Moved to Faith by Reliable Sources

In support of the Central Thesis:

No one can actually believe in something blindly.

What do you consider a reliable source of information?  We put our trust (faith) in others all the time.  Eating at a restaurant shows our faith in the cooks, the health inspectors, or even the friend who tell us, “It looks terrible, but try it!  You’ll love it!”

Faith is evidenced by action.  We depend upon reliable sources to bring us to the point of taking an action like actually putting some disgusting looking food in our mouths.  There is a difference between acknowledging that your friend survived eating at a nasty-looking restaurant, and actually eating the food yourself.

Faith is NOT magic.  It does not “make something true.”  Nasty-looking (and clean-looking) restaurants can make you very sick even if you REALLY believe they won’t.  But your actions are evidence of your faith and what you trust.

In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.  (James, Chapter 2, Verse 17)

Being a chemist, I am bothered by those who mistakenly claim that science is devoid of faith.  Let me speak to the scientist.  An honest scientist realizes that testing a theory requires a quantity of faith.  You are expending time, precious days of your life, and often other people’s money and time to see if a theory holds or fails in a controlled set of circumstances.  You are “sure of what you hope for and certain of what you do not see”.  But, notice the subtlety.  You are not sure of the result or certain of the result, but rather, you are sure that nature is repeatable, logical, and knowable.  How did you come to trust in the stability, the logic, and the “knowability” of nature?  Reliable Sources.

A scientist comes to know about the behavior of nature through reliable sources.  For me, it began with parents explaining the seasons, teachers suggesting books to read, and the books themselves.  I didn’t just learn facts.  I came to trust the philosophy that nature was knowable and that rational thought was trustworthy. This is not an empirical result.  It is a secondary conclusion and the foundation of empiricism.

Hence the flawed logic of scientism’s claim,

If it cannot be empirically proven, then it cannot be objectively true.

That claim cannot be empirically proven, so that claim commits suicide.

This example is not a straw man, either.  Here is the claim written in a more popular form,

It must be possible to conceive of evidence that would prove a claim false.

This is most certainly a claim that is non-falsifiable.  Further, in the same article the statement is made:

Any claim that could not be falsified would be devoid of any propositional content; that is, it would not be making a factual assertion — it would instead be making an emotive statement, a declaration of the way the claimant feels about the world. Nonfalsifiable claims do communicate information, but what they describe is the claimant’s value orientation. They communicate nothing whatsoever of a factual nature, and hence are neither true nor false. Nonfalsifiable statements are propositionally vacuous.

Therefore, “It must be possible to conceive of evidence that would prove the claim false” is propositionally vacuous.

If that makes your head explode, good. You should realize that science rests on top of philosophy.  Why do we trust our 5 senses?  Philosophy.  Where does logical experimentation originate?  Philosophy.  And it is philosophy that tells us what is logical, what is reasonable, and what sources (including empirical results) are likely to be trustworthy.

Back to the question.  We use reliable sources to bring us to the point of taking action on our beliefs (faith).  We may not have studied philosophy in school, but we learned it in the school of hard knocks.  Who hasn’t felt the pain of betrayal and learned something about who to trust?  Who hasn’t sniffed old-ish milk trusting their senses to reflect the true nature of the substance?

So the scientist trusting her mentors and the literature, the child trusting his parents, the Christian trusting her ministers have more in common than they think.  When it comes to achieving faith in something, we all have to choose our sources and our philosophical framework.

The question remains, “are the sources we have faith in truly reliable?”  Check out J. Warner Wallace’s book Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels or Lee Strobel’s book The Case for Christ: A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus.  They searched the source documents and interviewed experts until their objections were answered.  Even though they could not see God with their physical eyes, they could clearly see their sources.  Their faith was NOT blind.  And then it came down to action.  They trusted in Christ.  They actually “ate at the restaurant.”

Taste and see that the Lord is good; blessed is the one who takes refuge in him. (Psalm 34, Verse 8)

:DW

Roadmap for the Series

This series of blog posts will explore what is meant by Christians when they say they have “faith” in Christ. Roadmap for the series:

• Part 1 – Introduction to my “No Such Thing as Blind Faith” series of posts
• Part 2 – What is the Biblical concept of the word “faith”?
• How does one come to have “faith” in something?
  • Part 3 – Sources they trust – parents, pastors, professors, publications, papers, posts
  • Part 4 – Intuition – putting the pieces of life together (least “explainable” but still not “blind”)
  • Part 5 – Reaction to stress or joy – mountain tops and valleys in life
  • Part 6 – Experience – direct experience with Christ in some way
• Part 7 – Conclusion, support of the central thesis, and how we come to change our minds

What is the Biblical concept of the word “faith”?

In support of the Central Thesis: “No one can actually believe in something blindly.”

This series of blog posts explores what is meant by Christians when they say they have “faith” in Christ.  This will serve dual purposes of causing the Christian to seriously consider HOW they themselves came to faith, and of providing a starting point for discussion with non-believers about the word “faith” in a Christian world view.

