Believing <i>Because</i> the Gospel Is Absurd?

[Northwoods]

A few anti-intellectual Christian fundamentalists have proudly told me that they believe <i>because</i> it is absurd to believe! "If this makes me irrational, then I embrace being irrational," they've said in so many words.
Question: Paul is in a related territory when he writes in Romans that the Gospel is a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks but is there anywhere in the New Testament that declares explicitly that one can believe it <i>because</i> it is absurd?

[ChaosBorders]

A few anti-intellectual Christian fundamentalists have proudly told me that they believe <i>because</i> it is absurd to believe! "If this makes me irrational, then I embrace being irrational," they've said in so many words.
Question: Paul is in a related territory when he writes in Romans that the Gospel is a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks but is there anywhere in the New Testament that declares explicitly that one can believe it <i>because</i> it is absurd?

Not that I know of off the top of my head, but the idea is important to the concept of fideism. So, though more often touted by anti-intellectuals, with the likes of Soren Kierkegaard and William James in that camp it is not solely anti-intellectuals who support the idea.

[thatoneguy]

William of Occam, the father of modern logic and the man whose famous razor we all love to use, was one of first people to hold this belief (perhaps even the first).

is there anywhere in the New Testament that declares explicitly that one can believe it because it is absurd?

Of course not. However, if it was done because it was written in the bible, then such a belief would be logical, now wouldn't it?

The beauty of absurdism is it's lack of rules. You believe what you choose to, and reasons for those beliefs fall somewhere in between unimportant and non-existent.

And I wouldn't necessarily call such a belief anti-intellectual. In fact, I think it could well be the sign of someone who has truly realized that most of our beliefs are absurd anyway. But the consequences of such a belief speak louder than the motives. As long as those beliefs aren't causing the holder to affect the lives of those around him, I hardly see it as an issue.

Now, as I turns out I know no one with this belief, so I can't speak for how harmless or non-harmless it actually is.

[Slopeshoulder]

All true. A mindless belief is exactly that. But many good thinkers think that any belief that attempts to be other-than-absurd is a reduction and a contradiction in terms.
The danger comes when fundamentalists embrace the absurd while also reducing it to allegedly clear solid truth. That then is mindless, a reduction, and a contradiction in terms. An unholy trinity of ridiculousness. But most of them are either too dumb or lazy to understand that.

[Northwoods]

is there anywhere in the New Testament that declares explicitly that one can believe it because it is absurd?

Of course not. However, if it was done because it was written in the bible, then such a belief would be logical, now wouldn't it?

I wouldn't necessarily call such a belief anti-intellectual. In fact, I think it could well be the sign of someone who has truly realized that most of our beliefs are absurd anyway.

1.Why do you say "Of course not"? It's not so un-New-Testament a thing to say.
2.You wrote, "If it was done because it was written in the Bible...." If what was done?
3."Some who truly realized...."? I don't know about believing most of our beliefs are absurd, but if someone believed that all our beliefs are absurd, then it would be absurd to believe that all our beliefs are absurd and there would be no point advocating that position.

[Northwoods]

.... fundamentalists have proudly told me that they believe <i>because</i> it is absurd to believe!

.... the idea is important to the concept of fideism.

Fideism, I believe, has to do with faith that something is true even though not rationally supportable. One would have to go a bit further and perhaps into another territory to have faith that something is true because it is irrational.

[thatoneguy]

is there anywhere in the New Testament that declares explicitly that one can believe it because it is absurd?

Of course not. However, if it was done because it was written in the bible, then such a belief would be logical, now wouldn't it?

I wouldn't necessarily call such a belief anti-intellectual. In fact, I think it could well be the sign of someone who has truly realized that most of our beliefs are absurd anyway.

1.Why do you say "Of course not"? It's not so un-New-Testament a thing to say.
2.You wrote, "If it was done because it was written in the Bible...." If what was done?
3."Some who truly realized...."? I don't know about believing most of our beliefs are absurd, but if someone believed that all our beliefs are absurd, then it would be absurd to believe that all our beliefs are absurd and there would be no point advocating that position.

1. I'm not a new-testament kinda guy. I was just answering honestly.
2. Believing because the NT says so. They're believing because they think it's absurd. It's that they believe in the new-testament because of absurdism, not that they believe in absurdism because of the new testament.
3. It's a much more nuanced revelation than that. You can't always choose to believe or not believe something. I believe what we call "free will" is just a combination of billions upon billions of factors interacting in a very specific way. That doesn't mean I can at any point choose not to have it.

Good absurdists don't try to prove their points, either. At best, they'll disprove yours. But explaining is different from convincing.

[ChaosBorders]

.... fundamentalists have proudly told me that they believe <i>because</i> it is absurd to believe!

.... the idea is important to the concept of fideism.

Fideism, I believe, has to do with faith that something is true even though not rationally supportable. One would have to go a bit further and perhaps into another territory to have faith that something is true because it is irrational.

*some forms of fideism.

Particularly that proposed by Kierkegaard.

[Slopeshoulder]

yes! there are other versions than the fundamentalist version.
Kierkegaard's is foundational.