"Blind" faith

[The Folk Prophet]

I understood you just fine. 

 

I doubt it.

 

I think you didn't understand me.  

 

I do not. It strikes me that you're trying to say that we cannot help what level of faith we have. And, accordingly, our salvation, which comes by our faith, is a coin toss, or that God actually is a respector of persons and therefore He giveth to some men liberally and others not.

 

The parts I highlighted should clear up any confusion.

 

Except that they do not align with some of your other comments about not being able to have it for the wanting. Now I will grant that there may be some semantic issues here. What does "wanting" mean. Obviously action is required, not just a random, "I'd like more Faith". 

 

There is a big ol' birthday cake of faith just for the "wanting". One asks, God gives. But...yes...one has to actually cut the cake, take a fork, put it in their mouth, chew and swallow.

 

What I am strongly responding against is the implication (intentional or not) that we cannot help whether we have faith or not.

 

I stated, very plainly, that faith is a gift that is freely given to any who so choose. You responded very clearly that you used to think that but you were mistaken -- implying that the entire idea is mistaken -- and that I am mistaken. But none of your quotes support the idea that God will withhold faith from anyone or that our faith is not based on our own choices, determinations, decisions, etc. And Elder Andersen's talk teaches, very clearly, that what I am saying is not mistaken at all.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

What I am strongly responding against is the implication (intentional or not) that we cannot help whether we have faith or not.

That's not what I meant. I only meant to say that faith may come more easily to some than to others..because it is a gift that Heavenly Father will bestow upon us at a time of His choosing. Certainly I think he will give it to all who seek it, but in His own time and by His own judgment.

[Guest]

Faith is not a trait to be developed or a reward to be earned.

 

We must do all that we can do to qualify for the gift of faith.

 

Faith is always a gift of God to man, which is obtained by obedience

 

Faith does not come without works; faith does not come without obedience to the commandments of God.

 

It sounds like a semantic argument to me.  Again it is like being saved.  Do we “earn” it?  Sort of yes.  Sort of no.  We have to do things to become worthy.  And if we are worthy Jesus accepts us and grants it to us.

 

So is that earning it?

 

We have to do some works and be obedient to be blessed with the GIFT of faith.  And if we have a little faith, and we do more works and are more obedient we are blessed with MORE faith.

 

So is that developing it?

 

Semantics.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Guest

[The Folk Prophet]

Faith is not a trait to be developed or a reward to be earned.

 

We must do all that we can do to qualify for the gift of faith.

 

Faith is always a gift of God to man, which is obtained by obedience

 

Faith does not come without works; faith does not come without obedience to the commandments of God.

 

It sounds like a semantic argument to me.  Again it is like being saved.  Do we “earn” it?  Sort of yes.  Sort of no.  We have to do things to become worthy.  And if we are worthy Jesus accepts us and grants it to us.

 

So is that earning it?

 

We have to do some works and be obedient to be blessed with the GIFT of faith.  And if we have a little faith, and we do more works and are more obedient we are blessed with MORE faith.

 

So is that developing it?

 

Semantics.

 

Agreed. With all due respect to whoever the "not a trait to be developed" comes from (the sourcing wasn't clear), The comment that faith is not a trait to be developed seems highly at odds with the myriad of teachings that we need to develop our faith. So which word becomes the semantic conundrum? Develop? Trait? Faith? Maybe all of them.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Agreed. With all due respect to whoever the "not a trait to be developed" comes from (the sourcing wasn't clear), The comment that faith is not a trait to be developed seems highly at odds with the myriad of teachings that we need to develop our faith. So which word becomes the semantic conundrum? Develop? Trait? Faith? Maybe all of them.

 

 

The sourcing is at the bottom, right above the link to where you can find the link to the entire talk (because context can be important.)  The source is Elder David A. Bednar from a BYUI Devotional.  

Edited October 13, 2015 by LiterateParakeet

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

 

Semantics.

