“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
Hebrews 11:1
Personally, and as you would already know from past postings, I have found this to mean "Now faith is made up of that which we hope is true, based on no evidence that it actually is true" Some may find that too inaccurate, but the way people apply it speaks for itself.
Outside of scripture, faith is defined as:
"A confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea or thing, that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence" -Dictionary.com
"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". -Accurate and Reliable Dictionary
"A firm belief in something for which there is no truth." -Merriam Webster Online Dictionary
"Belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof." -Encarta
The overly religious seem to believe that if one really really believes something that this qualifies for actually knowing it to be true. The believer asserts they are right simply because they believe they are right. This, of course, is delusional thinking.
This concept is best summed up by:
Step 1. Assume the Conclusion
Step 2. Assert your conviction
Repeat
On the other hand, knowing something is so can only be justified when it means it is demonstrable and measurable. Truth is simply whatever statement or belief can be shown to be actually true. Just having faith that something is true does not qualify nor can it be counted as knowledge based in fact . Unwavering faith that something is true is irrational and delusional by any definition.
Scripture assures the believer that even if they have the faith of a mustard seed, one can command a mountain to cast itself into the sea. Of course, this is nonsense and no one on earth has actually ever had this kind of faith or successfully pulled off this stunt.
“Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” ~Matthew 17:20-21
Luke evidently realized the insanity of such a statement on Matthew's part so adjusted the mountain to "mulberry bush" which seems more possible yet isn't either.
"He replied, "If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, 'Be uprooted and planted in the sea, and it will obey you. -Luke 17:6
"Every religion claims to believe as they do because of reason, education or intelligence given by their god in revelation. But whether they admit it or not, all of them are assuming their preferred conclusions on faith.... Believe as hard as you want to, but convincing yourself, however firmly, still can't change the reality of things. Seeing is believing but seeing isn't knowing. Believing isn't knowing. Subjective convictions are meaningless in science and eyewitness testimony is the least reliable form of evidence." Fundamental Falsehoods of Creationism, pg 123
Unfortunately, Tertullian of the Second Century CE set an unfortunate tone for those with the tendency towards a perverse and foolish kind of faith and many, especially in the more cultish COGs promote this foolishness to this day.
"We want no curious disputation after possessing Christ Jesus, no inquiring after enjoying the gospel! With our faith, we desire no further belief."
"And the Son of God died; it is by all means to be believed because it is absurd. And he was buried and rose again; the fact is certain because it is impossible."
"After Jesus Christ we have no need of speculation, after the Gospel no need of research. When we come to believe, we have no desire to believe anything else; for we begin by believing that is nothing else which we have to believe."
If you can't prove something isn't true does that mean that it is? If we "know in my heart it is so" or "trust and obey for there's no other way...", is that actually so? Is it a wise way to live one's life? Or is it delusional thinking and belief with a religious twist?
Growing up in the Dutch Reformed Church no one would ever have shunned medical attention or believed something in the kind of "faith" that may end in their loss of a job or their personal demise for not taking good medical care of themselves. No one got "anointed" with the understanding that, for sure, "the sick will be made well." I suspect they have been over that delusional kind of faith hundreds is not a thousand years ago.
Back to the scriptures on what it means to have faith.
John 20:29 "Blessed are they that have not seen, but yet believe"
Romans 14:22 "The faith that you have, have as YOUR OWN conviction"
2 Corintians 4:18 "We look not at things seen, but at things not seen"
2 Corinthians 5"7 "For we walk by faith, not by sight."
"Faith is the very opposite of reason and where faith is encouraged, reason is discouraged. We are expected to believe without reason; in fact, we are blessed if we readily believe the most outrageous, illogical, inconsistent, and contradictory claims from even the most credulous and questionable people without any evidence at all, according to the sermons of theologians past and present.
"... As you can see, where faith is encouraged, reason is discouraged. They're opposites. This is not just my interpretation but the common understanding of scholars and philosophers. Friedrich Nietzsche said, 'Faith means not wanting to know what is true' Or to put it another way, as Mark Twain did, ' Faith is believing what you know ain't so.'"
