Is Faith Evidence of Things Not Seen?

Brickjectivity · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Depending on your favorite translation, Hebrews 11:1 reads:

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Some religious folks believe that their faith itself is evidence that what they have faith in is actually true. This is particularly the case, it seems, when it comes to supernatural claims or ones that don't have good evidence for them.

In my view, this is a manifestly absurd and circular position. People believe all kinds of things, some true, some untrue. The fact that I believe, for example, that the world is flat, is not evidence that I'm correct about that.

Do you believe faith is the evidence of things not seen? Why or why not?

First of all consider what he means by 'Faith'. He's making an argument about what the law teaches, so in that context consider:

Look at Hebrews 10 as a preface to Hebrews 11. It begins with "The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves." In chapter 11 he proceeds through making his argument commenting in 10:22 "...let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings..." He is building a case that the law is rather than an end point a teacher of something. He implies in 10:23-26 that we have to consistently work hard at love and doing good deeds and that the opposite is to continue sinning. In other words its a sin to not be doing something good. This goes beyond what the law says. This is the furtherance and the lesson he's saying that law teaches. Hebrews 10:36 says "You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God you will receive what he has promised."

To make a sensible answer consider what he means by 'Faith'. A supporting question is whether he thinks belief equals faith, and its clear that he doesn't. Now his statement makes more sense, and we can see that it is faithfulness that is evidence of things not seen.

epronovost · Aug 7, 2020

mikkel_the_dane said:
So the claim that the world is natural and not supernatural is as much only a very strongly held belief, just as the reverse one.

Just as is the position that there is an such an ontological difference as natural and supernatural.

mikkel_the_dane · Aug 7, 2020

epronovost said:
Just as is the position that there is an such an ontological difference as natural and supernatural.

Evidence, please.

epronovost · Aug 7, 2020

mikkel_the_dane said:
Evidence, please.

(1) The truth-value of any statement is always relative to some particular standpoint;
(2) No standpoint is metaphysically privileged over all others.

Dualism is a metaphysical standpoint just as monism. There is thus no reason to accept any form of dualism or that any form of ontological category should be accepted since all of ontology is based on some form of metaphysical standpoint.

Left Coast · Aug 7, 2020

mikkel_the_dane said:
I am good at doubt. So in the end, I accept these:

Cognitive Relativism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Now if you combine (1) and (2), it means that it is unknown as with evidence, if the monitor, you are reading this on, is there as the monitor in itself.
So the idea of evidence as per empirical realism is a belief and without evidence. But so is God. Now if you then combine that with Agrippa's trilemma there is no justified evidence, proof, truth and what not possible for any belief about what reality really is.

I don't particularly want to go down the rabbit hole as we've done before more than once. Suffice it to say, based on what you said here, that you agree that faith is not evidence that the thing you have faith in is true. Alright.

Left Coast · Aug 7, 2020

Sw. Vandana Jyothi said:
Hi, Left Coast
Thanks for asking! Consider if you will that human beings might, in addition to the regular tools, be endowed with other tools for perceiving and processing extra-sensory experiences. Think "third eye" and "hrit padma" (lotus of the sacred heart) and "higher consciousness" (beyond consciousness of mind). Most of us are not even taught about these tools, let alone how to employ them.

How would you tell the difference between these "other tools," as you describe them, and dreams or visions or other altered states of consciousness?

MonkeyFire · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Depending on your favorite translation, Hebrews 11:1 reads:

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Some religious folks believe that their faith itself is evidence that what they have faith in is actually true. This is particularly the case, it seems, when it comes to supernatural claims or ones that don't have good evidence for them.

In my view, this is a manifestly absurd and circular position. People believe all kinds of things, some true, some untrue. The fact that I believe, for example, that the world is flat, is not evidence that I'm correct about that.

Do you believe faith is the evidence of things not seen? Why or why not?

Religion doesn't require evidence. Faith is more like omniscience, every light has a fire.

"Atheist actually know very little. It's ironic really." - Me

Left Coast · Aug 7, 2020

Trailblazer said:
That said, I think that we need to have faith that we will get the evidence we need if we earnestly seek God.

Hi Trail!

Why do you say we need to have faith that we will get the evidence? If we seek and get the evidence, as you said, faith is unnecessary. Why believe something is the case when we don't have evidence for it?

Left Coast · Aug 7, 2020

Brickjectivity said:
To make a sensible answer consider what he means by 'Faith'. A supporting question is whether he thinks belief equals faith, and its clear that he doesn't. Now his statement makes more sense, and we can see that it is faithfulness that is evidence of things not seen.

Interesting context, thanks Brick.

How does faithfulness (ie doing good deeds) provide evidence of things not seen? Do you take him to mean that your actions demonstrate your beliefs?

Left Coast · Aug 7, 2020

MonkeyFire said:
Religion doesn't require evidence. Faith is more like omniscience, every light has a fire.

Really? Then what do you do with faiths/religions that contradict?

"Atheist actually know very little. It's ironic really." - Me

What's ironic about it? And how did you arrive at that conclusion?

halbhh · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Depending on your favorite translation, Hebrews 11:1 reads:

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Some religious folks believe that their faith itself is evidence that what they have faith in is actually true. This is particularly the case, it seems, when it comes to supernatural claims or ones that don't have good evidence for them.

In my view, this is a manifestly absurd and circular position. People believe all kinds of things, some true, some untrue. The fact that I believe, for example, that the world is flat, is not evidence that I'm correct about that.

Do you believe faith is the evidence of things not seen? Why or why not?

"Some religious folks believe that their faith itself is evidence that what they have faith in is actually true. " -- Well, that's a new idea to me.

