Fideism

A sometimes interesting website is "wikihow", a user-driven site to tell you how ... to do just about anything. I say "sometimes" because sometimes you'll come across something like this article about how to argue that God does not exist. Ummm, yeah. Because the article itself begins with "it should be noted that while proving nonexistence is a logical impossibility" and goes from there.

In the article they use the term "fideism" and define it as "by faith". Fideism is actually defined as an "exclusive or basic reliance upon faith alone, accompanied by a consequent disparagement of reason." That is, the definition of fideism goes beyond "faith" to necessarily include "faith is the enemy of reason". Thus, it includes faith and excludes reason ... which is not the same thing as believing something "by faith". For instance, Hebrews 11 is known as "the faith chapter". The word used there for "faith" is πίστις--pistis. Strong's dictionary defines this term as "persuasion" and roots it in πείθω--peithō--"to convince (by argument)". Obviously "by argument" specifically denies "apart from reason". To be "persuaded" requires causing someone to do or believe something through reasoning or argument. Thayer's definition is "to persuade, i.e., to induce one by words to believe." Thus, biblical "faith" does not preclude reason and, in fact, includes it. Remember, "Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God." (Rom 10:17). Jesus made the point to His skeptics, "You have seen Me and yet do not believe" (John 6:64), alluding to the host of signs performed as evidence which did not move them. He told them "... even though you do not believe Me, believe the works ..." by way of offering reasons that they should place their faith in Him.

The wikihow article says, "The mortal enemy of faith is knowledge." And they offer the standard definition--the Archie Bunker definition--of faith:

You must believe something someone else tells you is true, even though your mind tells you it is a lie and it makes no sense.

This they define as "fideism". "Without fideism," they go on to say, "the concept of religion would not exist."

I would hope that you've already seen that the Bible denies this. Biblical faith is not fideism. Biblical faith includes reason and evidence. Biblical faith is not opposed to knowledge or thinking. Jesus understood and commended reasoning. Indeed, Paul urges the renewing of your mind (Rom 12:2).

Of course, now I'm going to have to explain further these recent posts where I appear to actually endorse fideism ... because I don't.

Earlier I pointed to a news item (which, as it turned out, was demonstrated as a hoax) and argued, "I have placed my confidence in my Savior, not in the evidence that argues for (or against) Him." Just a couple of days later I wrote about Jesus's blessing on "they who did not see, and yet believed." There, now, see? I'm opposed to evidence and reason, right?

No. I'm in favor of "faith and". You see, I understand biblical faith as being persuaded. I'm just not entirely sure that the sole source for this persuasion must be material science or philosophical rhetoric. I believe that supernatural persuasion must occur. I wrote,

There is a large thrust lately to produce evidence and argument for Christ. And that's all well and good. I'm not opposed. You know, be "ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15), "Contend for the faith" (Jude 1:3), that sort of thing. All good.

See that? "All good." I'm in favor of contending for the faith, for making a defense. I like Apologetics. But I believe that being persuaded to faith in Christ occurs apart from purely rational, human-sourced arguments and that, once that persuasion occurs, one can begin to see the rest of the logic, the reason, the evidence, and the arguments that fall into place. Okay, so I argue that faith does not rest on reason, but on Christ. So how is that not fideism? Because fideism requires opposition to reason, and I suggest that reason can support faith. I'm just not counting on human-sourced, materialist methods irreconcilably separated from the supernatural^[1] and philosophically opposed to God (Rom 8:7) (compare 1 Cor 2:14) as the best source for good reasons to believe, especially with the heart problem (Jer 17:9) humans have.
________

^[1] Understand that trying to measure the supernatural with natural methods is nonsensical. You can't, for instance, hold a microphone up to the light and expect to hear the light. You can't connect a voltmeter to your piano and expect to measure middle C. The measuring device must match that which is being measured. The natural cannot measure the supernatural.