dandbj13
Member
I am writing a book from the perspective of a former Christian. I would greatly appreciate any and all feedback. This is one of the chapters. Depending on the feedback I get, I will post more for your scrutiny. Thank you in advance.
David Johnson
Faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we dont see.
Its impossible to please God without faith because the one who draws near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards people who try to find him. He. 11: 1, 6
Faith is such a big subject, and cannot be covered in one chapter, or even one volume. Whatever the coverage, though, I believe the discussion has to start with Hebrews 11. These passages provide the foundation of religious faith, and put to lie, any notion that religious devotion is based in reality or reason. It seems to me that Christians who try to justify their beliefs with empirical evidence have utterly missed the point of faith.
According the the first passage, faith is the substitute for empirical evidence. It turns hope into reality, and is all the proof one needs for unprovable things. If you need more proof than faith provides, then you do not have faith:
So we always have courage. We know that while we live in this body, we are away from the Lord.*We live by what we believe, not by what we can see. 2 Cor. 5:6-7
Jesus said, Thomas, do you have faith because you have seen me? The people who have faith in me without seeing me are the ones who are really blessed! Jn. 20:29
If there is any doubt that faith stands in opposition to scientific reason, then the above passages should put those doubts to bed. In 2 Cor., the phrase, what we can see for clarity, could be rendered, what we can prove. For the New Testament writers, there is a clear line of demarkation between belief and proof. More than delineation, there is outright antagonism between the two. You cannot straddle the fence. You cannot, like Thomas, claim faith while demanding proof. The only acceptable faith is blind faith. That is to say, faith not aided by evidence, or sight, as it were.
Presuppositional Belief
How do we come to believe anything? Generally, there is a hierarchy of belief that starts with a reasonable, evidentiary foundation. When evidence is lacking, we fall back on personal experience, or a trusted source. When all of that is lacking, we must try to infer the unknown based on the known. Obviously, belief is best planted in the soil of verifiable evidence. Each of these faith foundations are based on reason. You make your assumption based on the best information you have at the time.
The kind of faith promoted by the bible is sans-evidentiary. Reason (logic) is not the basis of biblical faith. God does not provide us with scientists who produce evidence for us to see, but with prophets who tell stories for us to believe. The best we have is stories of proof. The bible is replete with such stories. Without any verification of the veracity of the stories, we are simply to believe them, and thus, model our lives after those beliefs. In other words, we must be predisposed to believe the stories, taking them at face-value, without critical assessment. If we apply textual criticism, evidence, and reason to the stories, then we are not taking them on faith. We are just proving them to be true. Our faith is what pleases god, not our logic.
Things We Must Accept on Faith
The Hebrews writer confirms that it is impossible to please god without this type of faith. He also goes on to suggest two things that this unseeing (blind) faith must cover. The first is that we must, without any evidence, believe that god exists. This is a big ask for anyone. We cannot wonder about the existence of god. We cannot try to prove the existence of god, because the attempt to prove it suggests that proof is needed. We may deny that proof is needed for us, but merely seek it for the sake of converting others. That rather misses the point by a wide margin. If god demands faith without evidence from us, he equally requires it from whomever we might convert. If we convert someone with evidence, then we have deprived them of faith. We are attempting to give them what god has withheld: proof.
No! It is a presuppositional requirement that we possess simple and uncritical belief in god. The reason that critique and doubt can never enter the picture is that the only way to remove doubt is with evidence. The only way to convert doubt to assurance is to conclusively prove that which was formerly doubted.
Once Thomas saw and touched the death wounds of Jesus, he was forever locked out of the truest form of faith, which is to believe without seeing, according to the story. Once our doubts are erased by proof, then we are no better than Thomas. Seeking proof is the same as demanding to see and touch the wounds. True faith cannot abide this.
In addition to believing in gods existence, we must believe that he will reward us. I suppose, though not specifically mentioned, that we must believe in his punishments as well. I am guessing that reward is intended to be motivation for us to do what god requires of us. This becomes a part of the central theme of the chapter. All of those who demonstrated great faith, went on to receive a greater reward. Here is just one example:
Women received back their dead by resurrection. Others were tortured and refused to be released so they could gain a better resurrection. He. 11:35
Apparently, among the rewards were women receiving back their dead (children, husbands, fathers) by resurrection, and obtaining a better resurrection for ones self by enduring more torture than was even required. I have no idea what it means to receive back ones dead. Nor have I any understanding of varying levels of resurrection. I only know that belief in these rewards was the motivating factor for acts of valor and martyrdom. Belief in reward, ask any Muslim man who has ever strapped a bomb to his chest, can inspire extreme behavior. Clearly, god is counting on that kind of belief as well...