"Faith requires that we literally make-believe, that we presume, presuppose, and pretend that we ignore what we really do see, and imagine something is there when it apparently isn't. It means that we lie to ourselves and fool ourselves. Worse than that, faith requires that we believe the unbelievable." Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism pg 152-153
"In other words, faith assumes its own conclusions, believes impossible nonsense without reason and defends those beliefs against all reason to the contrary. It can't help but be wrong to some degree to start with, and any errors will never even be acknowledged, much less sought out or corrected, so that situation can never improve. However wrong it already is, is however wrong it will forever be. Faith offers no way to discover the real truth about anything, but it s a great way to stary wrong forever and never admit it-even to yourself." pg 154
Why bring this up again on my part? Because the kind of irresponsible "faith" the Churches of God promote is dangerous. I spent 26 years observing this kind of "faith" in WCG and not a little bit of time endeavoring to put some balance into the lives of those who insisted they were going to just "trust and obey and obey for there's no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey." We even sang that in the Church of my youth and THAT bothered me too! The difference in the two experiences is that what one trusted in and obeyed were seen differently and applied accordingly.
You don't have to die from Covid, a treatable staph infection or any other medical emergency to prove your faith. You don't have to tough out gallstones or peritonitis to prove your spiritual worth. You don't have to "send it all in" to prove your faith in a Dave Pack, who at this time is about as close to insanity as any COG ,"yep, that's me spoken of in the scriptures" cultish leader ever has come. You need not shun family or friends to show loyalty and faith in your delusional Church teachings. In many respects, it does not matter one bit what the Bible says, and one doesn't even have to struggle over what it means. It is simply irrelevant to today and I know that is not how most devote and faith filled fundamentalists think and certainly not what they would believe to be so. Nonetheless...
Thanks for listening and reading if so disposed. This foolish faith topic has always been an issue for me both in my own past as a pastor in WCG and to this day observing the foolish advice and behaviors of the near cultish Churches of God.
I would prefer the average Church of God member learn to stand up to their intrusive ministry and remind them when it is time for them to mind their own business and that you can successfully watch out for your own soul, thank you...
"Faith is the very opposite of Reason." Possibly nothing truer has ever been said. I think it the height of absurdity that, Christians, of all people delusional, would have the audacity to go after people who identify as a different gender from their biology.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteStep 1. Assume the Conclusion
Step 2. Assert your conviction
Goes on with the concept of the origin of life for sure. In spite of the fact that it has never been repeated or measured.
Dennis,
ReplyDeleteIf we read your treatise as an attack on the kind of faith which characterizes Fundamentalist Christians (Armstrongism being a convenient and excellent example), then many of us would agree with many of the observations that you make about that kind of faith. However, if we read your treatise as an attack on faith generally, then many of us will be compelled to note a number of flaws in the logic/reasoning presented here.
Your post is an articulate presentation of the philosophy of materialism. In other words, the view that the only things that exist in the universe are the things which we (humans) can perceive/experience through our five senses - that only MATERIAL things exist. As you well know, however, this view is NOT universal among intellectuals, scientists, or philosophers. In other words, what about the immaterialists and idealists? Your definition and description of faith is based on the materialist perspective on the nature of reality, but it ignores the perspective of a George Berkeley who contends that no material things exist (rejecting the notion that mind-independent things or substances exist)! It ignores the implications of Schrödinger's Cat about the dependence of things at the atomic/sub-atomic level on the presence of an observer. It ignores Max Tegmark's observations about us being part of a mathematical construct and "observer moments."
Moreover, I believe that the notion that faith and reason must always stand in contradiction to each other represents a logical fallacy - the false dilemma. In part 2 and 3 of this comment, I'm going to include a recent post of my own on this very subject which I think demonstrates that faith and reason are not necessarily mutually exclusive concepts.
(To be continued)
Too many Atheists and Christians believe that faith is incompatible with reason. This belief blinds both sides to how faith and reason actually relate to each other and consequently distorts their understanding of them as concepts. In short, they view faith as being the antithesis of reason - opposites of each other. Of course, Christians believe that faith is superior to reason, and atheists believe that reason is superior to faith (and never the twain shall meet). From this perspective, faith is defined as a belief in something that cannot be sensed by humans (without evidence), and reason is defined as arriving at a conclusion about something by employing logical thinking (relying on evidence).