 

Semantics?  Well as I told TFP, that was a quote from Elder Bednar and he quoted James E. Talmage and Joseph F. Smith.  

[RMGuy]

I believe that faith is a necessary component for individuals to operate on in the absence of knowledge.  IE, my faith bridges the gaps that my knowledge fails to fill.  

 

If I have faith in something and later come to a knowledge of that thing that verifies my faith then my faith has been justified in that thing.

If I have faith in something and later come to a knowledge of the fallacy of that thing then my faith in that thing was vain.  

 

There are many things I had a faith in as a younger man.  Many of them have been verified through my experiences and evidences and so now I know those things to be true.  I had faith in many things as a younger man that through my experiences and evidences have been proven false so I no longer hold to those items with faith.  There are far, far more items that I have not been able to conclusively resolve and so I cling to my faith in those things.  Is that blind faith?  I don't know...but it works for me.  

[Traveler]

In most cases, faith is defined as belief in an unknown BUT TRUE thing. Thus, by definition, it is impossible to have faith in something false.

 

That may or may not impact your point, but I thought it worth bringing up.

 

Just so I understand where you are coming from - in all your experience you have never witnessed at any time; faith in something that was not true?  Do you have any experience in sports, investments or politics?

[Vort]

Just so I understand where you are coming from - in all your experience you have never witnessed at any time; faith in something that was not true?  Do you have any experience in sports, investments or politics?

 

Correct, but not because I didn't believe in something false. Rather, when I believe in something false, then by definition that's not faith. This is because faith is defined as a belief in something true but unknown.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Vort

[The Folk Prophet]

Moroni provides some insight as to how the gift of faith is provided to men by God in chapter 7 of that book:

 

31 And the office of their ministry is to call men unto repentance, and to fulfil and to do the work of the covenants of the Father, which he hath made unto the children of men, to prepare the way among the children of men, by declaring the word of Christ unto the chosen vessels of the Lord, that they may bear testimony of him.

 

32 And by so doing, the Lord God prepareth the way that the residue of men may have faith in Christ, that the Holy Ghost may have place in their hearts, according to the power thereof; and after this manner bringeth to pass the Father, the covenants which he hath made unto the children of men.

[The Folk Prophet]

Correct, but not because I didn't believe in something false. Rather, when I believe in something false, then by definition that's not faith. This is because faith is defined as a belief in something true but unknown.

 

I do not think that is the definition of faith. It's something that faith is. That doesn't mean it defines it.

[Vort]

I do not think that is the definition of faith. It's something that faith is. That doesn't mean it defines it.

 

I'm not saying it's a complete definition. I'm saying that, by definition of what faith is, you cannot have faith in something false.

 

Your objection is similar to a conversation where one party is asking about the case where you have a wife who isn't your married spouse. A second party objects, noting that by definition, a wife means a spouse, so you can't have a "non-spouse wife". Then a third party interjects, "Ah! That's not true! A spouse might be a husband!"

[The Folk Prophet]

I'm not saying it's a complete definition. I'm saying that, by definition of what faith is, you cannot have faith in something false.

 

Your objection is similar to a conversation where one party is asking about the case where you have a wife who isn't your married spouse. A second party objects, noting that by definition, a wife means a spouse, so you can't have a "non-spouse wife". Then a third party interjects, "Ah! That's not true! A spouse might be a husband!"

 

Not really. My objection is actually more your first statement here. It isn't a complete definition.

 

That being said...now that I think about it, I was more responding to the idea that many people "define" as "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen", which I do not believe is a definition of faith, but rather just some stuff that faith is. Like how a dog is hairy. A dog may have hair. But "hairy" does not define a dog. Charity is kind. Kindness is not the definition of charity. Like that.

 

All that said...where do you get the idea that faith has to be in something that is true to qualify as faith?

[Vort]

Not really. My objection is actually more your first statement here. It isn't a complete definition.

