arguments is the source of a great deal of intellectual confusion. And in some very important respects, the essay is an extended straw-man argument against the “faith and reason” perspective, at times misrepresenting the views of thinkers such as Aquinas and at other times selectively reading the Bible by appealing to Paul above all other authorities.2 As I argue in my essay, there are at least three traditions of reason: one associated with the modernist-empiricist tradition, one associated with