Father & Young Daughter Seated at the Table Having a Discussion | Exploring Religion and Sacrifice | Understanding Sacrifice

The Invisible Nature of Faith: Why Sacrifice Reveals Belief

How can faith be recognized? True faith is revealed through sacrifice, not appearance, and challenges comfort.

There’s a comedian I enjoy named Theo Von. In his comedy, he plays this character who’s, let’s say, a little simple. He comes across as very credulous—a little ignorant. Nobody is really sure if it’s a character he’s playing or if that’s genuinely who he is. 

Anyway, in one of his routines, he jokes about meeting astronaut Buzz Aldrin. He says:

Here’s one thing that strikes me about the moon landing. For one, I met Buzz Aldrin. And I looked into his eyes. And he didn’t look—to me—it didn’t look like he had been to the moon. And I’m not saying that everybody got that special lunar glow in their eye— everybody got that galactic twinkle in one of their [eye] balls, if they’ve been to the moon, but he didn’t have it! For me.

It’s funny because, for some reason, we expect that someone who’s experienced something so profound, like walking on the moon, should look different—somehow marked by their experience.

We humans have a strong tendency to believe that we can read someone’s character by looking at them. Historically, people even built whole theories around this, like phrenology—the belief that you could tell a person’s propensity for criminality or virtue by the shape of their skull. Obviously, we now know how flawed and even damaging those ideas were, often entangled with racism and prejudice. However, the instinct remains: we like to think that we can “see” what a person is really like just by looking at them.

Acts of sacrifice become powerful witnesses of our faith—not just to others, but to ourselves.

So, I ask, what does a person of faith look like? Do they have some kind of celestial twinkle? Maybe, sometimes. In fact, there was a fun study back in 2010 out of the University of Toronto that seemed to scientifically verify what used to be called “Mo-Dar” or “Mormon radar.” We often believe that holiness can be visible in people’s “countenances.”  But I think we’d all admit that our “righteousness radar” isn’t infallible.

In other traditions, holy men and women sometimes look very distinct. We can think of the yogis of India or Eastern Orthodox priests with their flowing robes and uncut beards. In our own tradition, however, people of faith often look just like everyone else.

The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard made a similar observation about what he called the “knight of faith.” He said, “The instant I first lay eyes on [the Knight of Faith], I set him apart at once; I jump back, clap my hands, and say half aloud, ‘Good Lord, is this the man, Is this really the one—he looks just like a tax collector!’” In other words,  if you were to meet one of these remarkable people, they would look perfectly ordinary, nothing special about them whatsoever. Nothing in their outward appearance would reveal the profound faith within. 

And so, Knights of Faith go through life looking like tax collectors, middle managers, teachers, ice cream scoopers, interior decorators, Subway sandwich artists, plumbers, lawyers—quietly performing acts of faith day in and day out with little fanfare.

So, faith is largely invisible and interior. We are in no position to judge the faith of other people. The real paradox, though, is that our own faith can sometimes remain hidden to us. We might think that we can discern our own faith better than anyone else—because we are, obviously, closer to ourselves than anyone else. But the insights of modern psychology suggest that we are often mysteries to ourselves. 

At least since Freud in the early 20th century, we’ve known that human beings are extremely adept at deceiving themselves. We have elaborate psychological defense mechanisms set up to protect our ego. When we construct our sense of self, we often give selective attention to the evidence at hand—overemphasizing evidence that suggests we are heroic and noble and ignoring evidence that suggests we’re wily rascals. For these reasons, we actually don’t know ourselves very well.

In light of this, perhaps our own faith can be difficult to assess. This is, I think, where sacrifice and tangible acts of faith can be particularly important. Acts of sacrifice become powerful witnesses of our faith—not just to others, but to ourselves. When we’re willing to act on our beliefs, to give something up, that sacrifice stands as evidence of the health of our faith.

You cannot talk about sacrifice without referencing Abraham and Isaac. God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac. Was this to test Abraham’s faith, as though God didn’t already know what Abraham was capable of? Or was it so that Abraham could come to understand his own faith more deeply, as though looking in a mirror? It seems to me likely that God already knew the quality of Abraham’s faith. But did Abraham know the quality of his own faith? I imagine he learned a lot about himself in the plodding, three-day journey to the top of Mount Moriah. 

