Faith is commonly described as “believing in something you don’t see.” Or touch, or smell, or – you get the point. (There are other, and probably better, definitions, but this is good enough for most of us to agree on.)
Think about it, then. If you can’t “see” it, aren’t you walking blind? Maybe. And maybe not. Maybe what you’re dealing with really is invisible. As I pointed out in my last post, you need only look through a microscope or telescope to find a whole other world beyond the range of your natural unaided vision. But no-one would label you blind for using the scope, would they? Of course not.
The real problem lies in the assumption that all we can see (and touch and smell and hear and taste) is all that is. And maybe it is. But maybe it’s not.
Which brings me to my own definition of faith: faith (at least in a general sense) is the willingness to explore the possibility that there may be more to our world than meets the eye.
No, faith is not blind. It just happens to deal in things that cannot be seen. And people of faith are not – or at least shouldn’t be – unreasonable. Choosing to engage things you can’t see is hardly grounds to ignore what’s right before your eyes.
What’s your take, though?
You just read Why I Don’t Believe in “Blind Faith” (Part 2) on Tambaya! If you liked it, and want to be notified when I write new posts (thrice a week), simply subscribe via email, RSS and Facebook (on NetworkedBlogs)! And feel free to share it with your friends using the buttons below.