Does anyone agree with this statement? Why or why not?

Question

"...... because faith requires by definition the suspension of thought and independent inquiry."

I found this in an answer to another question and was amazed at the lack of understanding concerning faith. Anyone who has ever exercised faith knows that one must have an immense ability to focus and think soberly. In my opinion, a person must constantly engage in *thought and independent inquiry* to exercise faith. What is your opinion?

Also, thoughts on the difference between "faith" and "blind faith" would be appreciated. I look forward to the thoughtful answers. Peace.

Answer 1

I think it's true that people must engage in creative thinking to exercise faith without positive, physical evidence or at least direct inference from similar situations.

Answer 2

I agree with it. Not "does anyone agree with...", but rather ask "how many of you agree with.."

Yes, faith in the unobserved, unproven, unintelligible, requires suspension of though and inquiry.

Talking snakes, talking-burning bushes, sticks to snakes, several hundred year old people, arks and floods and pairs of animals, 6 days of creation, firmament, Adam and dust and ribs, Immaculate Conception, Blood of Christ, Rev 1:13-18, Rev 4:6-8, Rev 6:13, Rev 7:1, Rev 8, Psalm 58:3, ....it goes on and on and on... THINK! Why don't we all just go and Deut 10:16 because it says so. Next time you or your family member gets a severe infection, or perhaps requires surgery, lean heavily upon Mark 5:34 and see where that really gets you.

If you believe all that you just read and can't query it, can't see that it makes absolutely no sense, then you are truly lost. Then you are exhibiting blind faith.

Answer 3

In order to have faith you have to stop thinking rationally. Faith is the opposite of rational thought.

If there's no or very little evidence for something and competing theory's hold more evidence, any faith in the theory with less evidence will be necessarily irrational.

There is no God. This is obvious to anyone what can rationally examine the evidence. There is exactly just as little evidence for God as there is for the Easter Bunny. I'm not even joking.

Answer 4

Faith comes about by a very special knowing and understanding that is revealed from within. Real faith is so strong that one cannot but believe. It doesn't come from the intellect, the noisy chatter of the mind talking to itself by positive affirmations. It doesn't come by analysis and inquiry. It's just pure consciousness that knows. It's a conviction from things unseen. Blind faith is just believing without any conviction. It's just positive thinking, the chatter of the ego mind. Not the real thing. Real faith does not need to tell itself it is real.

Answer 5

In Hebrews 11:1, there's a pretty good definition of what faith is.... "... the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

I was taught that faith in God, heaven, etc is like "knowing" that China exists... I've never been there, so I don't know for positive, but there's things that show me that China actually exists... people who've been there, mostly. I have faith in their words- that they're telling me the truth about what they've seen.


To me, the difference between faith and bind faith is that blind faith allows no questioning, kind of a "yessa massa" mentality... I find that my faith in "things hoped for" encourages asking questions, learning, study, etc.

Answer 6

According to the Bible, "faith is the evidence of things hoped for."

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, faith is "1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. "

Your personal definition of "faith" doesn't square with what the rest of the English speaking world has agreed the word means.

Answer 7

Depends what kind of faith. If it is the faith that some people will answer your question then this is reasonable. If it is faith that there is a god and faith that backward men didn't invent it because they were scared of death and couldn't explain things-then that is different...

Answer 8

depends on how much you include and associate "dogma" with "faith"

to be a follower of any particular religion one has to accept a certain amount of dogma, therefore, you are in fact giving up a measure of "independent thought and inquiry"

to simply be a person of faith, with ones own understating of ones own personal beliefs, even when this may conflict with certain tenets or principles of ones own religion shows that critical and independent thought can exist even within organized religion. ironically it is usually these independent thinkers that are the source of what comes to be dogma within a religion...

...it would seem that it varies from person to person, and probably depends a great deal on this or that persons intelligence rather than their beliefs.

Answer 9

The Greek word behind "faith" in the New Testament is 'pistis'. As a noun, 'pistis' is a word that was used as a technical rhetorical term for forensic proof. Examples of this usage are found in the works of Aristotle and Quintiallian.

Answer 10

I am not sure that faith requires the suspension of thought and inquiry, but it does rely upon putting one's trust/belief in something that is inherently unknowable and unproveable when it comes to spiritual things. That seems to me to make it illogical. It also relies in som ecases upon a belief that god created a system that runs counter to the common sense and logical powers he/she gave humans who allegedly are made in god's image. Doesn't seem likely.