, we have no knowledge of God, and there is no proof of the truth of the Exodus account.
You're carpet bombing. You're scatter shooting.
The only thing I feel to point out to you in this post is that you directly and rather ignorantly write that Moses had no faith. The book of Hebrews, let alone Exodus, Deuteronomy, and Numbers shows us the faith Moses had.
faith is a personal choice. knowledge is not. knowledge exist whether you believe it or not.
So what if faith is a personal choice?
Knowledge is not always verses faith.
And Moses had the great educational knowledge from Egypt and he had faith too. You are trying to form some false dichotomy between the two.
sure, the fact that god exists may be knowledge that we have not discovered for certain yet. until such proof is found, the existence of god is a matter of faith.
Speak for yourself then if you want to take the position of Agnosticism.
You assume that what you know, everyone else must know the same.
Maybe it is just a matter of timing.
What others know, you will sometime in the future, also come to know.
You cannot insist that no one else knows of God because you do not know of God. I know of God. I know God through Jesus. And the fact that there is subjective choice involved doesn't make God not real.
When I was single, I did not know of marriage, subjectively, personally. Yet some others knew of marriage. Then the day came when I also knew what others knew - the experience of marriage.
I know God today.
17 Mar 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziIf all you have or have experienced is the 'textbook definition' of faith, then you probably have no faith at all. Do you have any experiential concept of faith, or do you only know what faith is because you can find it in a dictionary?
" They are allowed to disagree, but as usual, that doesn't make them right"
nop. disagreeing doesn't make one right. having some fact to support one's opinion can make one right. in this case, the definition of the concept of faith.
17 Mar 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziAt the risk of summoning up a "no true faith" argument, I will just say that those who have actually experienced faith in a 'life-changing' way do have a 'knowledge' they have gained from their faith.
moses didn't have faith. moses had knowledge. god was speaking TO him, he allowed him to terrorize the people of egypt with bio and chemical weapons.
the character moses KNEW god existed.
we don't know. we have no way of knowing if moses existed, if he did that horrible crap in egypt, if he did wonder the desert for 40 years. we have no proof. som ...[text shortened]... iscovered for certain yet. until such proof is found, the existence of god is a matter of faith.
I invite others to 'naysay' me all they want. But those who have experience with what faith is will agree with me. I'm frankly surprised that there are those who call themselves Christian who only understand faith from the dictionary definition.