Ron Doss shared with me a word that he recently came across, with which he and I were not familiar. The term was fideity, or fideism. (Interestingly, my spell checker in the computer program I use to prepare this bulletin doesn’t know the term either).
There are two definitions for fideism I want to share with you—both from online dictionaries. 1) exclusive reliance in religious matters upon faith, with consequent rejection of appeals to science or philosophy—dictionary.com; 2) The doctrine that knowledge depends on faith or revelation—oxforddictionaries.com.
The term would be used disparagingly toward Christians, as clearly indicated by the first definition. The question is, is it true? Well, it depends a bit upon the actual definition of the term. According to the second definition, absolutely so! We are dependent upon God’s revelation regarding what is true. Even if such revealed truth is counterintuitive to what we think would be true, we accept revelation above our own thoughts. “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). However, if it is claimed that belief in God and His word is contradictory to true science or philosophy, and in order to believe we must be unreasonable, that is categorically untrue. As Paul wrote, “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).
If you want an example of unreasonable dependence upon faith, how about the idea that all you see today is the result of mere chance? Now that is a true example of fideism!