 

That being said...now that I think about it, I was more responding to the idea that many people "define" as "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen", which I do not believe is a definition of faith, but rather just some stuff that faith is. Like how a dog is hairy. A dog may have hair. But "hairy" does not define a dog. Charity is kind. Kindness is not the definition of charity. Like that.

 

All that said...where do you get the idea that faith has to be in something that is true to qualify as faith?

 

I suppose primarily from Alma 32:21:

 

And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.

 

I agree with you that these things are not full definitions of faith. It is clear that faith is a Godly quality; the Lectures on Faith teach that God himself acts and creates through exercise of faith. Thus, "belief without knowing" is obviously not any kind of full definition of faith, since we can't really attribute ignorance to God. But belief without perfect knowledge is certainly an aspect of faith.

 

I think of faith as a many-faceted gem. When we talk about faith, we are usually talking about this or that facet. But sometimes, we should step back and view the whole gem.

[Guest]

Semantics?  Well as I told TFP, that was a quote from Elder Bednar and he quoted James E. Talmage and Joseph F. Smith.  

 

That was exactly why I called it semantics.  

 

How much difference is there between

     "I develop faith in me by being obedient" vs.

     "I am obedient, thus allowing the gift of faith to develop in me"?

 

Yes there is an attitude and a focus difference.  But in actual practice, how much difference is there?  Yes, I call it semantics.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Guest

[Guest AnnieCarvalho]

One thing I don't like about the internet is that we lose a lot of meaning in conversations we have because we're not able to see facial expressions, body language, and because we aren't able to actually 'converse.'

 

I feel like I've opened a can of worms here when I mentioned people who have blind faith.

Of course, you couldn't read my mind, and so you had no idea who I was referring to.

All you can do, then, is decide who YOU think I'm talking about and respond, negatively or positively.

 

So, for my own self, let me explain who I meant when I said, "blind faith."

 

I have two cousins who are not LDS, but who WERE "brought up in the way they should go" by my grandmother.  As adults, both fell far from the path and got into drugs, alcohol, and one ended up in jail for writing bad checks.

 

While in jail, they were introduced to a Teen Challenge program, and both took the challenge.

 

Now, many years later, they are two of the most wonderful human beings and examples of Christians I know.

 

However... they will not hear a single word against the Bible or their church.

They will not read anything, watch anything, listen to anything that might cause them to stumble.

They would never consider listening to the LDS Missionaries, for instance.

Because they have what I would define as "blind faith" - not only in God, in Jesus, but in their own denomination.

They don't want to hear anything that veers in any direction off that road.

They're holding their own version of the iron rod and they are good examples.

But it frustrates me, because I can't bounce my ideas or problems off them... their answer is "just have faith."

 

Anyway, that's what I mean by blind faith.

 

I envy them sometimes.

They are so sure of their salvation and question nothing.

To me, it would make life easier.

 

That's all...

[Traveler]

One thing I don't like about the internet is that we lose a lot of meaning in conversations we have because we're not able to see facial expressions, body language, and because we aren't able to actually 'converse.'

 

I feel like I've opened a can of worms here when I mentioned people who have blind faith.

Of course, you couldn't read my mind, and so you had no idea who I was referring to.

All you can do, then, is decide who YOU think I'm talking about and respond, negatively or positively.

 

So, for my own self, let me explain who I meant when I said, "blind faith."

 

I have two cousins who are not LDS, but who WERE "brought up in the way they should go" by my grandmother.  As adults, both fell far from the path and got into drugs, alcohol, and one ended up in jail for writing bad checks.

 

While in jail, they were introduced to a Teen Challenge program, and both took the challenge.

 

Now, many years later, they are two of the most wonderful human beings and examples of Christians I know.

 

However... they will not hear a single word against the Bible or their church.

They will not read anything, watch anything, listen to anything that might cause them to stumble.

They would never consider listening to the LDS Missionaries, for instance.

Because they have what I would define as "blind faith" - not only in God, in Jesus, but in their own denomination.

