During Alma the Younger?¢‚Ç¨‚Ñ¢s sermon to the poor of Antionum, he extrapolated on the foundation of what faith is.
…faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.
I wonder though how this can be. If something has to be true for you to have faith, how can you know that thing is true? Wouldn?¢‚Ç¨‚Ñ¢t such knowledge nullify the faith then?
Let?¢‚Ç¨‚Ñ¢s take for example the existence of God. By Alma?¢‚Ç¨‚Ñ¢s definition, God needs to be true?¢‚Ç¨‚Äùor exist?¢‚Ç¨‚Äùin order for me to have faith in Him. Yet, how can I know in advance He exists?¢‚Ç¨‚Äùis true?¢‚Ç¨‚Äùbefore I have faith in Him?
You might say, ?¢‚Ç¨?ìJoseph Smith, Moses and others saw him and testify of him?¢‚Ç¨¬ù. Absolutely, but I wasn?¢‚Ç¨‚Ñ¢t there with them, so I have to have faith in their words or testimonies. However, that brings us back to knowing something is true before having faith in it. I would need to know that what Joseph Smith, Moses and others claimed were true before I can have faith in their words.
I have no problems with faith amounting to a belief in something that cannot be seen. However, throwing in the ?¢‚Ç¨?ìtruth aspect?¢‚Ç¨¬ù seems to be throwing a wrench into the whole definition.