ReplyDeleteHowever, other folks who have considered these issues have offered alternative definitions for faith and reason which demonstrate that the contest between them is an illusion! In the article Are Faith and Reason Compatible? by Greg Koukl (At "Stand to Reason, Clear-Thinking Christianity"), reason is defined as the process of evaluating whether or not there is "adequate justification for a belief." Likewise, the same article defines faith as having three components: 1) the object - the "something or someone you have faith in," 2) the content - the "details about what it means to put your faith in that thing," and 3) the trust or commitment that demonstrates your faith. The article went on to observe: "If you define what reason is, and you define what faith is, you realize that there’s no conflict. Reason assesses, faith trusts. Reason assesses whether or not something or someone is trustworthy, and then faith believes that certain things are true in light of the reasons. Not blind faith, but a reasonable step of trust."
(Continued)
The folks over at Capturing Christianity liked the logic behind Greg Koukl's definitions (which Greg admitted are really David Horner's definitions). In their article On the Conflict Between Faith and Reason, they point out that the way that many Christians and atheists define faith contradicts principles laid out in Scripture. We read: "As Greg Koukl points out, if this definition were correct, then faith increases as knowledge decreases. And so, giving a fact-based defense of Christianity would be misguided. It would produce the opposite of faith. However, Peter commands believers in 1 Peter 3:15 to always be 'prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks for a reason of the hope that is in you.' Moreover, Paul, author of 2/3 of the books in the New Testament, gave similar commands in 2 Cor 10:5, 2 Tim 4:2, Phil 1:16, and Eph 5:11. So it turns out this definition is scripturally absurd, it leads to contradiction." The article went on to point out that Paul wrote to the saints of Corinth that "if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins…. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied." (I Corinthians 15:17, 19) In other words, "according to Paul, we need more than hopes and dreams for our faith to be worth anything."
ReplyDeleteMoreover, this is consistent with the famous definition of faith found in the New Testament epistle to the Hebrews (11:1). Indeed, we read there that the anonymous author of the epistle looked at faith as a kind of "evidence." This, in turn, is followed by many tangible examples of the power and reality of faith exercised by biblical personalities down through the ages. Paul wrote to the Romans that "the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead." (Romans 1:20) In other words, faith is supported by real/tangible evidence! Indeed, in the Gospel of John, we are told that Jesus once pointed to the works which he had done as a justification for belief in him! (John 14:11) Scripture also informs us that David considered/thought about the moon and stars in connection with his faith in God and his plans for humankind (Psalms 8:3-5) Hence, from a Scriptural perspective, we see that evidence compliments faith, and that reason is portrayed as being consistent with that faith!
(There's going to be a part 4)
Nevertheless, those Christians who insist on faithism/fideism are fond of pointing out that "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." (Proverbs 14:12) Well, there you have it! Human reasoning is flawed and inconsistent with faith! Really? What are the Proverbs? Weren't they designed to impart wisdom and instruction in righteousness? (Proverbs 1:1-10) Hence, isn't the proverb quoted above clearly dealing with human reasoning about morality - right and wrong? In other words, isn't making this statement a blanket condemnation of all human reasoning twisting/perverting its clear intent and meaning? What about God's invitation for us to reason together with him? (Isaiah 1:18) What about Peter's instruction to be prepared to give an answer which was already referenced above? (I Peter 3:15) What about that instruction to meditate on God's laws? (Joshua 1:8) If the other guys are right, what is there to think about? What did Paul mean when he told the saints at Thessalonica to "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good"? Why were the Bereans more noble than other folks? (Acts 17:11) So, we see that thinking/reasoning is NOT inconsistent with faith. In fact, it supports it!
ReplyDeleteEverything we do or believe in is based on faith. Everything. So it is the construction of or the makeup of your faith that is most important.
ReplyDeleteTonto said...
ReplyDeleteStep 1. Assume the Conclusion
Step 2. Assert your conviction
Goes on with the concept of the origin of life for sure. In spite of the fact that it has never been repeated or measured.
==================================
Science, at the present time, has no explanation, and doesn't claim to have an explanation as to the origin of life. There are multiple theories regarding the origin of the first cell.
That the evolution of all life AFTER however it did originate over the past 4.5 billion years, is well understood
ReplyDeletePS This is NOT a posting about the origin of life, evolution or any of the sciences. It is about the nature of religious faith and its drawbacks. Let's not stray off into the endless and oft repeated controversies and arguments about one believing in or not believing in evolution or the origin of life stuff. Thanks
Lonnie Notes: " So, we see that thinking/reasoning is NOT inconsistent with faith. In fact, it supports it!"
