What is the difference between faith and blind faith in God's word?

Question

John 20:29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Hebrews 11:1 Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

2 Corinthians 5:7 For we live by faith, not by sight.

All 3 verses indicate that faith is not-seen. Is faith by definition not-seen?

Would God be happy with a person who believes in His promise (P) to him with 0 physical evidence or worse the evidence is actually against the fulfillment of P?

What kind of physical evidence did Noah have to believe that God was going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens?

God says P to M.
V1: M believes P because God says it and acts accordingly before seeing P fulfilled.
V2: M asks to see evidence that P would come true.
Would God be more satisfied with V1? We need to look at the issue from God's point of view, not from man's point of view.

Can anyone give me a concrete example of blind faith in God after God has spoken P to him?

There is no such thing because blind faith is faith.

Answer 1

First, "blind faith" is never discussed in the Bible. Christians are not asked to believe or trust on the basis of no evidence.

The greatest passage about faith/belief in the Bible is Heb 11. It is precisely here in Heb 11 that the author marshals a vast amount of evidence that God is faithful - he tells us to look at all the things God has done, and on that basis to trust God for the things not yet seen - the future.

This pattern is repeated often in Scripture - look at how often the Jews rehearsed their history of God's greatness and miraculous dealings; note Ps 105 and 106 and many others. Note the approach of Stephen at his trial in Acts 7, etc.

Now, it is a simple matter of observation that some require more convincing than others - doubting Thomas is the classic example quoted by the OP. In fact, Thomas has plenty of evidence of Jesus' resurrection from the personal testimony of others but refused to believe until he had personal, physical experience. Jesus correctly rebukes Thomas for this approach in John 20:29, simply because it is not possible to do this with everything in life.

(There are many things of everyday life that we must believe on the basis of other's testimony rather than personal experience.)

Having said that, Thomas actually possessed evidence from Jesus Himself because of Jesus' life and miracles in the years before Jesus' death. Thomas (and the other disciples as well) should have known that Jesus would rise from the dead but did not understand.

Jesus blessed those who believe on the basis of the adequate evidence that God provides each of us. John 20:29.

Answer 2

I have been thinking about your question and about what is really at the heart of it. I do not believe the term "blind' faith is really the proper way to express what I believe you are asking, but I think I understand what you are looking for. Allow me, if you will, to first offer this observation about faith and then I will give you an example from Abraham rather than Noah to illustrate my point. If you would still like to see how this show up in the example of Noah, I will be happy to provide that for you.

Faith is from the word πίστις which means 'to be persuaded.' The word is translated in the NT as both faith and belief and reflects two interlocking dynamics. The first is the mental acceptance of a set of facts. The second is the action that responds to that acceptance. Belief is the fundamental structure for salvation but belief is never presented in scripture as exclusively an intellectual exorcise. Biblical faith is more than just a simple acknowledgement of a set of revealed truths. Faith is always presented as a behavior structure that actively responds to the word of God. James makes the point that faith apart from obedience to the will of God is not faith. Faith is legitimized only when it is linked to action. We see this in a number of examples given by the Hebrew writer. In Hebrews 11, belief/faith is inseparably linked to an active response that legitimizes what the mind has accepted as true. Without obedience to the will of God, there is no acknowledgement of faith. By faith those offered as examples of faith did what God commanded. Abraham And his sacrifice of Isaac is one of the examples given by the Hebrew writer.

There are truths we can understand from our observation of the natural world, but there are also truths that cannot be ascertained from our observation of the natural world. An observation of our field of experience will only take one so far. It is impossible for logic to breech the threshold into the eternal dimension of God. That requires the element of faith.

When Abraham acquiesced to offer Isaac, he did not conclude that God could raise Isaac from the dead based on any logical exercise. There is nothing in the world of man that could possibly lead Abraham to conclude through any logical process that someone could be raised from the dead to rejoin the living. Abraham had to look beyond logic to conclude the possibility of a resurrection. Logically, the facts are as follows:

1. Knife to the throat = an absolute outcome – death.

2. Fire to the flesh = absolute outcome – total destruction of the flesh.

These have always produced irreversible results – the death and total thermal consumption of the victim.

