Faith and Reason by R. C. Sproul

[INTJMom]

[Sproul rhymes with "soul"]

"Without reason, the content of biblical faith would be unintelligible and meaningless. So we say that biblical faith is not the same as reason, but that faith is rational and reasonable. The first assertion that faith is rational means that faith is intelligible. It is not absurd or illogical. If biblical revelation were absurd and irrational, it would be utterly unintelligible and meaningless. The content of the Bible cannot pierce the soul of a sentient creature without first going through the mind."
Ligonier Ministries | Tabletalk Magazine

Sproul is a Presbyterian theologian.

I just posted this in case someone might be interested in this point of view.

 

[gokartride]

Religious thought can be highly advanced. I think if this age is to appreciate these kind of ideas (even if they choose not to accept it) it will come from a rearticulation at a very thoughtful and holistic level. Because of historical/cultural circumstances, faith is often seen now as sort of an enemy. It is not.

 

[Mole]

Religious thought can be highly advanced. I think if this age is to appreciate these kind of ideas (even if they choose not to accept it) it will come from a rearticulation at a very thoughtful and holistic level. Because of historical/cultural circumstances, faith is often seen now as sort of an enemy. It is not.

The Roman Catholic Church has an official doctrine of Faith and Reason.

However when you examine it, Faith comes first and Reason only elucidates Faith.

In fact in 1907, Pope Pius X, in the Encyclical, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, condemned Modernism as a Heresy.

And Modernism as you know is based firmly on the Enlightenment and Reason.

In fact the doctrine of Faith and Reason it there for propaganda purposes as they don't want to be seen as opposed to the great success of Science.

And Science is based entirely on the Enlightenment and Reason.

 

[gokartride]

The boundaries we are so accustomed to creating and defending are artificial...all of it (faith, reason, enlightenment) is connected.

Why, faith even has a place in science!!!

As for Modernism....enlightenment is fine, reason is fine.....but where certain excesses/distortions emerge something is generally said.

 

[Wyst]

However when you examine it, Faith comes first and Reason only elucidates Faith.

Without reason, how could a person possibly come to understand their need for a savior? It is reason that is innately there - everyone has it. Faith comes later after a person realizes their need for a righteousness greater than their own.

 

[TrueHeart]

The Roman Catholic Church has an official doctrine of Faith and Reason.

However when you examine it, Faith comes first and Reason only elucidates Faith.

In fact in 1907, Pope Pius X, in the Encyclical, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, condemned Modernism as a Heresy.

And Modernism as you know is based firmly on the Enlightenment and Reason.

In fact the doctrine of Faith and Reason it there for propaganda purposes as they don't want to be seen as opposed to the great success of Science.

And Science is based entirely on the Enlightenment and Reason.

Modernism is a technical term in Catholic theology. Are you using the term in that sense?

Catholic Encyclopedia: Modernism (1911)

 

[sassafrassquatch]

Without reason, how could a person possibly come to understand their need for a savior? It is reason that is innately there - everyone has it. Faith comes later after a person realizes their need for a righteousness greater than their own.

Odd. It was through reason I discovered christianity to be a scam.

 

[Wyst]

I guess some people are less reasonable than others?

Without reason you wouldn't have come to a decision on the matter anyway. Regardless of the presence or absence of faith.

Reason is first. That is my point - not whether or not Christianity is true/right for everyone.

 

[Orangey]

Modernism is a technical term in Catholic theology. Are you using the term in that sense?

Catholic Encyclopedia: Modernism (1911)

I think the "modernism" that he's referring to is the Western intellectual and cultural movement that took place in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries that sought to reintroduce the ideals of the enlightenment (scientific knowledge, technology, positivism). Perhaps a better term for it is "modernity".

 

[Mole]

Modernism is a technical term in Catholic theology. Are you using the term in that sense?

Catholic Encyclopedia: Modernism (1911)

I think when Pius X declared Modernism to be a heresy, he was being defensive, without imagination or a sense of morality.

Fortunately Vatican II reversed this decision, and the Church made its peace with Modernity.

For instance, the Roman Catholic Church, does not believe in or teach Creationism.

And the Roman Catholic Church teaches the separation of Church and State and rigorously practises it.

So Roman Catholicism is now a normal and acceptable religion in a modern, democratic, secular society.

 

[Mole]

Why, faith even has a place in science!!!

I think that faith is incompatible with scientific skepticism.

The way this is normally handled is to say that science and faith deal with entirely different domains. And each is valid within their own domain.

 

[Night]

I think that faith is incompatible with scientific skepticism.

The way this is normally handled is to say that science and faith deal with entirely different domains. And each is valid within their own domain.

Exactly.

Faith is belief without verifiable event. A construct assembled on the alogical. Religion is absent scientific motive. The quest for truth is of a spiritual - rather than physical - nature. Religion offers moralistic laws and bylaws - often dealing with issues of personal choice.

Science deals with measurable fact. A theory is a cluster of observed natural phenomenon summarized into a concise principle - as to allow for independent evaluation. Theories are ever-changing and are not of absolute precision. Within theory, we find populations of hypotheses, coexisting to support their host theory - and offer a means for revision.

It's those that do not understand this distinction that seek to believe that they are in competition.

 

[tothresevn]

coexisting to support its host

What's a host?

 

[Night]

In the case of my post, I use host as a descriptive unit designed offer/receive sustenance to/from its residents.

The exchange is symbiotic. Without hypotheses, we cannot have theory.

 

[tothresevn]

huh?

 

[heart]

And Science is based entirely on the Enlightenment and Reason.

Except if it becomes Sciencism where dogma affects what is allowed to be researched and questioned and "heretics" are blacklisted. There are no panceas in life, no safe areas where guard against this sort of thing may be lowered.

 

[ajblaise]

It's really nothing special to say you need reason to be faithful. You need reason just to read a word or sentence and understand language. It doesn't per se mean that your faith is reasonable and rational, you just need those facilities to be faithfu,l as well as do anything else in life.

 

[sassafrassquatch]

Except if it becomes Sciencism where dogma affects what is allowed to be researched and questioned and "heretics" are blacklisted. There are no panceas in life, no safe areas where guard against this sort of thing may be lowered.

You say that every time the subject comes up. What do you mean exactly? Who are these "dogmatic" scientists?

 

[htb]

Good point from Sproul, though I can't see the assertion that faith and reason mutually exclude as anything more than a cheap shot.

Clever fellow. Though I don't agree with every position RC Sproul defends, "Renewing Your Mind" is a morning regular of mine.

 

[Mole]

Except if it becomes Sciencism where dogma affects what is allowed to be researched and questioned and "heretics" are blacklisted. There are no panceas in life, no safe areas where guard against this sort of thing may be lowered.

Sure, and the other name of for Sciencism is pseudo science.

For instance Creationism is pseudo science.

And now the Creationists have moved to Intelligent Design which is also pseudo science.

However I also think that to say that there are no safe areas where our guard may be lowered is a psychological defence. It is purely to guard the ego against imagined threats and is simply neurotic.