What is the attraction of a "blind faith?" I do admit to see some glimmer, though I must also admit I take it to be of the same sort as costume jewelry. I suspect that the majority of the instances where one comes across a claim to take God to be who you have not come to know He is (yet and/or yourself), stems from the claim-giver's fear and unbelief (for surely if one says a thing louder and more confident, it must validate its validity; to think so highly of your will as to insist it's potency can effect a truth; I now recall as a child feeling and acting as if to shut my eyes hard enough was to dissolve the obstruction to my will.) Is it not so clear that our projections of a Good God may go no further than the screen of our Imagination? Our God knows our minds; who we know Him to be. Surely there can be times where we can take Him to be both who He is and who we have not known Him (through experience) to be. And this is faith, and this is trust. But I ask, faith as what? Trust in whom? We have not trusted ourselves into our cultural context; we are born into Christian homes as others are born into Law homes. Why should we expect/desire to take our culture's word for who God is anymore than we should expect/desire other's to trust theirs? It is not trust in our doctrine that will fulfill the requirements of the law, neither trust in our parent's upbringing, nor our culture's accurate depiction of their creator. It is the definer, enactor, and fulfiller of the law that does Himself, and who knows our minds. Surely He does not now expect of us what we are not now?
What is the attraction of a "blind faith?" It is to propose and assume that our God desires us to know what we do not, to take Him to be who we do not know Him to be. And this is balanced upon fear; we resist challenging the assumption for fear it is true, for if it is, such challenging would negate its "blindness." This knowing is trusting. This trusting is incurred either associatively (concerning God's Being through other human beings) or experientially (concerning God's Being through our human being).
I reject blind faith. This is too strong, though. I reject that God desires our blindness of faith (even in Him). I must concede that it is a good thing to come into light by way of darkness, to sight by way of blindness (but, "by way of" might be better expressed "before"). It is a good thing to come to God any way one can, but once you find He is not hard of hearing, stop shouting. It is an insult to continue on playing Marco-Polo once you find your companion to have been waiting all this time at the table. Eat with Him.
If you do not will to know God is Good, you will not so know Him.
If you will to know God is Good, you will know He is so.
We come to know God by a cooperation of our wills with Truth.
We do not come to know God by an independence of our wills, which is a cooperation of our wills with Mis-Truth through maintained projection of our Imagination by our will.
How can one assist another to trust that God is Good? Not with clever rebuttals to ceaseless arguments (only a type of questioning and admittedly bias). How does one display that God is Good: by outwards expressions of actuated trust in His Goodness. Lead in following. Show how one follows well. But one must concede to not winning the battle in order to fight well.
No comments:
Post a Comment