David Johnson
Faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we dont see.
Its impossible to please God without faith because the one who draws near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards people who try to find him. He. 11: 1, 6
Faith is such a big subject, and cannot be covered in one chapter, or even one volume. Whatever the coverage, though, I believe the discussion has to start with Hebrews 11. These passages provide the foundation of religious faith, and put to lie, any notion that religious devotion is based in reality or reason. It seems to me that Christians who try to justify their beliefs with empirical evidence have utterly missed the point of faith.
According the the first passage, faith is the substitute for empirical evidence. It turns hope into reality, and is all the proof one needs for unprovable things. If you need more proof than faith provides, then you do not have faith:
So we always have courage. We know that while we live in this body, we are away from the Lord.*We live by what we believe, not by what we can see. 2 Cor. 5:6-7
Jesus said, Thomas, do you have faith because you have seen me? The people who have faith in me without seeing me are the ones who are really blessed! Jn. 20:29
If there is any doubt that faith stands in opposition to scientific reason, then the above passages should put those doubts to bed. In 2 Cor., the phrase, what we can see for clarity, could be rendered, what we can prove. For the New Testament writers, there is a clear line of demarkation between belief and proof. More than delineation, there is outright antagonism between the two. You cannot straddle the fence. You cannot, like Thomas, claim faith while demanding proof. The only acceptable faith is blind faith. That is to say, faith not aided by evidence, or sight, as it were.
Presuppositional Belief
How do we come to believe anything? Generally, there is a hierarchy of belief that starts with a reasonable, evidentiary foundation. When evidence is lacking, we fall back on personal experience, or a trusted source. When all of that is lacking, we must try to infer the unknown based on the known. Obviously, belief is best planted in the soil of verifiable evidence. Each of these faith foundations are based on reason. You make your assumption based on the best information you have at the time.
The kind of faith promoted by the bible is sans-evidentiary. Reason (logic) is not the basis of biblical faith. God does not provide us with scientists who produce evidence for us to see, but with prophets who tell stories for us to believe. The best we have is stories of proof. The bible is replete with such stories. Without any verification of the veracity of the stories, we are simply to believe them, and thus, model our lives after those beliefs. In other words, we must be predisposed to believe the stories, taking them at face-value, without critical assessment. If we apply textual criticism, evidence, and reason to the stories, then we are not taking them on faith. We are just proving them to be true. Our faith is what pleases god, not our logic.
Things We Must Accept on Faith
The Hebrews writer confirms that it is impossible to please god without this type of faith. He also goes on to suggest two things that this unseeing (blind) faith must cover. The first is that we must, without any evidence, believe that god exists. This is a big ask for anyone. We cannot wonder about the existence of god. We cannot try to prove the existence of god, because the attempt to prove it suggests that proof is needed. We may deny that proof is needed for us, but merely seek it for the sake of converting others. That rather misses the point by a wide margin. If god demands faith without evidence from us, he equally requires it from whomever we might convert. If we convert someone with evidence, then we have deprived them of faith. We are attempting to give them what god has withheld: proof.
No! It is a presuppositional requirement that we possess simple and uncritical belief in god. The reason that critique and doubt can never enter the picture is that the only way to remove doubt is with evidence. The only way to convert doubt to assurance is to conclusively prove that which was formerly doubted.
Once Thomas saw and touched the death wounds of Jesus, he was forever locked out of the truest form of faith, which is to believe without seeing, according to the story. Once our doubts are erased by proof, then we are no better than Thomas. Seeking proof is the same as demanding to see and touch the wounds. True faith cannot abide this.
In addition to believing in gods existence, we must believe that he will reward us. I suppose, though not specifically mentioned, that we must believe in his punishments as well. I am guessing that reward is intended to be motivation for us to do what god requires of us. This becomes a part of the central theme of the chapter. All of those who demonstrated great faith, went on to receive a greater reward. Here is just one example:
Women received back their dead by resurrection. Others were tortured and refused to be released so they could gain a better resurrection. He. 11:35
Apparently, among the rewards were women receiving back their dead (children, husbands, fathers) by resurrection, and obtaining a better resurrection for ones self by enduring more torture than was even required. I have no idea what it means to receive back ones dead. Nor have I any understanding of varying levels of resurrection. I only know that belief in these rewards was the motivating factor for acts of valor and martyrdom. Belief in reward, ask any Muslim man who has ever strapped a bomb to his chest, can inspire extreme behavior. Clearly, god is counting on that kind of belief as well...
