"Blind Faith": Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
Luke's testimony shows that Jesus clearly understood the value of evidence and continually provided “many convincing proofs” (Acts 1:2-3) to His followers so they could record their observations and change the world with their testimony. Jesus commended this process. His words to Thomas were not an affirmation of “blind faith”. | Luke's testimony shows that Jesus clearly understood the value of evidence and continually provided “many convincing proofs” (Acts 1:2-3) to His followers so they could record their observations and change the world with their testimony. Jesus commended this process. His words to Thomas were not an affirmation of “blind faith”. | ||
=References= | =References= |
Revision as of 02:51, 8 July 2013
Some message believers look at the evidence of Failed Prophecies that we and others have presented and state "You just don't believe" and then advocate a kind of "blind faith" that requires true believers to ignore any negative evidence. Isn't blind faith good?When Jesus presented Himself to Thomas, He made an important statement that is occasionally offered as an affirmation of some form of “blind faith”:
Without any other context to understand what Jesus believed about the relationship between evidence and faith, this single sentence (“Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed”) does sound like an endorsement of faith independent of evidential support. But context changes everything. Like other declarations offered by Jesus, this statement has to be reconciled with everything else Jesus said and did before we can truly understand what He believed about the role of evidence. But the Apostle John thought evidence was importantAs it turns out, the Apostle John wrote more about Jesus’ evidential approach than any other Gospel author. According to John, Jesus repeatedly offered the evidence of His miracles to verify His identity and told His observers that this evidence was sufficient:
John frequently described Jesus as someone who offered the evidence of His miraculous power to demonstrate His Deity. In fact, the passage describing Thomas’ doubt is also an affirmation of an evidential faith, if it is read in its entirety:
John makes an important statement right after the line that is typically offered to “demonstrate” Jesus’ alleged affirmation of a non-evidential faith: “Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples…”. What? Blessed are those who did not see and yet believed, therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples? Do you see the contradiction here if Jesus was speaking against evidence? Why would Jesus continue to provide evidence if those who believe without evidence are supposed to be blessed? The answer is found, once again, in the Gospel of John. In Jesus’ famous prayer to the Father, He prayed for unity and He carefully included those of us who would become Christians long after Jesus ascended into Heaven:
Jesus is talking here about all the people (like you and me) who will believe in Jesus not because of what we will see with our own eyes but because of what the disciples saw and recorded as eyewitnesses (“their word”). Yes, Thomas was blessed to believe on the basis of what he saw, but how much more blessed are those who will someday believe, not on the basis of what they will see, but on the basis of what the disciples saw and faithfully recorded. Luke thought evidence was important as well
Luke's testimony shows that Jesus clearly understood the value of evidence and continually provided “many convincing proofs” (Acts 1:2-3) to His followers so they could record their observations and change the world with their testimony. Jesus commended this process. His words to Thomas were not an affirmation of “blind faith”. ReferencesParts of this article were adapted from an email by J. Warner Wallace, the author of Cold-Case Christianity - Stand to Reason |