Abraham's experiences with offering sacrifices told him that sacrifices do not survive the ordeal; not ever! Human logic, based on human experience says, “If I do this my son will be irretrievably dead and gone.” Something was going to have to happen in Abraham's reasoning processes that would transcend the logic of the human experiential index. Abraham faced a logical dilemma - If Isaac is dead, how will the promise be fulfilled. This seems to create a contradiction between the promise and the command.

Abraham based his decision not on any logical assumptions, but upon the faithfulness of God. Abraham’s conclusion reached beyond the boundaries of applied logic – “God is able to raise one even from the dead.” This is certainly not a logical conclusion. How could Abraham possibly know this? He had no physical evidence to support such an extraordinary conclusion. The text never says that this knowledge was ever revealed to Abraham. He had never had a sacrifice get up off the altar and follow him home after the ordeal. He had had no experience with the dead being raised to life. The only thing Abraham’s experience could confirm to him about death was that logically, it is always decisive and irreversible. This is the limit of the logical approach. Abraham had to believe in something he could not see or otherwise prove empirically. But this was not blind faith. This was faith that was rooted in the revealed promise of God to make his descendants as numerous as the stars of the sky. Abraham came to understand that the realization of the promise was not dependent upon Isaac, whether he is dead or alive. The realization of the promise was dependent solely upon the will and the power of God. There were no other antecedent factors. The Hebrew writer confirms for us that faith was the only factor that drove Abraham’s conclusion and moved him to honor God's demand to sacrifice Isaac. The result of this was that God acknowledged Abraham as faithful, not logical.

Answer 3

With the very good answers already provided, I would just add that God does not expect, nor has He every asked for "blind faith." That phrase is an invention of man.

"And dost thou wish to know, O vain man, that the faith apart from the works is dead? " (James 2:20, YLT)

Our faith in God is demonstrated by our works, our response and answer to His commands. Remember Gideon's requests to have the signs repeated so he could be sure he did not assume or misread the evidence God had presented?

"36 And Gideon saith unto God, `If Thou art Saviour of Israel by my hand, as Thou hast spoken,

37 lo, I am placing the fleece of wool in the threshing-floor: if dew is on the fleece alone, and on all the earth drought -- then I have known that Thou dost save Israel by my hand, as Thou hast spoken;'

38 and it is so, and he riseth early on the morrow, and presseth the fleece, and wringeth dew out of the fleece -- the fulness of the bowl, of water.

39 And Gideon saith unto God, `Let not Thine anger burn against me, and I speak only this time; let me try, I pray Thee, only this time with the fleece -- let there be, I pray Thee, drought on the fleece alone, and on all the earth let there be dew.'

40 And God doth so on that night, and there is drought on the fleece alone, and on all the earth there hath been dew." (Judg. 6:36-40, YLT)

Gideon asked God to provide more than one sign to be fully assured in his own mind of what God wanted Gideon to do. God was patient with Gideon's need to fully know for sure.

And, that is the crux. We cannot have faith in something or someone we do not know. The more we know, the stronger our faith, which results in the actions we undertake to be as God would have us to be, and to stand for Him.

"so then the faith [is] by a report, and the report through a saying of God," (Rom. 10:17, YLT)

Answer 4

Believe the context of the verse to Thomas is important - He was referring to all of us who have not seen yet believe in the King of Kings. Hebrews verse defines it.

Jesus’ command is - “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭10:27‬ ‭NIV‬

The key word being ‘and with all your mind’. The Lord wants us to trust Him and love Him completely - heart, soul, might and mind.

So, no this is not about blind faith.