Now, this Abraham story is one of the trickiest and, frankly, most unsettling in all of scripture. In fact, Kierkegaard wrote an entire book about Abraham and his sacrifice of Isaac called Fear and Trembling. Instead of writing under his own name, however, Kierkegaard writes under a pseudonym, Johannes de Silento, or Johan the Silent. In the book, Johannes-Kierkegaard admits to not being able to understand Abraham—he is “silent” in the face of Abraham’s staggering faith, and “silent” in the face of God’s terrible requirements. 

True faith isn’t easy or comfortable—it often demands something profound of us.

But this doesn’t mean that Kierkegaard found the entire story absurd or that he found nothing to learn from it. The most obvious lesson, it seems, is that faith can be tremendously difficult. This story underscores a fact that remains relevant today: true faith isn’t easy or comfortable—it often demands something profound of us.

Kierkegaard lived in Denmark in the 19th century, at a time when everyone was Christian, and a member of the state church, baptized as a baby as a matter of course. But he believed that this kind of de facto Christianity—what we might call cultural Christianity—was no Christianity at all. There’s a serious risk in living in a place where the Church enjoys hegemony (i.e. where the Church is the majority). Kierkegaard said that where there is “Christendom,” it is there that Christianity dies. Because choosing to be a Christian is supposed to be an intentional choice which can be difficult and fraught. But, if it’s the de facto state, the choice isn’t really made for one’s self but accepted passively as a matter of course. 

True faith, by contrast, is when God meets you at the nexus of “fear and trembling.” We all have to choose for ourselves to be a Christian, to be a Latter-day Saint. This remains true even, or perhaps especially if we were “raised” a Latter-day Saint. 

When it comes to faith and sacrifice, I think of a recent X comment that read: “High-demand religion is the only religion there is. Anything else is just a book club.” (This is too snarky—but hey, it’s X.) Perhaps more tactfully put, Joseph Smith taught that “a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation.”

The Church of Jesus Christ is often designated as a “high-demand religion,” and there are many who find “high-demand religions” suspicious. One sometimes senses that “high demand religion” is just a new and polite euphemism for “cult.” But to the point of the Tweet: if religion doesn’t demand something of us—if it doesn’t push us toward sacrifice—then what is it but a social club?

One of the more sobering scriptures in all of modern revelation reads: “Therefore, they must needs be chastened and tried, even as Abraham, who was commanded to offer up his only son. For all those who will not endure chastening, but deny me, cannot be sanctified.” 

EVEN AS ABRAHAM. Are you sweating, yet?

There will come a time when God calls each of us to demonstrate our faith through a difficult sacrifice. In that moment, it’s as if He says, “I will meet you at the crossroads of fear and trembling. Only here can I give you the true gift of faith. Only here can you show Me—and perhaps even yourself—the depth and sincerity of your belief.”​​

Faith is not always comfortable. If every time God speaks to you, He validates you and your choices and never asks you to do difficult things, to make sacrifices, to repent, to swim in the dark waters of fear and trembling, then it’s worth considering that the voice you’re hearing is not God’s, but your own, ventriloquized back to you.

What will God call you to sacrifice? For most of us, it will be our favorite sins. 

Since Old Testament times, God asked his people to ritually sacrifice animals. Of this practice, Elder Neal A. Maxwell once taught, “Real, personal sacrifice never was placing an animal on the altar. Instead, it is a willingness to put the animal in us upon the altar and letting it be consumed.”

Real faith requires us to sacrifice and to let go of our own will.

Let us pray like King Lamoni’s father, “if there is a God, and if thou art God, wilt thou make thyself known unto me, and I will give away all my sins to know thee.

As we contemplate what it means to have faith, remember that true faith is rarely comfortable. It challenges us, stretches us, and asks us to step beyond what feels safe. Real faith requires us to sacrifice, to wrestle with God, and to let go of our own will in order to draw closer to Him.

In the end, the sacrifices we make—the things we’re willing to place on the altar—are not just about proving our faith to God. They’re about revealing our faith to ourselves, allowing us to see what we truly believe and who we truly are.

So let’s each ask ourselves: What am I willing to give up to make my faith real, even when it asks me to wade into the waters of fear and trembling? What am I willing to sacrifice, not just to please God, but to discover the depths of my own faith?

