If you have faith like a grain of mustard seed ...

Simon

Matthew 17:20 - He said to them, “Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you.

I get the 'message' - if you believe enough (in fact, even a tiny amount - a mustard seed being tiny) then nothing is impossible but really, what a ridiculous statement and idea for several reasons.

There are lots of people who believe things completely and sincerely even to the point of death. So far I've not noticed any sudden movements of any mountain ranges. Their faith does nothing. All that faith does is motivate people (often to do stupid things) but it doesn't help them accomplish anything. For that you need effort and energy and at that point you are at the limits of human endeavour the same as the rest of us. So what does faith really "do" other than influence your choices? Nothing.

So really what was the point of that scripture? It's blatantly untrue - it is simply a great soundbite that makes no sense if you think about it longer than 2 seconds.

I think a more accurate version would be "if you have enough faith, we can make you do anything". Yes, believe enough and there is nothing that you won't put up with or tolerate or make excuses for. It would take a mountain to move to change your mind if you just believe enough.

It doesn't matter if your church lies, hurts people, rips families apart or covers up child abuse - even a mountain of evidence won't convince someone who has faith.

I guess they can't move mountains but they will be unmoved by mountains of evidence.

prologos

Since Paul in Hebr. 11 qualifies, or re-defines that statement to: faith being an "expectation" only, the moving mountain range is future and of of course it is "not beheld", invisible , so convenient, akin to an illusion. A Hyperbole, like the 2x12 in your eye.

Simon

It's important to also remember the context: it was in response to the disciples asking why they could not expel a demon from someone possessed.

Now, does anyone really believe in demon possession? Surely with the demons now cast out of heaven and supposedly confined to the earth the frequency of such occurrences should be way higher ... so why don't we have the today?

Or is it that we simply now recognize that what was once labeled "demon possession" is really mental illness and they can be treated. No faith required. The supernatural is reserved for TV shows and movies, it has no place in modern society. And yet the stories that rely on it's existence in order to be credible somehow persist.

The bible makes for great soundbites but as a source of any form of wisdom it's seriously lacking. Strange that people would put so much weight into following what is so easily discredited as a genuine narrative. No wonder that they keep the soundbites but make sure they are always taken out of context, disconnected from the original source.

Jonathan Drake

What is the difference between Christ saying this and parents telling their children they can, "become anything they set their mind to"?

Simon

What is the difference between Christ saying this and parents telling their children they can, "become anything they set their mind to"?

One is good parenting and building up a child's self confidence. The other is simply manipulating people with lies and is effectively putting them down - the message is that they failed because they lacked sufficient faith, i.e. "you are not good enough, do better".

Jonathan Drake

Ok yea, that's a good point. Lemme share what I concluded from researching this segment of matthew.

In Matt 16 you see the disciples doubted even after seeing miraculous feeding of thousands. They doubted so much that they forgot to bring the leftover loaves with them when they departed. Then, it was so heavy on their minds that when Christ said to, "watch out for the leaven of the Pharisees" they didn't even think about the strange expression. They just assumed he meant the bread they forgot.

however, Christ then explains by drawing out of them why they doubted. The Pharisees were teaching, correctly, that the bible said in Malachi that Elijah would come first before the messiah. They didn't percieve John the Baptist was Elijah and so they doubted Jesus was the Christ. However, three of them had exceptional faith, and these three are rewarded by being given the very thing the Pharisees were asking for in chapter 16, a sign of his authority and messianic claim in the form of the transfiguration. However only the three saw it, thus the others continued to doubt. and the doubt prevented the expulsion of this demon.

So, considering all this context, Jesus bluntness seems sensible to me. If I was providing all the proof in the world as credentials for a fact, and the people I was showing this to doubted anyway: I'd be frustrated. Especially after it happening many times. So, in my opinion (whatever that's worth), this blunt statement makes sense. It's like, "after everything you've seen you still have no faith in me? Really?"

Simon

In Matt 16 you see the disciples doubted even after seeing miraculous feeding of thousands. They doubted so much that they forgot to bring the leftover loaves with them when they departed. Then, it was so heavy on their minds that when Christ said to, "watch out for the leaven of the Pharisees" they didn't even think about the strange expression. They just assumed he meant the bread they forgot.

The disciples were the dumb sidekicks - there to make Jesus look good. It's totally believable that you'd see all these miracles and then fail to believe ... not.

It's like, "after everything you've seen you still have no faith in me? Really?"

So given then those closest to him who witness first-hand amazing miracles didn't believe he was the son of god. Then erm, why should anyone else?

What I do believe: it's all a fanciful and concocted story that doesn't stand up to scrutiny if you look at it objectively and consider human factors, motivations etc... It's a badly written book where characters make strange decisions simply because the plot writer has something else in mind and didn't know how to write all that well.

Jonathan Drake

In the end they believe him. Also, Jesus blood brothers didn't believe him at all either in the gospels, but later they do believe.

ive spoken about this subject with several people and I always concede that there is no proof to believe what happens in the gospels. None of those things can be proven, only that Jesus did live and rome killed him- that's it. The rest must be taken on faith, and that can't be denied by anyone no matter how crazy indoctrinated into a denomination they are - there is NO PROOF.

Thus, what you believe is completely possible. And it's the reason why, for me, looking at verifiable history from the first century is far more useful. As an example, the people who joined the Christian movement by the thousands were doing so at the risk of their own lives. They would have known this because at first they were all Jews, and also since they all knew what happened to Stephen as recorded in Acts 7. Yet, even with this fear, even after its real life demonstration in Stephen - they still didn't renounce Christianity. What further fascinates me is how such a drastic cultural shift happened in only a few years at most - and again, in the face of possible death. Something very real, and very impressive was going on to cause such a drastic explosion of Jesus devotion.

thats how I feel about it personally anyway.

steve2

Christ required total unquestioning faith of his followers and spoke of doubt in derogatory ways. He set the haughty template by which people who claim to be his followers also come to expect from their followers total faith and deride doubt. Paul perfected the art of calling doubters troublemakers who were seeking to further their own suspect ends.

In the Bible, doubt is brought down to size, not by reasoning and examining the evidence, but by shame and fear, truly the greatest silencers known to manipulative humans.

Over the years - and not just within the stricter schools of Christianity - to doubt is to be patronized at best, and demonized at worst.

Village Idiot

Jesus was prone to hyperbole so I believe he was being metaphoric in this case. What cannot be dismissed is his statement at the end of the book of Mark:

15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” Mark 16:15-20 New International Version

The highlighted scriptures are those that would be more difficult to fake (unless they choose their snakes and their 'poison'. And yes I know that this scripture does not appear in some manuscripts but that only highlights the contradictions of the Bible.

If you have faith like a grain of mustard seed ...

Share this