There are two elements among others that have the potential to influence our Christian life and determine which kind of disciple we are going to be, namely, knowledge and faith. The Scriptures have much to say about these two entities and to ponder on them for a moment can only be beneficial.
The point I will make in this brief essay is the following: Faith and knowledge always coexist, and their coexistence is proportional. In other words, your faith will never exceed your knowledge and your knowledge will never exceed your faith. Now I can already hear the disagreements, for who has not observed a person whose head is full of Christian information and whose heart is nearly void of genuine faith? But bear with me a little and perhaps we will come to some agreement.
A little food for the mind
Let us consider the following statement: I know the car is red but I don’t believe the car is red. I think all of us understand that such an affirmation is nonsensical; and we understand so because we know and believe that a person who knows the car is red must by necessity believe the car is red. If we turn this statement around it remains as illogical as a square circle: I believe the car is red but I don’t know the car is red. In brief, all of us know that where knowledge exists faith coexists by necessity, and both in identical proportion.
Two different categories
When we translate this principle to our Christian life it might seem to create some problems. Consider the following statement: He knows what the Bible says but he does not believe what the Bible says. Here it seems knowledge and faith can be divided without causing any problem. As a matter of fact it could be debated a person can have knowledge without having faith. But this division emerges because we are dealing here with two different categories, namely, what is ‘intellectual’ and what is ‘experimental’.
While intellectual knowledge can never be separated from intellectual faith, it can be separated from experimental faith without causing any problem. Not only that, but as we are going to see, intellectual faith can be divided from experimental faith without creating any tension. This is why there are two categories.
Let us return to the previous statement: He knows what the Bible says but he doesn’t believe what the Bible says. As we all understand there is nothing wrong with this affirmation; and there is nothing wrong with it because we are switching from one category to another. But what about the following statement: He knows what the Bible says but he doesn’t believe the Bible says it. Here again we are left with something absurd. The rule can be stated this way: Intellectual faith will always coexist with intellectual knowledge, and experimental faith will always coexist with experimental knowledge. As long as we remain in the same category faith and knowledge will always coexist in the same proportion.
Faith separated from faith
If we approach the subject in a different way we come to the same conclusion. Let us consider the following question: Does faith always coexist with faith in the same proportion? At first glance this question might appear nearly idiotic, but it is not. The right answer is: Faith always coexists with itself, and by necessity in the same proportion, only if we remain in the same category. The moment we change category this coexistence might collapse and the proportion change drastically. This is why we can say: He believes it is written in the Bible, but he doesn’t believe what is written in the Bible. As we all understand there is nothing wrong with such an affirmation because we are dealing with two categories. Hence intellectual faith can be divided from experimental faith as it can be divided from experimental knowledge.
The chronological order
To the question: Which of the two comes first, knowledge or faith? Reality answers: Both come to existence simultaneously. It can be compared to the dimensions of an object. Take an apple for instance, does its width come to existence before its height? The answer is simple enough, in the existing world of space and time both dimensions are engendered simultaneously.
Augustine of Hippo
In the fifth century AD, Augustine of Hippo wrote: “We must first believe, in order that we may know”. Here the word ‘first’ is somewhat misleading for it seems to suggest that faith—coming first—can exist for a time without its corresponding knowledge. But this is not what Augustine is saying. He is simply pointing out that the source of knowledge must be trusted in order to obtain its provision. Let me give you a few examples.
The person who claims to know a car is red possesses this kind of knowledge because he believes his sense perception can be trusted. If this specific faith would not exist he could not claim to know the car is red. Hence “We must first believe, in order that we may know”. Of course it must be understood that the person who believes his sense perception can be trusted knows his sense perception can be trusted. Hence, here again, knowledge coexists with faith.
Another way to look at it is through the example of a student. If he doesn’t believe his teacher is trustworthy he will not be sure what is being taught is true. Consequently he will not receive what is being communicated as valid knowledge. Here again we see how “we must first believe, in order that we may know”. But the logic can be expressed differently. We could say: The student must know his teacher is trustworthy in order to receive his words as valid knowledge. Hence the declaration: “We must first believe the teacher is trustworthy” equals “We must first know the teacher is trustworthy”. It follows that what is believed is known and what is known is believed (1 Timothy 4:3).
Conclusion
To understand this principle is important for several reasons: First because it creates an obvious contrast between two similar categories—a contrast that is not always perceived. Regrettably this lack of perception has led some evangelicals to canonize head-knowledge and to extol any institution producing it in the name of religion. Hence the diploma has become a sort of bump key opening just about every door.
Another reason why this understanding is important is because it stresses the need of divine revelations, and surely this need cannot be overemphasized, for “where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint” (Proverbs 29:18). Undoubtedly restrain is being cast off nowadays, and often cast off by cold evangelical graduates. I can only agree with Thomas Watson when he writes: “Knowledge without repentance will be but a torch to light men to hell”, or with C.S. Lewis asserting that “Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.” And obviously, the values needed at this point cannot be of the fluctuating kind. They must be the result of divine revelations: stable and lasting, not subject to public opinion but to the wisdom of God.
And at last, yet not the least, understanding the principle helps us to put due importance on experimental knowledge, without which experimental faith cannot breathe.
If you think this post can help somebody you can share it with the options presented bellow.
(Perhaps you would be interested in two posts I wrote to point out the difference between Christian information and Christian knowledge. The posts are called, Come and See.)