ReplyDelete=====================
In a religious context, where " “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." it is inconsistent and no way to get to how things really are as opposed to how we want or personally need them to be.
While every sincere Christian I know wants to claim that their faith is bolstered by their clear thinking, research, proofs and such, that is not the nature of Biblical Faith. If you believe that any human can walk on water, you believe that in faith because one said he did. There is no evidence this is possible unless the water is frozen.
If you believe the tale of Noah as literally true, you do so in faith and not in any reality or factual sense. It falls apart in that realm.
If one believes the genuinely dead can rise from the literally dead, they do it by faith that someone is telling them the truth. It is not a matter of "I can prove it". You can't and never can prove a religious belief.
So, my perspective is not just about WCG/COG and fundamentalist faith abuses. It is about the nature of faith and that being belief and practice in that that for which there is no proof and often to one's personal harm. Near death experiences are near death and not actual death. The story of Lazarus is just a story and has to be taken in faith. The facts of human decomposition after four days goes against it being literally true or is the one billions exception which is also not a good way to prove anything.
Big topic. But to be clear, I am speaking of faith as opposed to facts and proof of anything being so and not in a limited COG context. I am well aware of the apologetics that seem needed to assure one that they aren't believing with "blind faith". "Blind faith" is an oxymoron as implied in "the evidence of things not seen". That's blindness by any definition.
Using evidence that is unseen is not unlike saying "You MUST RELAX" The "MUST" puts a lot of pressure on the world "RELAX" :)
I get your perspective Lonnie. It once would have been mine. I just see Faith now as no substitute for proof of anything and certainly not something to make me do that which makes me uncomfortable yet lacking "faith" if I don't do it according to some church or minister. I hate to see others succumbing to the same kind of pressure put on them by others who think they know best.
OK then wait until the time when it can be seen and the hope realized.
ReplyDeleteThis is a fascinating topic and a very thoughtful, respectful debate. I appreciate that.
ReplyDeleteJust to add my two cents, I agree with Lonnie's explanation. I would only add one thing to it. Many of the things that Jesus did while here on earth were witnessed by many people. What we, as believers, are asked to do is put our faith in both the prediction of His coming (for example) and the reality that He did actually come to earth. The subsequent contemporaneous accounts, are a confirmation of the reality of the object of our faith. So one could look at a prediction of an event...It would take a certain amount of faith to believe and then wait for it to happen, but then it does, thereby confirming the reality of the prediction. That is an exercise of our faith. In other words, three separate things, occurring at different times, all came together to confirm the narrative. 1). Jesus would be born. 2) Jesus was born and 3) He did things written in advance of His birth to confirm He was who He said He was. We have multiple layers of witnesses to the prediction, the actual event(s) taking place and the confirmation of our faith when the predictions had, in fact, become the reality. So you have a kind of three layered confirmation.
Surely the God who, in my opinion, created all of us, would know that we would need some confirmation of events for those who would NOT be there at the time they occurred. To me that takes both sides of the debate and unites them. The faith is confirmed by the reality. That is how we can have faith in yet future prophecies coming to pass, just as they did before. They compliment each other, rather than being polar opposites.
The Problem With Faith: Too many people put too much faith in false prophets.
ReplyDeleteDennis wrote, ""Now faith is made up of that which we hope is true, based on no evidence that it actually is true"
ReplyDeleteThis is not a definition of Christian faith. In fact, it is a definition of being gullible. Someone promises you a candy bar. And you say that the substance of the candy bar is the fact that you believe you are going to receive it. And the evidence that you have of the candy bar is the fact that you believe you are going to receive it. This is not secular life as we know it. If you get hungry, are you going to unwrap and eat your belief?
Christian faith results from the operation of the Holy Spirit within the mind and heart of the believer. It is the faith of Jesus imparted to Christians. Through the Holy Spirit, Jesus lives in the Christian. You cannot really convincingly communicate those concepts to non-believers who use secular belief as their model.
This verse in Hebrews is the answer to the question, "Why are those crazy Christians living lives of devotion in spite of adversity? It doesn't make sense." It is because Christians have faith and the faith is the visible indication of the fact that they have a spiritual grounds for their hope and trust. People look at their faithful behavior and say, "They must see something that I don't because I wouldn't do that."