But consider these well known translations below. Which one sticks out like a sore thumb as not like the others? --

New International Version
Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

English Standard Version
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

New Living Translation
Faith shows the reality of what we hope for; it is the evidence of things we cannot see.

Berean Literal Bible
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not being seen.

New American Standard Bible
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

---------
See what's happening? One translation is very unlike all the others.

Once again, as in many other verses, the NLT mangles the text and renders something not at all like a good translation.

So....just use a better translation.

The ESV is very highly regarded for accuracy.

Trailblazer · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Hi Trail!

Why do you say we need to have faith that we will get the evidence? If we seek and get the evidence, as you said, faith is unnecessary. Why believe something is the case when we don't have evidence for it?

I do not think we should believe before we have the evidence we require.

I do not say that we need to have faith, the Bible says that:

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

Baha'u'llah said we will be guided if we earnestly seek God:

““Whoso maketh efforts for Us,” he shall enjoy the blessings conferred by the words: “In Our Ways shall We assuredly guide him.”” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 266-267

The way I interpret the passage above is that if we make a sincere effort and earnestly seek God, God will guide us to the evidence that we need to believe in Him, but we have to have faith that God will do so in order to make the effort.

robocop (actually) · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Depending on your favorite translation, Hebrews 11:1 reads:

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Some religious folks believe that their faith itself is evidence that what they have faith in is actually true. This is particularly the case, it seems, when it comes to supernatural claims or ones that don't have good evidence for them.

In my view, this is a manifestly absurd and circular position. People believe all kinds of things, some true, some untrue. The fact that I believe, for example, that the world is flat, is not evidence that I'm correct about that.

Do you believe faith is the evidence of things not seen? Why or why not?

In my book on the Book of Mormon (not official of the Church or endorsed by it), it leads:

Faith is when you realize something is wrong, you suspend believing in what is unnecessary, you look for your new concept, and you discover a better explanation.

ppp · Aug 7, 2020

robocop (actually) said:
In my book on the Book of Mormon (not official of the Church or endorsed by it), it leads:

Faith is when you realize something is wrong, you suspend believing in what is unnecessary, you look for your new concept, and you discover a better explanation.

What constitutes "better"? True, or merely satisfying?

Left Coast · Aug 7, 2020

Trailblazer said:
The way I interpret the passage above is that if we make a sincere effort and earnestly seek God, God will guide us to the evidence that we need to believe in Him, but we have to have faith that God will do so in order to make the effort.

Well that seems hopelessly circular. I have to believe that God will give me the evidence that I'll need to believe in the God I already need to believe will give me the evidence I'll need to believe in Him.

Kenny · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Depending on your favorite translation, Hebrews 11:1 reads:

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Some religious folks believe that their faith itself is evidence that what they have faith in is actually true. This is particularly the case, it seems, when it comes to supernatural claims or ones that don't have good evidence for them.

In my view, this is a manifestly absurd and circular position. People believe all kinds of things, some true, some untrue. The fact that I believe, for example, that the world is flat, is not evidence that I'm correct about that.

Do you believe faith is the evidence of things not seen? Why or why not?

I like this translation:

11 Now faith is the assurance (the confirmation, the title deed) of the things [we] hope for, being the proof of things [we] do not see and the conviction of their reality [faith perceiving as real fact what is not revealed to the senses].

I'm not sure what you mean that there is no "good evidence for them". Is it perhaps you don't understand how it works?

If you have a title deed to a piece of property that has been signed and sealed, you don't have to see the evidence of the property... the deed declares it.

Matthew 9:21
For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole.

Jesus said to her "your faith has made you whole".

Everybody actually uses faith every day to some extent.

It is true that people believe all sorts of things. It isn't necessarily all faith. Sometime it is mental assent and other times it just plain foolishness or presumption.

Trailblazer · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Well that seems hopelessly circular. I have to believe that God will give me the evidence that I'll need to believe in the God I already need to believe will give me the evidence I'll need to believe in Him.

If we try to constrain God with human logic we will never win because God does not operate on logic, like humans do. So it might seem circular to you that you need faith in order to believe, but that is what God requires, and since God is the one who is in charge of providing the evidence, it makes sense to abide by His requirements.

It makes sense to me that we need to have faith in order to believe what we cannot prove. God can never be proven to exist, so even if we have evidence we need to have faith in the evidence, and if we have enough faith in the evidence the evidence becomes proof to us, even though that evidence will not be proof to everyone else.

night912 · Aug 7, 2020

Faith, although not a rational reason, is the most honest reason for one to believe in something. I have no problem with it being just that. The problem comes when someone uses faith in other ways, such as being evidence for something to be universally true or argue that it's a rational way of reasoning. There are others that I didn't mentioned.

robocop (actually) · Aug 7, 2020

Joe W said:
What constitutes "better"? True, or merely satisfying?

Both. True for being scientific and satisfying for giving yourself new morals.

TransmutingSoul · Aug 7, 2020

Left Coast said:
Well that seems hopelessly circular. I have to believe that God will give me the evidence that I'll need to believe in the God I already need to believe will give me the evidence I'll need to believe in Him.

Faith enables to sort out what is guidance from God from what is our own imaginings. Faith is acceptance of the Sources of God given wisdom in this world.

We can not start the journey unless God has gifted us to recognise the source.

The challenge never ends, with or without that knowledge.

Regards Tony

Is Faith Evidence of Things Not Seen?

wind and rain touch not this brain

Well-Known Member

My own religion

Well-Known Member

This Is Water

This Is Water

Well-Known Member

This Is Water

This Is Water

This Is Water

The wonder and awe of "all things".

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This Is Water

Face to face with my Father

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member