Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Faith and Reason

A long time ago a philosopher named Soren Kierkegaard separated faith and reason into two separate entities. He taught that you could have faith in something even if there was no reason for it because faith did not depend on reason.



Faith cannot exist apart from reason. Blind faith is no faith at all. Faith and reason have a coexistent relationship. Faith is based on reason. For example, one can say that Abraham sacrificed Isaac by faith. But the faith was based on the reason that he had experience with God. God had spoken to Him before. God's words had proven themselves true before. This was not an isolated incident where Abraham for the first time heard a voice from the sky call out and tell him to sacrifice his son and Abraham blindly obeyed this voice. No. He had walked with God already. He knew and trusted God. Yet it is still by faith because he had to trust that God was in control in order to obey and offer his son as a burnt offering. His faith was rewarded as God provided a lamb in the place of his son for the sacrifice.


Peter did not walk on water out of blind faith either. He had seen the miracles of Christ. He knew Jesus and had spent much time with him. He had reason to believe that he could do as Jesus asked and walk out on the water. He had never walked on the water before, but he took the step in faith based on prior experience that he could trust Jesus.


I think often times that people think that Christians want them to check their brains at the door to accept biblical Christianity. Some who do believe in the Bible think they do so purely on a blind faith and do not understand the evidence that exist for which their faith can be firmly anchored in reason backed up by history and empirical evidence. Yes faith is still required, but not as some would think; not as some baseless hope, but a faith rooted in truth.


God has given us so many evidences of His existence and of His love for us. The evidence for Jesus life, death, and resurrection is very strong. Even excluding the accounts of the Gospels, one can still conclude from the strong evidence that Jesus lived, preformed many miracles, died by crucifixion, and was resurrected leaving an empty tomb that cannot be explained any other way. Moreover, eyewitnesses who died for their belief in his resurrection testified to his resurrection. No one would die for a lie.


Explore the facts. Dig in. Ask questions. What have you got to lose? Seek the truth.


3 comments:

metaquietus said...

I'm curious, what proof do you have that Jesus did any of those things?

Kevin DeGraaf said...

God has given us so many evidences of His existence and of His love for us. The evidence for Jesus life, death, and resurrection is very strong. Even excluding the accounts of the Gospels, one can still conclude from the strong evidence that Jesus lived, preformed many miracles, died by crucifixion, and was resurrected leaving an empty tomb that cannot be explained any other way.

Please read Let The Stones Speak and Choking On The Camel.

Moreover, eyewitnesses who died for their belief in his resurrection testified to his resurrection. No one would die for a lie.

Please read The Argument From Martyrdom.

Karla said...

Kevin, I haven't read these books yet, but I have read Mike Licona's The Case for the Resurrection as well as studied some information from Garry Habbermas who is a scholarly expert on the resurrection of Jesus. He has devoted his life to studying all the evidences about it as well as all the thoughts and opinions against it.

Metaquietus, I have eye witness testimony, I have historical accounts outside of the gospels that testify as to how the followers of Christ died because of this belief. I have the historical evidence that the Romans put forth that the tomb was empty for they accused the disciples of stealing the body of Christ. Christianity took root in Jerusalem where Christ was crucified, this would not have been possible if someone could go up and find his body in that tomb.