Roadmap for the series:

• Part 1 – Introduction to my “No Such Thing as Blind Faith” series of posts
• Part 2 – What is the Biblical concept of the word “faith”?
• How does one come to have “faith” in something?
  • Part 3 – Sources they trust – parents, pastors, professors, publications, papers, posts
  • Part 4 – Intuition – putting the pieces of life together (least “explainable” but still not “blind”)
  • Part 5 – Reaction to stress or joy – mountain tops and valleys in life
  • Part 6 – Experience – direct experience with Christ in some way
• Part 7 – Conclusion, support of the central thesis, and how we come to change our minds

Christian Faith

Rather than begin with the 259 uses of the word “faith” in the Bible, it might be useful to illustrate what is taught about faith in practice in just about every youth group and team building camp in the world.

Jane was nervous, excited, and very self-conscious about her weight as she climbed onto the table in the dining hall.  She wasn’t embarrassed.  Yet.  But she was afraid of the hard floor.  She was being asked to stand on the edge of the table, cross her arms across her chest, remain stiff as a board, and fall backward off the table.  Insane?  Well, her youth group was standing behind her with their arms extended ready to catch her.  Could they do it?  Probably.  She didn’t actually do the math of her weight divided among eight pairs of arms, but they seemed confident, ready, and able.  Her youth leader asked her to go first and was very encouraging.  He told her that he had done this exercise with hundreds of kids for years with no broken bones, concussions, or deaths.  His levity was both comforting and disconcerting.

She was ready, but then she paused.  She turned around.  Looked at her friends (and one or two frenemies).  They were smiling and encouraging.  Their confidence was contagious.  “OK, I’ll do it.”, she thought.

“Ready?”, she asked.

“Ready.”, they replied.

“Falling.”, she said.

“Fall!”, they shouted.

And down she went.  There was an initial tilting feeling, then a short moment of panic as she realized there was no way to stop falling.  The youth leader’s voice in her head reminded her, “stiff as a board, or you’ll get hurt or hurt someone else.”  With a short squeal, she stayed stiff, and felt the cushioning crush of 16 arms catching and arresting her fall.  Eight smiling and giggling faces were surprisingly close by.  She stayed stiff as they tipped her up and placed her feet on the floor.

Immediately, there was chatter of “Me next!” and funny imitations of her squeal that made her blush with laughter.

This exercise is called the TRUST FALL and it is used to illustrate faith in Christian circles.  The lesson illustrates having faith in each other, and is extended to having faith in God.

Let us analyze the trust fall in various ways, and then show that the above example is in line with the Biblical concept of “faith” and is NOT in line with the mischaracterizations of faith popularized by the “New Atheists”.

Let’s begin with the “fun stuff”.  Hitchens says, “Faith is believing in spite of the evidence.”  Therefore, the “Hitchens TRUST FALL” would look like this:

Johnny climbs onto a table, wraps his arms around his chest, and becomes stiff as a board.  He says, “Ready?”

No one answers, which is evidence that no one is there.  He turns to look, and sees that no one is there.  The evidence points to no one being there.

Going through the motions, though, he says, “Falling”.  No reply, of course. But he has “Hitchens-like faith in spite of the evidence”.  So he falls anyway.

Crack!  Johnny falls off the table onto the hard floor and the consequences are not good.  But he had “Faith in spite of the evidence”.

This is NOT the concept of Christian faith.

This is rightly judged to be delusional behavior.  And although many Christians may “say” that they trust Christ in spite of the evidence, I contend that they do not.  If you ask them about God’s work in their life, their relationship with Christ, their interactions with God’s word, the encouragement they have received from their church family, they will point to an impressive list of “evidences” that confirm their faith.

Critical Point!!

(This is NOT a proof that their faith is TRUE.  Many faiths, cults, and even atheistic circles provide similar “evidences”, and they cannot ALL be true.  But this DOES prove that their faith is NOT blind even if they say it is.  They have identified many REASONS to believe what they believe.)

Here is another example that people misinterpret as blind faith.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

“The Leap of Faith” is the clearest example of what people may claim to be blind faith.  If you don’t remember it, watch it here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFntFdEGgws ).

 

But don’t miss the facts.  Indiana did not simply come upon a cavern and blindly step into it.  He had his father’s lifetime obsession and meticulous study of the history of the grail.  He had his father’s notebook with a drawing of how he should approach the cavern.  And, he had the experience that the book was trustworthy – the penitent man doesn’t get his head chopped off, and the name of God is firm.

These EVIDENCES and EXPERIENCES and the person and character of his father are what Indiana Jones had faith in.  He trusted these things, and stepped out in faith.  The path was invisible, but his faith was not “blind”.  He had reasons to believe.

Evidential Faith in the Bible

Jesus encouraged this type of faith throughout the Gospels.  And he encouraged his disciples to put their faith “in Him” and in his miracles.

“Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves.” (John 14:11)

“Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.” (Mark 16:14)

(He didn’t rebuke them for their stubborn refusal to believe their own eyes that saw him crucified dead and placed in a grave.  He rebuked them for not believing what they should have accepted as reliable testimony.)

“A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”

Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”

Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:26-29)

(Again, Jesus is confirming that those who have believed based upon the reliable testimony of the other disciples even to the present day will be blessed.)

This is not BLIND faith.  Blind faith in Jesus Christ would be believing “in him” without knowing the first thing about him, any testimony about him, nothing about your need for him, what his life, death, or resurrection meant, or even how he might be relevant to your life.  That would be strange faith indeed.

It is certainly NOT what Christians mean by faith in Christ.

:DW