Thomas Aquinas was the first to describe faith and reason as two sides to one coin.
Reason is the working of the mind and faith is the working of the soul.
Without this dual structure of knowledge, man's ability to think properly gets all screwed up.
So, it is not really a strange tension but one that reflects man's ability to think.
The real problem lies in the fact that scientists want to ignore the mystery of faith and theologians want to ignore reason.
We need both - like two legs.
...
On the contrary, This is how "to believe" is defined by Augustine (De Praedest. Sanct. ii).
I answer that, "To think" can be taken in three ways.
First, in a general way for any kind of actual consideration of the intellect, as Augustine observes (De Trin. xiv, 7): "By understanding I mean now the faculty whereby we understand when thinking."
Secondly, "to think" is more strictly taken for that consideration of the intellect, which is accompanied by some kind of inquiry, and which precedes the intellect's arrival at the stage of perfection that comes with the certitude of sight. On this sense Augustine says (De Trin. xv, 16) that "the Son of God is not called the Thought, but the Word of God. When our thought realizes what we know and takes form therefrom, it becomes our word. Hence the Word of God must be understood without any thinking on the part of God, for there is nothing there that can take form, or be unformed." In this way thought is, properly speaking, the movement of the mind while yet deliberating, and not yet perfected by the clear sight of truth. Since, however, such a movement of the mind may be one of deliberation either about universal notions, which belongs to the intellectual faculty, or about particular matters, which belongs to the sensitive part, hence it is that "to think" is taken secondly for an act of the deliberating intellect, and thirdly for an act of the cogitative power.
Accordingly, if "to think" be understood broadly according to the first sense, then "to think with assent," does not express completely what is meant by "to believe": since, in this way, a man thinks with assent even when he considers what he knows by science [Science is certain knowledge of a demonstrated conclusion through its demonstration.], or understands.
If, on the other hand, "to think" be understood in the second way, then this expresses completely the nature of the act of believing.
For among the acts belonging to the intellect, some have a firm assent without any such kind of thinking, as when a man considers the things that he knows by science, or understands, for this consideration is already formed.
But some acts of the intellect have unformed thought devoid of a firm assent,
whether they incline to neither side, as in one who "doubts";
or incline to one side rather than the other, but on account of some slight motive, as in one who "suspects";
or incline to one side yet with fear of the other, as in one who "opines."
But this act "to believe," cleaves firmly to one side, in which respect belief has something in common with science and understanding; yet its knowledge does not attain the perfection of clear sight, wherein it agrees with doubt, suspicion and opinion. Hence it is proper to the believer to think with assent: so that the act of believing is distinguished from all the other acts of the intellect, which are about the true or the false.
There is actually a very long history of both “Faith and Reason” co-existing.
Here’s where things get interesting.
“Reason”, has become the domain of “science” and those that opposed understanding by “faith” or Religion. They pushed through and have dominated the narrative since the early 20th century.
As science has advanced, as it must, the questions that science alone, using materialism/reductionism, was to answer have created more questions than answers. Some would say that “that is how science works”. Always on the path of discovery, and that’s fine.
However, they have narrated and institutionalized conclusions that remain unresolved even under their own standards of the scientific method. These conclusions are easy for them to infer since they must be contained within the narrow framework of their discipline.
What is most interesting to me, is how they now invoke unprovable theories and present them as “scientific”.
Dark Energy, Dark Matter, String theory and a Multi-verse to name a few. All of these are beyond the scientific method but have become necessary in order for them maintain the a narrative that excludes Faith/Religion.
As a result, they are actually placing “Their Faith” in something that they cannot prove nor can ever prove.
There was a lost century where “theologians wanted to ignore reason”, but that is changing very very quickly.
The Scientific Establishment, and yes it does exist, is desperate to counter these pesky Christians.
Beyond Belief: Science, Reason, Religion & Survival
http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-science-religion-reason-and-survival
The above is ten sessions, well over 20 hours of video from our leading “Scientists” describing “their problem” and how to destroy Christianity.
It’s an extraordinary display of arrogance that you will ever see.
In the meantime, I see the results of this indoctrination into the “Scientific Method”, as being the only way to know truth, on display in virtually every aspect of our lives.
It’s crazy stuff.
This kid is not stupid. He is actually very intelligent, but his head has been filled with so much crap that the only thing he knows to be “Certain” is “Uncertainty”.
This is what is being taught and promoted and is influencing our public policies.
No Science, No Logic and No Morality: Atheism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hsZIauQex4
There’s more.
I welcome feedback.
Profound.
God’s gift to man - the ability to think and discover the wonder of Creation.
Nicely done!