Back in May, I read a Breakpoint essay by Chuck Colson that addressed the problem of pride. However, it opened a possible misunderstanding about the role of faith. Melinda at STR posted on it. I also posted my concern.
I decided to ask Chuck Colson to clarify what he meant by "beyond the intellect".
Mr. Colson responded.
For the sake of context, here is a snippet of my question to him.
"I had a question about how you framed faith, however. The phrase you used, "beyond the intellect", has different possible meanings. It could be taken to mean as a type of caulking to fill in the gap in our knowledge of God. In other words, where reason stops, faith begins.
Given this interpretation, the lesser our knowledge of God, the greater our faith. Faith is sort of pitted against reason in this line of thinking. The logical outworking of this would be to discourage a study of God or of apologetics – because it would leave less room for faith."
Chuck Colson replied,
Thanks for your question about “beyond the intellect.” I’m glad you asked it because it will make me more careful in my explanation of that particular issue.
I developed this point in some detail in the final chapter of my new book The Good Life. I also talk about faith picking up where reason lets off. In other words, reason can only take you so far. I believe this not only in the spiritual world, but I believe it as a question of epistemology. In other words, the final step, even after the best reasoned proposition, is one of faith. You have to have some faith that the conclusion of the reasoning process is sound, or that what we’re seeing is really what is there. T. M. has given some very helpful material on this subject.
What I was basically talking about was the consequence of spending four or five years in rather intense reasoned study of a biblical worldview. I was able to get myself to the point where I really was intellectually convinced there was a God and that no other explanation works. I’m at that same point today. But then in my prayer time, I began to think about God, and wondered what if I’m not right? What if when I get to the end of my life, He’s really not there waiting? How can I know this? I really can’t know it for certain by reason, as good as my reason is that has gotten me this far. If you get so convinced of your intellectual capability to prove the existence of God, it can work against the simple, humble faith that Jesus tells us to come with. That’s what I meant about “beyond the intellect.” The ultimate act of faith by which we commit ourselves to Christ is beyond the intellect. It is a step beyond reason.
Now having said that, which I hope answers your question, you have raised a very good caution. Does this mean that the more we know the less strong our faith will be? The more we know, there’d be less room for faith, as you put it. It shouldn’t mean that at all. That’s carrying a proposition to its logical conclusion, which eventually becomes an absurdity. I think we’re to know as much as we possibly can so that our faith is not without reasons. In fact, I believe the Christian faith is a very reason-able faith.
His "beyond the intellect" comment, therefore, did not mean that faith is the filler for where reason stops. He meant that faith [a better word would be trust] is an important component of a Biblical worldview. All worldviews, from naturalism to postmodernism to Christianity, ultimately rest on presuppositions ... not on deductive certainity [i.e. reason]. Colson realized that reason, as good as it is, is not sufficient to deliver 100 percent certainty on anything. What is worse, too much reliance on reason can actually get in the way [i.e. pride, rationalism etc.].
I therefore retract my concerns about his essay. Colson is not depicting faith as blind hope.