woman bookshelf books

Is the Bible’s definition of faith opposed to logic and evidence?

Probably the biggest misconception that I encounter when defending the faith is the mistaken notion of what faith is. Today we are going to get to the bottom of what the Bible says faith is, once and for all. This post will be useful to Christians and atheists, alike.

What is faith according to the Bible?

I am going to reference this article from apologist Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason in my explanation.

Koukl cites three Biblical examples to support the idea that faith is not blind leap-of-faith wishing, but is based on evidence.

  1. Moses went out into the wilderness and he had that first encounter with the burning bush, and God gave him the directive to go back to Egypt and let his people go. Moses said, Yeah, right. What’s going to happen when they say, why should we believe you, Moses? God said, See that staff? Throw it down. Moses threw it down and it turned into a serpent. God said, See that serpent? Pick it up. And he picked it up and it turned back into a staff. God said, Now you take that and do that before the Jewish people and you do that before Pharaoh. And you do this number with the hail, and the frogs, and turning the Nile River into blood. You put the sun out. You do a bunch of other tricks to get their attention. And then comes this phrase: “So that they might know that there is a God in Israel.”
  2. [I]n Mark 2 you see Jesus preaching in a house, and you know the story where they take the roof off and let the paralytic down through the roof. Jesus said, “Your sins are forgiven.” And people get bugged because how can anyone forgive sins but God alone? Jesus understood what they were thinking and He said this: What’s harder to say, your sins are forgiven, or to rise, take up your pallet and go home? Now, I’ll tell you what would be harder for me to say : Arise, take up your pallet and go home. I can walk into any Bible study and say your sins are forgiven and nobody is going to know if I know what I am talking about or not. But if I lay hands on somebody in a wheelchair and I say, Take up your wheelchair and go home, and they sit there, I look pretty dumb because everyone knows nothing happened. But Jesus adds this. He says, “In order that you may know that the Son of Man has the power and authority to forgive sins, I say to you, arise, take up your pallet and go home.” And he got up and he got out. Notice the phrase “In order that you may know”. Same message, right?
  3. Move over to the Book of Acts. First sermon after Pentecost. Peter was up in front of this massive crowd. He was talking about the resurrection to which he was an eyewitness. He talked about fulfilled prophecy. He talked about the miraculous tongues and the miraculous manifestation of being able to speak in a language you don’t know. Do you think this is physical evidence to those people? I think so. Pretty powerful. Peter tells them, These men are not drunk as it seems, but rather this is a fulfillment of prophecy. David spoke of this. Jesus got out of the grave, and we saw him, and we proclaim this to you. Do you know how he ends his sermon? It’s really great. Acts 2:36. I’ve been a Christian 20 years and I didn’t see this until about a year ago. This is for all of those who think that if you can know it for sure, you can’t exercise faith in it. Here is what Peter said. Acts 2:36, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified.” There it is again. “Know for certain.”

What is faith according to Bible-based theologians?

I am going to reference this article from theologian C. Michael Patton of Parchment and Pen in my explanation.

Patton explains that according to Reformation (conservative, Bible-based) theologians, faith has 3 parts:

  1. notitia – This is the basic informational foundation of our faith. It is best expressed by the word content. Faith, according to the Reformers must have content. You cannot have faith in nothing. There must be some referential propositional truth to which the faith points. The proposition “Christ rose from the grave,” for example, is a necessary information base that Christians must have.
  2. assensus – This is the assent or confidence that we have that the notitia is correct… This involves evidence which leads to the conviction of the truthfulness of the proposition… This involves intellectual assent and persuasion based upon critical thought… assensus… says, “I am persuaded to believe that Christ rose from the grave.”
  3. fiducia – This is the “resting” in the information based upon a conviction of its truthfulness. Fiducia is best expressed by the English word “trust.”… Fiducia is the personal subjective act of the will to take the final step. It is important to note that while fiducia goes beyond or transcends the intellect, it is built upon its foundation.

So, Biblical faith is really trust. Trust(3) can only occur after intellectual assent(2), based on evidence and thought. Intellectual assent(2) can only occur after the propositional information(1) is known.

The church today accepts 1 and 3, but denies 2. I call this “fideism” or “blind faith”. Ironically, activist atheists, (the New Atheists), also believe that faith is blind. The postmodern “emergent church” denies 1 and 2. A person could accept 1 and 2 but deny 3 by not re-prioritizing their life based on what they know to be true.

How do beliefs form, according to Christian philosophers?

I am going to reference a portion of chapter 3 of J.P. Moreland’s “Love Your God With All Your Mind” (i.e. – LYGWYM).

