Faith - the shootouts

Faith, a kind of attitude of trust, involves a stance towards some claim that is not demonstrable by reason, at least for now. Religiously it came from an authority or revelation.

Some believed that faith is offensive to reason, or it is above or beyond reason. “I believe because it is absurd”, says Tertullian. “When we believe, we desire to believe nothing further.”

Faith is above and beyond reason? Yes, says Thomas Aquinas. We actually have theological truths that exceeds human reason. But, he also says that we could attain truths above religious claims without faith, but such truths are incomplete. A two-fold truth he calls it. One to which the inquiry of reason can reach and the other which surpasses the whole ability of the human reason. (Averroes – Ibn Rushd, the great commentator of Aristotles - must be smiling in approval.)

But clever Aquinas says one cannot believe by faith and know by rational demonstration the very same truth. Why? Because this would make one or the other kind of knowledge superflous. Hmmm… real clever.

But of course we may choose to be an Augustinian – faith seeking understanding. To believe is to think with assent… an intellectual act, not determined by reason but by the will, a commitment. To believe God , or to believe in God, or to believe in a God.

Which god? Up to us. God but the God, the First Mover, the Ultimate Being, the Necessary Being, or… whatever.


To Kierkegaard the existentialist (left), faith requires a leap, and demands risk. The trust must be radical. To just elevate faith to the status of objective certainty as suggested by Hegel the dialectics, is just not enough. Kierkegaard says the radical trust of faith is the highest virtue one can reach.

Is he saying that faith is irrational?


The ‘enlightenment not yet complete’ Kant (right) must be flabbergasted. Did’nt he says that faith is complex, has no theoretical ground yet it has a rational basis that provides more or less stable conviction for believers?

The shootouts continues...