Answer 5

A. Department of Apologetics Most readers of the Bible do not realize that there is in Christian systematic theology--besides Ecclesiology, Soteriology, Christology, Pneumatology, Bibliology, etc.--A section called apologetics. It is based on the admonition of Peter:

Be ready always to give an answer (apologia, GK.) to every man that asketh you for a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.(1 Peter 3:15)

Whatever we conclude about the definition of "faith", it cannot go against the way Jesus, Peter, and Paul dealt with it. They all entertained reasons and evidences to show to the honest seekers. Jesus listed several in John 5; Peter appealed to many in Acts 2; John and Luke appealed to eye-witnesses to convince seekers (Luke 1:1-4, Acts 3:15, 4:20, 10:39, 13:31); and Paul engaged in "metaphysical proofs".

Knowledge of this discipline of apologetics would help clear up the confusion of this questioner. There was no advocacy of "blind faith" in the Bible.

B. Communicating God To help answer this post, one merely need to keep in mind that the Bible reveals God to be a very communicative God! From the very beginning in Genesis to the end of Revelation, God has talked with mankind! As Francis Schaeffer quipped: God is there and He is not silent!

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken to us by His Son. (Hebrews 1:1-2)

So mankind is invited to come to a God who has revealed Himself--not to an unknown God. And as the other answerers have noted, "the more one gets to know God, the more one can have a relaxed "trusting relationship" with Him. That is, a life of "faith." Much of the O.T. contains references to the faithful and supernatural acts of God, a rehearsal of the character of Jehovah, in attempts to encourage continual trust (faith) in Him.

So again, there is no such thing as "blind faith."

C. Expository Bible Study A third aspect that the questioner must be aware of is the fact that Topical Bible Study is not the best way to study verses. It is okay to use a Concordance to find references for particular words. But to learn what they mean, expository research is the best way to go about it.

To list a couple of verses that have the same word in them can lead to confusion because they do not take into account the context of the verses. Verses were written at different time periods, to different people, on different occasions, for different purposes. Just reading a group of verses with the same word, leads to confusion, misunderstanding, etc.

If this expository research had been done, the second half of this posted question would have been unnecessary. There would have been no misunderstanding concerning the meaning of "faith." There would have been no entertaining of the possibility of any such thing as "blind faith."

1. For example, take the verse of Hebrews 11:1 which was quoted. If the next verse were also quoted, it would have helped understand faith:

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which were seen were not made of things which do appear. (Hebrews 11:3)

Paul also appealed to the Cosmological Proof for the existence of God in Romans 1, and Acts 17. The chapter context of Hebrews 11 also reveals that the following list of men of faith was given as evidence to the Hebrews that they also should believe in God.

2. As far as the other verse, We walk by faith and not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7) has the context of "dying and going to heaven to be with Jesus." (Both verses before it and after it.) In other words, Paul was assuring the church that we will be with Christ in heaven, not because of Naturalistic, materialistic, secular philosophies (of things seen), but rather because of our living a life of trust (faith) in God., an intangible, unseen, merciful reliance upon Jesus's grace.

3. The third verse about "not seeing" calls those who were not present in the first century "blessed" if they too believe the eye-witnesses testimony (the preaching of the Gospel). {That includes us!} But notice the context. The very next verse stated:

And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written so that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God... (John 20:30-31)

So an expository research, instead of a topical one, would have made this query unnecessary.

D. Informed Faith Progress Christian faith is a religion based on "substance" and "evidence," given by a communicating God, so that a person can confidently trust in God (with an informed faith) through the walk of life and Christian discipleship, onward into eternal life.

To better understand this, perhaps we should discern the different stages in "coming to faithful living." (1) Convincing, (2) Converting, (3) Conversing. Or (1) Pre-evangelism, (2) Evangelism, (3) Post-evangelism: discipleship. Or still, (1) Pulling weeds, (2) Planting seeds, (3) Harvesting deeds.

Each step brings a person to faith, and then increases his faith, and then pleases God with a faithful relationship (with a trusting God, just like the patriarchs had, Hebrews 11.)

Answer 6

Faith is when you get up in the morning and get on with it, believing in living, life. St Paul said that we must add knowledge to faith. Faith is only the first rung on the ladder towards spiritual growth.