J.P. Moreland explains how beliefs form and how you can change them.

  1. Today, people are inclined to think that the sincerity and fervency of one’s beliefs are more important than the content… Nothing could be further from the truth… As far as reality is concerned, what matters is not whether I like a belief or how sincere I am in believing it but whether or not the belief is true. I am responsible for what I believe and, I might add, for what I refuse to believe because the content of what I do or do not believe makes a tremendous difference to what I become and how I act.
  2. A belief’s strength is the degree to which you are convinced the belief is true. As you gain ,evidence and support for a belief, its strength grows for you… The more certain you are of a belief… the more you rely on it as a basis for action.

But the most important point of the article is that your beliefs are not under the control of your will.

…Scripture holds us responsible for our beliefs since it commands us to embrace certain beliefs and warns us of the consequences of accepting other beliefs. On the other hand, experience teaches us that we cannot choose or change our beliefs by direct effort.

For example, if someone offered you $10,000 to believe right now that a pink elephant was sitting next to you, you could not really choose to believe this… If I want to change my beliefs about something, I can embark on a course of study in which I choose to think regularly about certain things, read certain pieces of evidence and argument, and try to find problems with evidence raised against the belief in question.

…by choosing to undertake a course of study… I can put myself in a position to undergo a change in… my beliefs… And… my character and behavior… will be transformed by these belief changes.

I think definition of faith is important, because atheists seemed to want to substitute their own definition of faith as blind belief for this Biblical definition, but there is no evidence for their view that faith is belief without evidence. I think this might be another case of projection by atheists. Blind faith is how they arrive at their views, so they are trying to push it onto us. But the Bible is clearly opposed to it.

Positive arguments for Christian theism

5 thoughts on “Is the Bible’s definition of faith opposed to logic and evidence?”

  1. Your list of “Positive arguments for Christian theism” is missing the most effective and productive argument, which is the 27 texts of the New Testament as the word of men.

    Like

    1. Hey Mike,

      I’ll do you a solid and tell you a story where I did exactly that. I hope this encourages you.

      Btw I did download your self-published books. I don’t know when I’ll get to them since I have a stack I’m working on at the moment.

      Long story short I got into a discussion with an atheist on the message boards at The Daily Wire. The article was about something religious, and the comments section blew up between Christians and atheists. The atheist I was engaging insisted that “faith is pretending to know what you don’t really know” (this definition is from Dr. Peter Bogosian’s’ book “A Manual for Creating Atheists”.)

      To prove to him that this is not what the Bible means by faith I asked him to test his definition to see if it’s true by inserting his definition into the text of the Bible anytime he sees the noun “faith”, or the verb “believe” every time he reads it in the gospel of John.

      He did so and realized the Dr. Bogosian was straw manning faith. The rest of our conversation was productive and respectful. He disappeared for a while at the Daily Wire and later I found out from him that he was severely injured by falling off a ladder. I don’t know if he ever became a believer but will be looking for him in the kingdom when that time comes.

      Like

      1. Thank you for sharing that. Praise the Lord!

        I fully agree with WK, Koukl, and others that “faith is not blind leap-of-faith wishing, but is based on evidence.” And that being the case, I do not understand why we promote complex and esoteric arguments more than the New Testament, which constitutes the primary historical sources for the life of Jesus.

        God rooted our salvation in the unchangeableness of history. No one can reasonably reject the testimony of the New Testament.

        Like

        1. You are very welcome, Mike.

          There are two things that I try to keep in mind when dealing with skeptics of all strips and worldviews.

          The first is to start with the gospel message because it is the most important thing that can be said. I don’t want to flatter myself with the idea that I know these esoteric arguments as well as William Lane Craig or others like him. The discussion can get too technical very quickly if I just so happen to meet a skeptic whose hobby is the ongoing debate in philosophy of religion.

          Secondly, on the other hand, if I meet someone who simply isn’t moved at all by starting with the Bible, I will do what I can in other evidence and arguments that I think falsify naturalism. Doing that I realized I will have mixed results since different people weight the evidence differently (plausibility is a person dependent notion). Some people insist on go the long hard route of everything be justified in a strict scientific rationalistic grid. Others have a strong intuition of God coming into the discussion and are more easily persuaded by doing good Bible study.

          The good news is God loves both the hard-hearted rationalist who insists there’s no evidence for God and the person who “isn’t far from the kingdom.” God use different people and methods for reaching both groups and everyone in between. In other words, I don’t think there is a magic bullet methodology one size fits all way to reach people.

          Like

Leave a comment