The Christian church today is facing something of an epistemological crisis in its faith and theology. To some extent, every age has faced something similar, but this particular crisis stems from the wreckage of the Enlightenment (as Alasdair McIntyre and Etienne Gilson argue) and the rise of post-modernism. Reason and faith are not happily married, and in many cases, the divorce seems complete. The apotheosis of reason has led in some way to the global scientific technocracy that dominates discourse and practice in social, political, cultural and theological circles. Questions multiply like the heads of the Hyrda, casting suspicion on language, logic, faith, reason, science, power, identity, and ultimately–existential meaning. In philosophy, the gap between the analytical school and the continental school represents but one of the many fissures in this contemporary thought-quake. Though we find occasional challenges to the dominance of the scientific worldview among philosophers (such as Oswald Spengler, Martin Heidegger, Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend), the empire of science seems to reign supreme in politics and society today.

In the Church, the conflict can be best described, although inaccurately in many ways, as a rift between those who favor reason and science against those who wish to defend faith against reason and science. It can be seen in the rift between fundamentalism and historical-criticism. The rift is especially volatile in the gap between churches espousing liberal morality and those that prefer a traditional understanding of morality. This polarization is a formidable obstacle to spiritual growth, ecumenism, and the life of faith itself. As Christians, I believe we need to ask ourselves: what is the proper relation between faith and reason? Where do I start in tackling this problem?

Walter Scott, one of the early writers of the Stone-Campbell movement, argued that the only creed Christians should espouse is Christ Himself. The Quakers, another faith group that historically sought to be like the New Testament Christians, sometimes call Jesus their “Teacher and Lord”. Since Jesus is the one person and entity that Christians share, it seems reasonable to investigate the dichotomy from the point of view of the Incarnation. It is true that this would exclude those Christians who profess a more Gnostic christology that excludes the incarnation, but their own distinct concepts regarding knowledge and reason are probably beyond the realm of this problem. The theology of the Incarnation is prominent in the Gospel of John, which presents to us a Jesus who is fully human and yet fully divine, as the later creeds state.  Being human, it would seem that Jesus needed natural reason to live his life. Being divine, it seems that natural reason alone was insufficient for his remarkable walk of faith, his ministry, and ultimatly the crucifixion, resurrection and glorification.

As “God with us” (Matthew 1:23), Jesus is paradoxical. It is clear that the Father revealed things to Jesus that had never been revealed to anyone else before (John 7:16, John 8:14-18). On the other hand, Jesus frankly admitted to not knowing when the world was going to end: “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” (Matthew 24:36). Jesus calls on us to believe the impossible (Mark 11:23), and also tells us to use common sense and think rationally (Mark 7:18-19). His parables contain observations of nature (Matthew 6:26) and warnings against being too naturally minded to grasp spiritual realities (Matthew 16:3, John 3:12). He upholds the validity of the Law (Matthew 5:17-20), while arguing against legalism (Matthew 12:5, Mark 2:25-28, Mark 3:4). Jesus can be paradoxical, but he is never irrational nor rationalistic. More than anything, Jesus is a student of Scripture (Luke 2:41-52) and the greatest preacher and expositor of Scripture (Luke 4:1-32). The number of times he appeals to what is written in the Law is astounding, as well as the number of appearances he makes in the synagogues, where the Scripture is read publicly. It is the Word of God that unifies the paradox of his thought and ministry; it is the Holy Spirit that impels, counsels and directs it. In the life of Christ we see Jesus acting through faith derived from natural reason, through prayerful faith derived from revelation, through the Holy Spirit, through the Scripture, and through communion with the Father.

To summarize, for a Christian to eschew faith or reason is to step outside of the life of Christ. To ignore paradoxes or dance around them is to stumble. The bodily resurrection of Christ and the sending of the Holy Spirit mean that Christ Jesus is incarnated in us (Romans 7:4, 2 Corinthians 5:17, 1 Corinthians 12:27). We are called to imitate Him (1 Corinthians 11:1). When Paul counsels against carnal thinking (Romans 8:5-9), he is speaking of that kind of thinking that denies spiritual reality, he is not attacking reasoning or thinking itself. In fact, Paul counsels the Philippians to think deeply (Philippians 4:4-9). In speaking of the greatest commandments, Jesus witnesses that we are to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength (Matthew 12:29-31). Without the mind, we cannot love God completely. Without reason, our faith is deficient.

For the Christian it is never faith or reason or faith or science. It must always be faith and reason, although faith, hope and love are by far the most important virtues (1 Corinthians 13), because true reason and final knowledge will be impossible without them. It is the application of this incarnational model of faith that will be most challenging. It cannot take place without humility, courage, and some degree of freedom. Dishonest science, pseudo-science, or controversial organizations probably do more to discredit the faith then to preach the Gospel or explain the faith reasonably. On the other hand, rejecting tenets of faith based on contemporary science or historical-critical theory of the Scriptures is poor scholarship and poor faith. Reason leads us to faith and can explain faith in certain circumstances, but reason is never a replacement for faith. The early Christian philosopher and theologian Pseudo-Dionysius wrote both apophatically and cataphatically: there are things we can say about God, and there is a lot about God that we cannot say, because we are mortal. Even in the intensely philosophical writings of Thomas Aquinas, we see that reason has its limitations; for this reason, Dante put St. Bernard higher in the heavens than Thomas, because Bernard stressed revelation and faith. This approach has both satisfactory and unsatisfactory results. As the Stoics might have said–there are things we can know, and there are things we just cannot know. The Bible says it this way: “The secret things belong to the Lord our GOD, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever” (Deuteronomy 29:29). There are things in the faith life of Christ that are reasonably understood; there are other things that seem totally mysterious and inexplicable. There are things in the Bible that are tangible and possess some kind of empirical evidence; there are many other things where nothing tangible or empirical will help. We need to accept that paradox, and ponder it deeply in our quest for truth. It is the paradox that Jesus embodied.

One last thing. The theology of the Incarnation shows that when God walked among us, we did not recognize Him or accept Him very readily. The truth was contrary to our expectations. Christ challenged the teaching authorities of his day. In this sense, he taught us true spiritual and intellectual freedom…as well as solitude and alienation. Being truthful comes with a cost. It also made him a rogue rabbi and something of a ronin at times (although he was never masterless, being forever in communion with the Father, and was himself Master). Jesus believed what the Father wanted Him to believe–that is truth. He did not allow himself to be enslaved by Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, Essenes, or even the disciples of John the Baptist. He did not subscribe to Greek or Roman philosophy, if he knew much about it. What He did do was preserve his reason by measuring what others said against what reason, the Word of God and the Holy Spirit taught. Today, I think Christ is teaching us to do the same. Question evolution. Question creation science. Question what Alexander Campbell or Barton Stone wrote. Question Luther, Calvin, and Wesley. Question Heisenberg, Einstein, and Alan Turing. Question the Doctors of the Church, the early Church Fathers, the saints, the heretics, the atheists. If they have something good to say that is truthful, believe it. If not, don’t. Be bold and be humble–something I despair of learning in this life. In the end, do not forget that faith requires both spirit and truth. We cannot be cheap or dishonest in our pursuit of truth, neither can truth exist without the spiritual: “God is spirit and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24).