There are two kinds of faith: faith due to evidence and faith without evidence. The later is called blind faith. Somehow, this became the default position in Christianity, and it makes me want to vomit.
If God wanted us to have blind faith, he would not provide evidences. Here's the problem: there's evidence everywhere. The history of the Jewish people, the collection of the writings in both new and old testament, the Roman historians, the testimony of the faithful in the early church, the writings of the early church, etc etc. God doesn't want blind faith. God doesn't love your ignorance, he desires your growth in wisdom.
Let's take a look at the biblical definition of faith in Hebrews 11:1, "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Does this mean we need blind faith?
NO! Reading the rest of the chapter, we get *evidences* to the faith of the pre-Abraham believers of the OT. The author lists multiple examples of faithful people and actions of God. How can, in the same chapter, one preach faith without evidence, and then give evidence for it?
What is it that is meant by "not seen"? Verse 13, "These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth." So, faith has to do with promise. And is the promise seen? Nope. The last two verses contain this answer, "And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect."
What is the promise we have faith in? The promise of our faith is to "...rise again to a better life." (verse 35). The firstfruits (1 cor. 15:20) of this promise is our Savior. Our resurrection is what we hope for and has not been seen. Our faith is in the Savior that promised we will rise with him on the Last Day. The "not seen" does not mean "without evidence"; it means the conclusion of the promise has yet to come to pass.
Therefore, to believe apart from evidence is contrary to the argumentation here in Hebrews. What we believe has yet to be concluded, but the evidence for such a belief is quite abundant.
Practically speaking, what does this mean for us? How ought we to act in light of this? First, stop promoting blind faith. The faith isn't a leap into ignorance. This is what many non-Christians believe, and it is the reason so many anti-intellectual stereotypes exist against us. This teaching is not only false, but is a barrier to teaching the gospel.
It also gives us a more informed command on "...being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you." (1 Peter 3). We are to be ready to reconcile faith and reason. They must go together. There are two kinds of faith: faith due to evidence and faith without evidence. The later is called blind faith. Somehow, this became the default position in Christianity, and it makes me want to vomit.
If God wanted us to have blind faith, he would not provide evidences. Here's the problem: there's evidence everywhere. The history of the Jewish people, the collection of the writings in both new and old testament, the Roman historians, the testimony of the faithful in the early church, the writings of the early church, etc etc. God doesn't want blind faith. God doesn't love your ignorance, he desires your growth in wisdom.
Let's take a look at the biblical definition of faith in Hebrews 11:1, "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Does this mean we need blind faith?
NO! Reading the rest of the chapter, we get *evidences* to the faith of the pre-Abraham believers of the OT. The author lists multiple examples of faithful people and actions of God. How can, in the same chapter, one preach faith without evidence, and then give evidence for it?
What is it that is meant by "not seen"? Verse 13, "These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth." So, faith has to do with promise. And is the promise seen? Nope. The last two verses contain this answer, "And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect."
What is the promise we have faith in? The promise of our faith is to "...rise again to a better life." (verse 35). The firstfruits (1 cor. 15:20) of this promise is our Savior. Our resurrection is what we hope for and has not been seen. Our faith is in the Savior that promised we will rise with him on the Last Day. The "not seen" does not mean "without evidence"; it means the conclusion of the promise has yet to come to pass.
Therefore, to believe apart from evidence is contrary to the argumentation here in Hebrews. What we believe has yet to be concluded, but the evidence for such a belief is quite abundant.
Practically speaking, what does this mean for us? How ought we to act in light of this? First, stop promoting blind faith. The faith isn't a leap into ignorance. This is what many non-Christians believe, and it is the reason so many anti-intellectual stereotypes exist against us. This teaching is not only false, but is a barrier to teaching the gospel.
It also gives us a more informed command on "...being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you." (1 Peter 3). We are to be ready to reconcile faith and reason. They must go together. |
User Notice 