About the author

Corey Landon Wozniak

Corey Landon Wozniak lives with his wife and four sons in Las Vegas, NV. He teaches English and Comparative Religions at a public high school.
On Key

You Might Also Like

The Room Next Door Review

“The Room Next Door” is the latest example of arthouse social engineering.  The film is about a troubled woman, Martha, who in the midst of cancer treatments decides to commit suicide. If this bothers you, the film implies, it is because there is something wrong with you. This is all the more troubling, because the film, in many ways, is beautiful. It is directed by Pedro Almodóvar, one of the most acclaimed living film directors, in his first full-length film in English. And you can’t help but be taken by the beauty of it all. The film is suffused with the soft colors of the woods. Despite being an entire screenplay full of little except two friends talking, the camera work keeps the film alive and moving. And Julianne Moore and Tilda Swinton who play Ingrid and Martha once again give impeccable, engaging performances, that you can’t help but admire.  But all the beauty in this film is in service of a story that is decidedly ugly—but not self-awarely so. Our two main characters are old friends who met as young writers. Ingrid has published a best seller recently, where she writes about how she can’t accept death. On her publicity tour, she learns that Martha is in the hospital with cancer. She goes to visit her and reignite their friendship. We learn through the conversations that these characters aren’t bad people, necessarily, they just struggle to see a world outside of their own desires and consciousness. They have repeatedly avoided building relationships or having families. Martha does have a daughter. But she chased her father away, then lied to her about who he was her whole life, and then proceeded to be an absent mother so she could chase the romanticism of being a war correspondent.  Now that she is sick and dying, she notices that she has no one in her life. The movie comments on this like an unusual quirk, rather than the inevitable result of a life of bad decisions. We learn early on that cancer treatment can be a roller coaster with euphoric peaks, and miserable nadirs. During one such rut, Martha purchases a suicide pill, and decides she will kill herself. She reaches out to Ingrid and asks her to come on vacation with her, so that she will have someone in the house when she does it.  Ingrid agrees. And although she early on expresses some discomfort, she quickly respects Martha’s wishes to largely pretend nothing is happening. They have a lovely vacation in upstate New York watching old movies and reading books. While they are there, Ingrid reconnects with Damien (John Turturo) an ex-boyfriend of both hers and Martha’s. He is horrified at the state of the world, and seems to only live for sex (or to constantly talk about sex.) Damien is not a sympathetic character, and perhaps the audience is supposed to read that his unpleasant and helpless politics are akin to Martha’s helpless approach to life. If so the audience hardly has time to ponder it under a heavy heaping of affirmations about the power to choose, and the dignity to die.  Eventually, Martha does exactly what she promised to do. There is a brief police investigation where the officer (Alessandro Nivola) expresses concern that Ingrid would have knowingly not gotten help for her friend. A lawyer comes and helpfully tells the audience we can ignore that concern because he is a religious fanatic. This is the kind of movie that alludes to James Joyce not just once but three times. It is so pleased with just how artsy it is. And for a film with a message like “life isn’t worth fighting for,” the best comfort is that it’s so artsy not a lot of people will watch it.  The only people I would recommend watching this film is for those studying how society has devalued human life, and how good tools can be misused to harm people. The film is rated PG-13. It includes several normalized same-sex relationships, and some joking about polyamorous relationships. But obviously the biggest warning is the way it normalizes and glamorizes suicide. If you watch it with older teenagers, I would focus on questions about the choice that Martha made, and how family and relationships could have helped her make better choices. I might ask about how Ingrid could have been a better or more caring friend. One out of five stars. “The Room Next Door” will be released in theaters nationwide January 17, 2025.

FX to Broadcast Temple Ceremonies

Latter-day Saints are finding themselves in a bind today after a trailer was released revealing that FX will be broadcasting temple ceremonies as part of its new show “Under the Banner of Heaven.” The television program is based on a sensationalized book about a Latter-day Saint detective, that includes substantial themes around his faith. While the depiction of sacred ceremonies of the Church are clearly inappropriate, Latter-day Saints are stuck wondering if they should simply ignore the program, or highlight the offensive nature of it, giving the show the attention such a provocation was clearly designed to elicit.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!