They don't want to hear anything that veers in any direction off that road.

They're holding their own version of the iron rod and they are good examples.

But it frustrates me, because I can't bounce my ideas or problems off them... their answer is "just have faith."

 

Anyway, that's what I mean by blind faith.

 

I envy them sometimes.

They are so sure of their salvation and question nothing.

To me, it would make life easier.

 

That's all...

 

I agree - except with you thinking life is easier.  When we have faith in illusions that are not true; faith will fail us just as those in the pre-existence that had faith in Lucifer rather than the Father and his son and so were cast out.  I have had much experience with those of such blind faith that they will stand in the bright sun of noon day and call it night and believe there is no consequence for rejecting truth they do not want to hear.  True faith will lead a person to truth not ever to error.

[priesthoodpower]

.....

 

I have two cousins who are not LDS, but who WERE "brought up in the way they should go" by my grandmother.  As adults, both fell far from the path and got into drugs, alcohol, and one ended up in jail for writing bad checks.

 

While in jail, they were introduced to a Teen Challenge program, and both took the challenge.

 

Now, many years later, they are two of the most wonderful human beings and examples of Christians I know.

 

However... they will not hear a single word against the Bible or their church.

They will not read anything, watch anything, listen to anything that might cause them to stumble.

They would never consider listening to the LDS Missionaries, for instance.

Because they have what I would define as "blind faith" - not only in God, in Jesus, but in their own denomination.

They don't want to hear anything that veers in any direction off that road.

They're holding their own version of the iron rod and they are good examples.

But it frustrates me, because I can't bounce my ideas or problems off them... their answer is "just have faith."

 

Anyway, that's what I mean by blind faith.

 

......

 

I admire your two cousins and they sound like very good people.

 

 

Christianity is under attack big time and its funny how we as LDS are slowly becoming more accepted by our peers. Other churchs that mocked us as a cult are slowly viewing us as Christians as their congregations slowly give way to the world.

 

We are already known worldwide as a church with strong Family values.

 

I think it just a matter of time for the LDS church to be an umbrella for all christian churchs and all the good people like your cousins will find it easier to bring their goodness and merge it with ours.

 

my two cents.

[Traveler]

In most cases, faith is defined as belief in an unknown BUT TRUE thing. Thus, by definition, it is impossible to have faith in something false.

 

That may or may not impact your point, but I thought it worth bringing up.

 

I have tried to warp my mind around this thought.  If faith is the belief, without evidence, in something that is true - but such a truth that any knowledge or evidence that unmasks the truth would, by definition, exclude such belief as faith - plus if a belief is based on false principles or comes to false conclusions - that is not faith.  What in the world is faith and how can we say something is actually faith?  How can we have faith in a definition of faith that has no application that distinguishes a result that cannot be known? 

 

We are encouraged to have faith?  How can we have faith when it is only faith if what we have faith in is true -  but if there is anything that can be known as true - that knowledge excludes our connection as faith.  What in blazes is faith?  If you know - then it is not faith and it is only faith if it is true.  How can we have any concept of what we believe has anything to do with faith?

Edited October 14, 2015 by Traveler

[Vort]

I have tried to warp my mind around this thought.  If faith is the belief, without evidence, in something that is true - but such a truth that any knowledge or evidence that unmasks the truth would, by definition, exclude such belief as faith - plus if a belief is based on false principles or comes to false conclusions - that is not faith.  What in the world is faith and how can we say something is actually faith?  How can we have faith in a definition of faith that has no application that distinguishes a result that cannot be known? 

 

We are encouraged to have faith?  How can we have faith when it is only faith if what we have faith in is true -  but if there is anything that can be known as true - that knowledge excludes our connection as faith.  What in blazes is faith?  If you know - then it is not faith and it is only faith if it is true.  How can we have any concept of what we believe has anything to do with faith?

