What is the difference between faith and blind faith in God's word?

[tonychanyt]

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 three verses indicate that faith is not-seen. Is faith, by definition, not-seen?

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

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.

Berean Literal Bible, Matthew 18:

3 Truly I say to you, if you are not converted and become as the little children, you shall never enter into the kingdom of the heavens.

Strong's Greek: 3813. παιδίον (paidion) — 52 Occurrences

BDAG:
① a child, normally below the age of puberty, child
ⓐ very young child, infant, used of boys and girls. Of a newborn child
② one who is open to instruction, child
③ one who is treasured in the way a parent treasures a child, child

When my daughter was 5, I placed her on a high spot and told her to jump. Unhesitantly, she jumped, and I would catch her. She looked forward to this exercise with laughter. When she was 8, I repeated that experiment. It took me a couple of minutes to convince her to jump

 

[Mark Quayle]

John 20:


Hebrews 11:


2 Corinthians 5:


All three 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 against P's fulfillment?

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.

Good point. "Blind faith" is another human construction.

 

[Paleouss]

Hello tonychanyt, hope you are doing well.

There is no such thing because blind faith is faith.

My understanding is that "blind faith" is the rejection of rationality and evidence. In this sense the word "blind" refers to the presence of evidence that is not acknowledged. For example, many Christians might accuse an atheist of having blind faith. As C.S. Lewis said (I think it was Lewis), it took more faith to believe there was no God. Of course, atheists would claim the same of Christians.

In contrast, 'true' faith is the "belief" in the evidence of those unseen things to come. In other words, true faith takes the evidence and then makes the jump into faith. Blind faith is a jump of faith in spite of the evidence.

God in no way asks us to have faith without Him providing evidence. It is only that the evidence leaves room for faith. We have evidence that there was Jesus Christ, that he lived, and that he died, and that he rose again on the third day. We have the testimony of countless vessels to the life changing presence of the Holy Spirit.

God gives every one the witness of his creations. That creational “voice goes out through all the earth” (Psa 19:4), “declares” (Psa 19:1), “proclaims” (Psa 19:1), and “pours out speech” (Psa 19:2). We also see this very same active agent theme in Acts 14 when God “did not leave himself without witness” (Acts 14:16) by actively giving good through experiences of “rains”and “fruitful seasons” (Act 14:17); also in Job 12 when we are told that the beasts will “teach you”, the birds will “tell you”, the fish will “declare to you” (Job 12:8); and in Proverbs, “Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice” (Prov 1:20).

Faith is taking the evidence for the things not seen and taking that last step of faith in belief of those things not seen. Blind faith, well, God never asks us to have blind faith. In fact, everything I understand of the Bible challenges us to seek wisdom, truth, and evidence.

Keep seeking God's truth as if it were hidden treasure.

 

[Daniel9v9]

Thank you for thinking about this! It's a great question and perhaps it can be helpful to broaden it a little bit, but think about it in simple terms:

What’s the difference between a secret and a mystery?

• A secret stops being a secret once it's found out. For example, I could keep the colour of the watch I'm wearing a secret, but I'll tell you: It's black. Now it's no longer a secret.
• A mystery, on the other hand, in the biblical sense, is not something to be solved, but something that is beyond our reason.

What’s the difference between believing in holy mysteries and having blind faith?

• With holy mysteries, we actually do have reasons for believing in them:
• One reason has to do with who God is, in that He is almighty, incomprehensible. And this is something that extends to his works, what He does. (Isaiah 55:8-9)
• And the second reason has to do with what we are, namely, sinful humans, with limited and corrupted reason. (Isaiah 40:13)

Putting these things together:

• We trust in God and His works precisely because we know God, and in humility, we recognise that God is greater than we are.
• Unlike the teachings of some other religions and cults, the Bible is not a book of secrets! It’s an open book for all. It is, however, a book of mysteries! That is, deeply profound realities that make us wise!

So although we can't know everything about God, and what He has done, is doing, and has promised to do, we can know it sufficiently. And these things aren't some hidden secrets, but have been made public in time and history. So we can rejoice in that, even though God is too great to comprehend, and even though our minds have limits, Christ's work of salvation is a true historical reality, so we have history and truth on our side; we have reasons to believe, not merely blind faith. Thanks be to God!