Armstrongists frequently believe that faith is about getting something specific from God in this temporal life. When they do this, they impose the secular belief model on this scripture in Hebrews. The model is: "I am going to trust God to do X where I define X." And sometimes in some cases X happens. In other cases, X does not happen. (Then judgmentalism sets in.) Like, you are going to trust God to heal you. But what if it is not his purpose to heal you. Yes, he is a healer but maybe he thinks you should die because there is something in the next life that you need to experience. The result of the specific target approach without understanding the larger context is that if you do not receive it as requested, you are shattered.
What we should do is not trust in God for some specific outcome in this life but just trust God period - no matter the outcome. And that is not easy. And you spend your whole life seeking help from God. And the fact that you believe truths in spiritual realms and it alters you behavior on earth is the substance that is called faith.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Addendum to 7:44
ReplyDeleteI don't think my previous statement on this was very clear. The scripture under scrutiny is Hebrews 11:1 which defines Christian faith. This is how this definition is misunderstood and applied:
"I need X very badly. So I am going to trust God to provide X. The fact that I believe that God is going to supply X is my token or rain check that I am going to receive X."
In my understanding, that is absolutely not what Hebrews 11:1 is saying. This is how David Bentley Hart, in his unadorned translation of the NT, states this scripture:
"Now faithfulness is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of unseen realities."
"Faithfulness" is a way of living. It is not a token or scrip repesenting something you have asked God for. It is a way of living that states to all observers that you are in touch with "unseen realities" - spiritual realities.
When someone becomes a Christian, Christ's faith resides within them as a gift and there is an overt behavioral change in their lives. Christians will understand this change and non-believers will think such changed people are crazy. And this visible change or conversion is based on salvation and the belief in the ultimate, future outcome of salvation. This faith-caused change in life is the observable evidence and substance of promises yet to be fulfilled.
The misapplication cited above transforms faith from belief that results in behavioral change to a "work." It is a "works righteouness" model of belief. (And in that sense follows the pattern of secular ideas of belief.) People who follow this model are led to "work up" faith so that will get the desired outcome. Hebrews 11:1 is rather about living in faithfulness (trust and belief) and trusting the rest to God.
This does not mean that you shouldn't ask God for specific needs. The scriptural example is that you should in trust that he will make the best decision. This is easily said but it is really, really hard to abide. Human beings want to be in control. They want to do something that results in something. I personally think it is the biggest challenge of Christian living. But the hallmark of the misapplication is that it reduces the wholistic mode of faithfulness to a bare transaction - almost a financial transaction. It is the idea that "I can exchange my worked up belief for what I want." And when this doesn't work as expected, all kinds of dismay and judgmentalism happens.
If you are accustomed to the transactional interpretation (found in Armstrongism and, no doubt, other denominations) this will be very hard to understand unless you really think about it. It was difficult for me.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
I would agree there is a skepticism about religious faith, but according to adventist historian Samuele Bacchiocchi, this can be an outgrowth of forgetfulness.
ReplyDelete"Neglecting the Sabbath, the memorial of creation, can lead people to be skeptical about their divine origin and destiny.
Neglecting the Passover, the memorial of redemption, can lead people to become forgetful and skeptical about God's provision of salvation through Christ's atoning sacrifice.
Neglecting Pentecost, the memorial of the outpouring of the early rain of the Holy Spirit to launch the Christian mission, can lead people to become skeptical about the outpouring of the latter rain to complete the Christian mission.
Neglecting the Feast of Trumpets, the reminder that we all must appear before the judgment seat of God, can lead people to live morally irresponsibly.
Neglecting the Day of Atonement, the reminder of the final redemptive act of Christ, who will cleanse His people and dispose of their sins at the second Advent, can lead people to despair of any solution to the sin problem that affects mankind.
Neglecting the Feast of Tabernacles, the reminder of God's past providential leading, can lead people to doubt God's ability to lead us to the Promised Land."
His understanding of the holy days is better than the wcg teaching. Remembrance of salvation and God’s love is good for us.
ReplyDeleteEmuna = Faith
ReplyDeleteFirmness, fidelity, steadfastness, steadiness, secure, truly, verily, trust, assurance.
BUT, trust NOT in Men!
1Ti 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: