https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=444
Blind Faith
A common misconception among atheists, humanists, and evolutionists is
that those who reject evolution in order to hold to a fundamental,
literal understanding of the biblical documents are guided by “blind
faith.” Robinson articulated this position quite emphatically when he
accused Christians of abandoning rationality and evidence in exchange
for intellectual dishonesty and ignorance of the truth (1976, pp.
115-124). Many within the scientific community labor under the delusion
that their “facts” and “evidence” are supportive of evolution and
opposed to a normal, face-value understanding of the biblical text. They
scoff at those who disagree with them, as if they alone have a corner
on truth.
The fact of the matter is that while most of the religious world
deserves the epithets hurled by the “informed” academicians, those who
espouse pure, New Testament Christianity do not. New Testament
Christians embrace the biblical definition of faith, in contrast
to the commonly conceived understanding of faith that is promulgated by
the vast majority of people in the denominational world.
The faith spoken of in the Bible is a faith that is preceded by knowledge. One cannot possess biblical faith in God until he or she comes to the knowledge
of God. Thus, faith is not accepting what one cannot prove. Faith
cannot outrun knowledge—for it is dependent upon knowledge (Romans
10:17). Abraham was said to have had faith only after he came to the knowledge of God’s promises and was fully persuaded (Romans 4:20-21). His faith, therefore, was seen in his trust and submission to what he knew
to be the will of God. Biblical faith is attained only after an
examination of the evidence, coupled with correct reasoning about the
evidence.
The God of the Bible is a God of truth. Throughout biblical history, He
has stressed the need for the acceptance of truth—in contrast with
error and falsehood. Those who, in fact, fail to seek the truth are
considered by God to be wicked (Jeremiah 5:1). The wise man urged: “Buy
the truth, and sell it not” (Proverbs 23:23). Paul, himself an
accomplished logician, exhorted people to love the truth (2
Thessalonians 2:10-12). He stated the necessity of giving diligence to
the task of dealing with the truth properly (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus
declared that only by knowing the truth is one made free (John 8:32).
Luke ascribed nobility to those who were willing to search for and
examine the evidence, rather than being content to simply take someone’s
word for the truth (Acts 17:11). Peter admonished Christians to be
prepared to give a defense (1 Peter 3:15), which stands in stark
contrast to those who, when questioned about proof of God, or the
credibility and comprehensibility of the Bible, triumphantly reply, “I
don’t know—I accept it by faith!”
Thus, the notion of “blind faith” is completely foreign
to the Bible. People are called upon to have faith only after they
receive adequate knowledge. In fact, the Bible demands that the thinker
be rational in gathering information, examining the evidence, and
reasoning properly about the evidence, thereby drawing only warranted
conclusions. That, in fact, is the essentiality of what is known in
philosophical circles as the basic law of rationality: one should draw
only such conclusions as are justified by the evidence. Paul articulated
exactly this concept when he wrote: “Prove all things; hold fast that
which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). John echoed the same thought when
he said to “test the spirits” (1 John 4:1). These passages show that
the New Testament Christian is one who stands ready to examine the
issues. God expects every individual to put to the test various
doctrines and beliefs, and then to reach only such conclusions as are
warranted by adequate evidence. Man must not rely upon papal
authorities, church traditions, or the claims of science. Rather, all
people are obligated to rely upon the properly studied written
directives of God (2 Timothy 2:15; John 12:48; 2 Peter 3:16). Biblical
religion and modern science clash only because the majority of those
within the scientific community have abandoned sound biblical
hermeneutics and insist upon drawing unwarranted, erroneous conclusions
from the relevant scientific evidence.
The Bible insists that evidence is abundantly available for those who
will engage in unprejudiced, rational inquiry. The resurrection claim,
for example, was substantiated by “many infallible proofs,” including
verification through the observation of more than five hundred persons
at once (Acts 1:3; 1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Many proofs were made
available in order to pave the way for faith (John 20:30-31). Peter
offered at least four lines of evidence to those gathered in Jerusalem
before he concluded his argument with “therefore…” (Acts 2:14-36). The
acquisition of knowledge through empirical evidence was undeniable, for
Peter concluded, “as you yourselves also know” (Acts 2:22, emp.
added). John referred to the auditory, visual, and tactile evidences
that provided further empirical verification (1 John 1:1-2). Christ
offered “works” to corroborate His claims, so that even His enemies did
not have to rely merely on His words—if they would but honestly reason
to the only logical conclusion (John 10:24-25,38). The proof was of such
magnitude that one Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews, even admitted: “[W]e
know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs
that You do unless God is with him” (John 3:2).
Nevertheless, there are always those who, for one reason or another,
refuse to accept the law of rationality, and who avoid the warranted
conclusions—just like those who side-stepped the proof that Christ
presented, and attributed it to Satan (Matthew 12:24). Christ countered
such an erroneous conclusion by pointing out their faulty reasoning and
the false implications of their argument (Matthew 12:25-27). The proof
that the apostles presented was equally conclusive, though unacceptable
to many (Acts 4:16).
The proof in our day is no less conclusive, nor is it any less
compelling. While it is not within the purview of this brief article to
prove such (see Warren and Flew, 1977; Warren and Matson, 1978), the
following tenets are provable: (1) we can know (not merely think, hope, or wish) that God exists (Romans 1:19-20); (2) we can know
that the Bible is the verbally inspired Word of God, and intended to be
comprehended in much the same way that any written human communication
is to be understood; (3) we can know that one day we will stand
before God in judgment and give account for whether we have studied the
Bible, learned what to do to be saved, and obeyed those instructions;
and (4) we can know that we know (1 John 2:3).
By abandoning the Bible as a literal, inerrant, infallible standard by
which all human behavior is to be measured, the scientist has
effectively rendered biblical religion, biblical faith, and New
Testament Christianity sterile—at least as far as his or her own life is
concerned. Once the Bible is dismissed as “figurative,” “confusing,” or
“incomprehensible,” one has opened wide the doors of subjectivity,
in which every man’s view is just as good as another’s. The more
sophisticated viewpoint may be more appealing, but it remains just as
subjective and self-stylized.
REFERENCES
Robinson, Richard (1976), “Religion and Reason,” Critiques of God, ed. Peter A. Angeles (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus).
Warren, Thomas B. and Antony G.N. Flew (1977), The Warren-Flew Debate (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).
Warren, Thomas B. and Wallace I. Matson (1978), The Warren-Matson Debate (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).