 

[Clare73]

Thank you for thinking about this! It's a great question and perhaps it can be helpful to broaden it a little bit, but think about it in simple terms:

What’s the difference between a secret and a mystery?

• A secret stops being a secret once it's found out. For example, I could keep the colour of the watch I'm wearing a secret, but I'll tell you: It's black. Now it's no longer a secret.
• A mystery, on the other hand, in the biblical sense, is not something to be solved, but something that is beyond our reason.

Actually, "secret'" in the NT means something that has never before been revealed, it does not mean beyond our reason; e.g.,
God's purpose to sum up all things in Christ (Eph 1:9),
God's purpose to include both Jews and Gentiles in the NT church (Eph 3:3-6),
the change that will take place at the resurrection (1 Co 15:51),
the plan by which a remnant of both Gentiles and Jews will be included in his kingdom (Ro 11:25).

 

[Daniel9v9]

Actually, "secret'" in the NT means something that has never before been revealed, it does not mean beyond our reason; e.g.,
God's purpose to sum up all things in Christ (Eph 1:9),
God's purpose to include both Jews and Gentiles in the NT church (Eph 3:3-6),
the change that will take place at the resurrection (1 Co 15:51),
the plan by which a remnant of both Gentiles and Jews will be included in his kingdom (Ro 11:25).

Yeah, there's a difference between a revelation and holy mystery. A revelation is a word from God that cannot be discerned from nature. By holy mystery, we mean profound realities such as the Trinity or the two natures of Christ, which are above our reason, but are what God has revealed to us about Himself.

By secret, I mean that the Bible doesn't contain secrets that may be revealed to some but not to others. God's Word is an open book that is proclaimed to the whole world. Hopefully that clarifies!

God bless!

 

[Clare73]

Yeah, there's a difference between a revelation and holy mystery. A revelation is a word from God that cannot be discerned from nature.
By holy mystery, we mean profound realities such as the Trinity or the two natures of Christ, which are above our reason, but are what God has revealed to us about Himself.

However, that is not what the NT means by "mystery," as demonstrated in post #6.

"Mystery" is simply something which has never before been revealed to us, and not necessarily something hard to understand; e.g.,
the mystery of God's purpose to include both Jews and Gentiles in the NT church (Eph 3:3-6)

It was a "secret" until the NT.

 

[Daniel9v9]

However, that is not what the NT means by "mystery," as demonstrated in post #6.

"Mystery" is simply something which has never before been revealed to us, and not necessarily something hard to understand; e.g.,
the mystery of God's purpose to include both Jews and Gentiles in the NT church (Eph 3:3-6)

It was a "secret" until the NT.

Yes, that would be an example of something the OT foreshadowed, that culminated in Christ and is brought to light in the NT. (eg. Romans 16:25)

However, that’s not what’s meant by the expression holy mystery, though there’s certainly overlap. For example, when the NT talks about the mystery of Christ, it doesn’t only mean that Christ is for both Jew and Gentile, but it also has to do with who Christ is and what He has done for us, that Jesus is YHWH our Redeemer and God in flesh. So when we talk about a holy mystery that refers to a teaching or a reality that’s revealed by God but is above all reason, such as Jesus being fully man and fully God, or God being one, yet Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

For clarification, I’m not talking about mystery in a generic sense, but holy mystery which is a theological expression. The reason I talk about this is because people often confuse faith in holy mysteries, such as who Christ is, with blind faith. And my point is that a belief in Christ’s humanity and divinity, for example, is not something believed in blind faith, but for the two reasons given above, namely, due to who God is as Almighty and who we are as created beings with limited and sinful minds.

Hope this helps!

 

[KevinT]

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.

I'm a little confused. You defined "P" as "Promise", but I can't figure out what "M" means. I'm guessing M=Man

I feel God DOES give evidence to mankind, but at just the right amount. Doubting Thomas had lots of evidence of the resurrection of Christ -- just not the kind that he wanted initially.

To answer your question, I agree that V1 is better.

The web gives me this definition of faith:

Belief; the assent of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting solely and implicitly on his authority and veracity; reliance on testimony.