 

Basically, the idea is that you can have faith in Jesus Christ, but you cannot have faith in Santa Claus. If faith is an active principle of power, then this distinction makes good sense.

[erog84]

Basically, the idea is that you can have faith in Jesus Christ, but you cannot have faith in Santa Claus. If faith is an active principle of power, then this distinction makes good sense.

 

If faith is an active principle of power, could you not there for act in a way that re-inforces your belief in Santa Claus, regardless of whether it is true or not?  I say this in no way to be argumentative, I find the discussion to be fascinating because there can be so many viewpoints on what faith is, but I tend to agree with Traveler regarding faith in this regard.  People of all denominations put faith in their beliefs, but not all beliefs can be true.  Those same people act on those beliefs, just like LDS act on theirs.  Obviousely we feel like we are right compared to other denominations, but I believe some of them might display even more faith (while wrong) than some LDS do in their beliefs.

 

Dictionary.com offers up many descriptions, as does the Standard Works, and ultimately it really doesn't matter who is "right or wrong", it just makes for interesting conversation.

[Traveler]

Basically, the idea is that you can have faith in Jesus Christ, but you cannot have faith in Santa Claus. If faith is an active principle of power, then this distinction makes good sense.

 

If you have faith in Santa Claus - being raised up in an effluent society - you may think your faith is rewarded by many exorbitant gifts and yet unaware that some youth in poverty that has faith in Santa Clause goes hungry and perhaps even starves to death at Christmas time.  My point is that there is faith in things that are not true - and such faith, thought it seems good or profitable for a time is useless.  My question - that few seem to want to explorer - how can we develop or connect with faith that is true?  How do anyone that believes in Christ connect to the faith that will make them whole?  I do not believe that answer is abstract as many make it out to be in order to cover their flawed faith?

[Vort]

If faith is an active principle of power, could you not there for act in a way that re-inforces your belief in Santa Claus, regardless of whether it is true or not?

 

Sure. But your reinforced believe still would not be true.

 

Let me put it this way: Suppose you have such strong faith in Christ that you can perform a miracle, such as a healing of yourself or another. Can any amount of "faith" in Santa Claus produce any such effect? Of course not. Santa Claus does not exist, so such "faith" has no power. So it is not faith.

 

Unbelievers will, of course, maintain that God is equally fictitious with Santa Claus and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. In other words, they say that faith as the LDS teach it is a false principle. This is why they deny the power of God, and are thus blind to the power of faith.

 

If you have faith in Santa Claus - being raised up in an effluent society - you may think your faith is rewarded by many exorbitant gifts and yet unaware that some youth in poverty that has faith in Santa Clause goes hungry and perhaps even starves to death at Christmas time.  My point is that there is faith in things that are not true - and such faith, thought it seems good or profitable for a time is useless.

 

Then it is a semantic issue: How do you want to define faith? I choose to define it as I understand the prophets and scriptures to have defined it, in which case you can have faith only in true things.

 

[Edited to make the last sentence say what I originally meant it to say.]

Edited October 15, 2015 by Vort

[Traveler]

Then it is a semantic issue: How do you want to define faith? I choose to define it as the prophets and scriptures have defined it, in which case you can have faith only in true things.

 

The scripture also indicate that we progress line upon line upon line and precept upon precept upon precept.  I am suggesting that your faith can take you to a better understanding.  For example Jesus stated on more than one occasion that faith makes an individual whole.  So if you are like me and are not whole - something is missing concerning your faith.

 

It is my experience that only by exercising - does one learn if it is true or false - (As per Alma) and after we have the faith to plant a seed - only then will we begin to understand if our faith is true.

 

It is also my experience and almost any single concept can be justified to be true by some scripture but in reality it is not true - and this is the reason that there is so much division among religious people - because they attach themselves to a stale faith that is not alive and growing as the seed Alma says is the true seed.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Traveler

[Traveler]

It is my understanding that faith is a willingness to experiment to discover truth - not a belief (faith) that one has the truth.