I don't see blind Faith... do you?
I think you miss the point of the story. Let's recap:
[The dog] knew nothing except that his master was here, and when the doop opened, he came running in without fear.
The point is, the dog DID know something. And the dog knew it beyond a shadow of a doubt. Call it intuition, or perhaps the ability to use senses that are beyond the physical world.
Animals of all types display evidence of sensory ranges that humans do not share, but they *also* evidence precisely what you have focused on ... the ability to*communicate* through more than just yelps and meows, in a very real way. And how much greater are we, than our animal brethren!
Blind faith, to me, is exactly that. It does not actually behold something; it simply *hopes* that in fact there *is* something to behold! It takes on an added dimension if and when a person *has* actually experienced the object of faith before. There can be a moment of revelation, of direct spiritual experience, but it is up to us to continue looking toward the light ... even when we cannot experience that light shining as directly or as brightly as before.
To me, THIS is Faith. It is therefore based on something very REAL, in one's own experience, and does not hinge entirely upon the testimony of others - wherever, and however, that testimony has been recorded. I do not necessarily have to go on a vision quest in order to obtain an experience of the Divine. All that is necessary is to open myself, and my perceptions, to the world around me ... and to seek the light of understanding, which God provides.
The Quakers, or Society of Friends, go about things much in this way, including at their Meetings. And that appeals to me a good bit more than gold candlesticks and crucifixes, pageantry and dogma. If all this religious mumbo-jumbo, and the unlikeliest of doctrines is what we're supposed to have
faith about ... then I may as well preach the good gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. At least that's something we can smile about, and all acknowledge as absurd, without offending good common sense and reason.
The problems enter in, as I see it, when we're asked to accept pure absurdity as "fact." While some people question the very existence of various religious figures (prophets, saviors, etc.), we can at least look to historical records to help support our case, in either direction. Extraordinary claims, however, require extraordinary evidence ... keeping in mind that what was extraordinary, heretical or impossible in a day gone by, is today commonplace and taken for granted!
Once ET has walked on the earth along with our own humanity, say for a few years or so, even the diehard skeptics will have to change their tune. And imagine if some of the holy figures from the world's various religions are finally permitted to "set the record straight" (as I believe they have already attempted, even numerous times). This may pertain to everything from their origin to the circumstances of their death, as well as the very purpose for their mission on earth. Here again, sooner or later, even the diehard "believer" - or man of faith - from the respective religion, will be forced to concede to the word of authority.
It's like arguing to Pythagoras that A squared + B squared does NOT equal C squared. Even young children learn the Pythagorean Theorem, and its truth is a constant one - undebatable, unchanging. But just look at how religious doctrines change and evolve over the centuries. Our minds, our understanding, our knowledge and even our ability to reason, GROWS. And with growth, we come to know more about ourselves, each other, and the world we live in. To suggest that our understanding of Deity, or matters Spiritual, is somehow static - frozen in time at any particular moment in world history, however distant or recent - is quite preposterous. It's not called Progressive Revelation for giggles and grins.
So all this
faith that we're supposed to have regarding things that now seem to us absurd, or unlikely ... some of this may one day present itself in such a way, that the blind faith of yesterday becomes the commonplace knowledge and practical wisdom of today! Other things will be disproved, and those who preached blind faith will feel rather foolish indeed. But my real point is that even if you're going out on a limb, you do not simply keep walking with no intention to stop whatsoever. The limb will get smaller, and your weight will remain the same, and eventually, the limb will snap, or else it will simply bend and you will fall right off.
You don't have to be a gnostic in order to base your faith upon knowledge, and upon real, solid experience. But you may find that it *does* require the shelving of a lot of religious mumbo-jumbo ... which is contrary to sound logic and common sense. This is not atheism, nor is it pure agnosticism. It just means admitting how little we really know, and trusting that the powers that be will guide us to increased understanding - if we are sincerely looking, and not afraid of what we might find there. But that's TWO big "ifs."
~Zag