But I would define it as:

A thorough understanding of someone such that one may be confident that what they say is trustworthy, or an understanding of a situation such that one may be confident in how events will play out. -- source: me

I think the distinction between "faith" and "blind faith" is a bit artificial, and just differing in degree. It was easier for Mary to believe in Christ's resurrection because she saw Him face to face, and harder for Thomas because he missed out on the initial appearances of Jesus.
Why didn't Jesus perform the miracles that the Pharisee's demanded? Would it have helped them believe and head off problems? No.

KT

 

[Clare73]

Yes, that would be an example of something the OT foreshadowed, that culminated in Christ and is brought to light in the NT. (eg. Romans 16:25)

However, that’s not what’s meant by the expression holy mystery,

Where do we find "holy mystery" in the NT?

though there’s certainly overlap. For example, when the NT talks about the mystery of Christ, it doesn’t only mean that Christ is for both Jew and Gentile, but it also has to do with who Christ is and what He has done for us, that Jesus is YHWH our Redeemer and God in flesh. So when we talk about a holy mystery that refers to a teaching or a reality that’s revealed by God but is above all reason, such as Jesus being fully man and fully God, or God being one, yet Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

For clarification, I’m not talking about mystery in a generic sense, but holy mystery which is a theological expression. The reason I talk about this is because people often confuse faith in holy mysteries, such as who Christ is, with blind faith. And my point is that a belief in Christ’s humanity and divinity, for example, is not something believed in blind faith, but for the two reasons given above, namely, due to who God is as Almighty and who we are as created beings with limited and sinful minds.

Hope this helps!

 

[Daniel9v9]

Where do we find "holy mystery" in the NT?

Yeah, same as the word Trinity, it doesn't appear in the Bible but it's a short-hand to explain a reality that is revealed in the Bible. So if we say that we believe in the Trinity, we mean that we believe and worship one God, and that He is the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. And because He is uncreated, almighty, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, yet one, we call this reality a holy mystery.

But I can see that the expression is offensive to you, so I can explain the same by using Biblical language if you like. For example: God's thoughts are not our thoughts, nor are our ways His ways. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are God's ways higher than our ways, and His thoughts than our thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8–9)

Or, again, consider the reality that God, YHWH, is a man in Jesus Christ. This is something that goes against all logic, because how can that which is infinite be in that which is finite, yet this is what God's Word has revealed to us and we receive it by faith, but not in blind faith. Very simply, God is greater than we are, and we rejoice in that! Thanks be to God!

 

[Clare73]

Yeah, same as the word Trinity, it doesn't appear in the Bible but it's a short-hand

Nor is there another word in the Bible referring to Trinity that can be used, creating the necessity for the new word.

to explain a reality that is revealed in the Bible.

Not analogous. . .

There is no other word in the Bible referring to Trinity that can be used, whereas
we do have the word "mystery" in the NT to explain the reality, and the word of God needs no improving by man.

we call this reality a holy mystery.

And we have God's word "mystery," not our added word "holy," to explain the reality.

 

[Carl Emerson]

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

No they don't !!!

Faith comes from hearing the Word of Christ...

Take the three verses one by one.

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."

This speaks of a faith that has come through an encounter with the invisible Christ who speaks to the Human Spirit. The 'seeing' then does not have to be physical but is Spiritual.


Hebrews 11:

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

Again the physical things may not be seen but the hope of them appearing is sure.

They are seen with the Spiritual eyes of faith.



2 Corinthians 5:

7 For we live by faith, not by sight.

In Isaiah 11:3 we know that Jesus would not judge by what his eyes saw and his ears heard.

Again it is the physical appearance that we are rightly ignoring while holding onto what we have seen and heard Him say in the Spirit.

So faith properly understood is never blind.

We must learn to see and hear Him Spiritually to have faith.

Jesus could only do what He saw the Father doing.

 

[tonychanyt]

No they don't !!!

Let proposition P1 = Faith is not seen.

True?

 

[Carl Emerson]

By secret, I mean that the Bible doesn't contain secrets that may be revealed to some but not to others. God's Word is an open book that is proclaimed to the whole world. Hopefully that clarifies!

I totally disagree with this...

2 Corinthians 4:4
the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Galatians 3:22
But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

Let proposition P1 = Faith is not seen.

True?

No... It is 'seen' Spiritually.

Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

 

[Daniel9v9]

Nor is there another word in the Bible referring to Trinity that can be used, creating the necessity for the new word.

Not analogous. . .

There is no other word in the Bible referring to Trinity that can be used, whereas
we do have the word "mystery" in the NT to explain the reality, and the word of God needs no improving by man.

And we have God's word "mystery," not our added word "holy," to explain the reality.

I think it's great that you're concerned about using Biblical language! That's good and right! I understand that the expression is offensive to you, which I think is due to confusion. But in any case, you're free to not use it, and it's quite possible to talk about things in God's Word that are above our reason without using the expression. But what I'm saying, in very simple terms, is this:

Are there things in the Bible that are above our reason? Yes. Is there an expression for those things commonly used by the churches? Yes. Do we have to use the expression? No. Can we use the expression? Yes, because it's nothing more than a short-hand for a real Biblical reality. It doesn't mean that we're adding or subtracting or changing God's Word in any way if that's what you're worried about.

It sounds to me that we can agree on the content of the teaching but that you object to the expression, and that's fine.

 

[Daniel9v9]

I totally disagree with this...

2 Corinthians 4:4
the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Galatians 3:22
But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.





No... It is 'seen' Spiritually.

Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Sorry, I think perhaps you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not talking about spiritual blindness, but secrets in the sense of certain doctrines that are only revealed to some and not to other believers. That is, in some religions and cults, you have to progress through certain levels in order to learn new secrets which are confidential to those who are on the same level. I believe Scientology functions like this, and it may also be an element of Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses and some Eastern religions.

In our faith, however, we are called to proclaim the fullness of God's Word, in season and out of season. And also, just practically, there's nothing stopping anyone from buying and reading a Bible on their own. While there have been some branches of Christendom who have viewed this as negative, I think most churches now don't forbid anyone from reading a Bible. And as people read the Bible, they can find everything God is saying — there's no additional texts that are hidden or kept from them in that sense — this is what I mean by saying that the Bible is an open book, it's available for all and it's preached throughout the world for anyone to hear. That does not mean that everyone understands it rightly, but that's a separate point from the one I'm making.

Hopefully this clarifies! God bless!

 

[Paleouss]

it's available for all and it's preached throughout the world for anyone to hear. That does not mean that everyone understands it rightly, but that's a separate point from the one I'm making.

2 Corinthians 4:4
the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

As an added, two cents. 2 Cor 4:4, "blinded the minds" is not referring to the actual, physical act of "seeing". As I'm sure everyone knows. The unbelieving don't wonder around saying, "what book, I don't see a book" or "what words, this page is blank". The unbelieving 'see' the same thing we see, i.e., the book and the words. They read the same things we read, word-for-word. Those words are present in their minds just as it is the believers.

So what does it mean that "the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving?". For it surely doesn't imply actual, physical blindness. Or a lack of actual retention of the information.

(1Cor 2:14 NASB95)
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised...

I think that 1Cor 2:14 makes this more clear. The unbelieving are said to "not accept the things of the Spirit". They many times get the information, they process it, but they do not accept it, i.e., they are blind to it. So why don't they accept it?

1Cor 2:14 NASB95
...they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

So the unbelieving can read the same thing but they "appraise" it as "foolishness". They appraise it as foolishness because the conviction of the words are "spiritually appraised".

In this sense, the Word of God is available to all but blind to some because it is properly appraised spiritually.

Peace be with you brothers

 

[tonychanyt]

No... It is 'seen' Spiritually.

I see Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Clare73]

I think it's great that you're concerned about using Biblical language! That's good and right! I understand that the expression is offensive to you, which I think is due to confusion. But in any case, you're free to not use it, and it's quite possible to talk about things in God's Word that are above our reason without using the expression. But what I'm saying, in very simple terms, is this:

Are there things in the Bible that are above our reason? Yes. Is there an expression for those things commonly used by the churches? Yes. Do we have to use the expression? No. Can we use the expression? Yes, because it's nothing more than a short-hand for a real Biblical reality. It doesn't mean that we're adding or subtracting or changing God's Word in any way if that's what you're worried about.
It sounds to me that we can agree on the content of the teaching but that you object to the expression, and that's fine.

We don't improve on Gods word by our own altering and enhancing.