What is the difference between 'faith' and 'blind faith'?

Faith is believing something is true even though there is no evidence to support it being true.

Blind faith is believing something is true even though there is evidence to support it not being true. (Blind to the apparent).

It's a subtle difference but important.

Faith is not a trait of a person.

Faith is believing in something even though it does not appear to be true.

Using faith as a means of understanding the world puts you at risk of being taken advantage of by others.

Blind Faith is the name of one of Eric Clapton's bands.

Faith is the name of a George Michael song.

I have to admit that this is only my take on this.

I bevieve that all truth MUST be ONE.

Whatever truth is discovered by science can not contradict religious truth. One must be wrong IF there is a seeming contradiction..

Blind faith totally rejects ANY findings of science IF they believe it disagrees with the literal and "inerrant" truth contained in the Bible. (Of course whatever "Interpretation" they are using must also be "infallible.") This is nonesense to me.

I prefer to believe science where it has been shown to be correct to any rational person. The Bible was only meant to teach religious truth. Even if you decide not to believe in macro evolution -- although this is one of the most proven theories in science -- the age of the earth is very demonstartable -- even to people of lttle science. Thus the world could NOT be just 6000 years old or so.

For another example I certainly believe in evolution. Having been very versed in the sciences, I find this eminently rational explanation of how life arrived as it is today. It would seem that Fundamentalist using BLIND faith, could NOT believe in evolution. (Most never have even studied science enough to make any intelligent decision in this regard). But to me evolution in no way conflicts with either creation or Intelligent Design. Why could not God have USED the process of evolution to create everything? Makes sense to me.

Next, whatever I believe MUST be rational. It must make sense. Therefore IF God is a loving being, then any belief that contradicts that I would question.

For example, some Fundamentalist believe that IFa person never hears about Jesus and the Gospel-- sorry -- right off to hell. They contend that since it says in the bible that only by accepting Jesus can you be saved. Unfortunately again only (censored) -- and of course Fundamentalists -- seem not to have the ability to understand that this can be accomplished many different ways. Just mouthing the words "I accept Jesus" is nonesense. Faith must be LIVED every day, It os not a one sentence experience.

"God is love, and he who abides in love, abides in God and God in him." I think that is somewhere in MY Bible at least. (I suspect many Fundamentalists scribble that passage out). This abiding in love and God abiding in him MUST include everyone. Even if that person NEVER heard of the word Jesus or the Bible.

To send someone to hell for just happening not to have heard of Jesus to me this an irrational belief. based again on BLIND faith. But now this faith is NOT based on scripture but only on some one's interpretation of scripture. Many scriptural verses contradict this premise.

Thus, my belief system MUST be inherently rational. We are rational beings after all. God gave us our intellects to USE! Not to abandon for BLIND faith.

(Read the parable of the talents).

=============================

and

T

seems to make a lot of sense also!

The only thing I might add, that although no factual evidence may support some article of faith, it must not stretch credulity past the limit of rationality, nor be self-contradictory.

Thus I do not believe that the easter bunny is real, nor do I believe that a loving God will indiscriminately send someone to hell.

Faith goes blind from too much masturbation (I thought everyone knew that?)

All faith is blind faith