You've heard that faith without works is dead. I'd say that faith without discernment is lost.
What are you going to have faith in? Which ancient text? Which religious leader? Which church and which doctrine? You need to discern these things before faith can even get off the ground. This idea is lost on the religious, who insist that we have faith in whatever they happen to be oriented toward.
Christians might say that Faith is the evidence of things unseen, but that doesn't mean faith shouldn't have evidence behind it. It means the kind of evidence isn't empirical.
Evangelicals might say that the Holy Spirit guides us into faith. Fine. But does it guide us in and through reason or against it? How do we discern what is the Holy Spirit and whether it's what we should be listening to?
Remember that the faith of Abraham included reasoning that God could raise Isaac from the dead.
Even the religious agree there's a such thing as blind faith, but blind faith can't just mean the faith of the other guy but not yours. As soon as you start thinking about the difference between blind faith and true faith, you're looking at discernment in one form or another.
It might be uncomfortable to upend your religious beliefs and subject them to discernment through reason, but it's also wise. Going through your whole life living a lie is a tragedy. If you want to do good in your life, believing the truth is a good start. And if your religious convictions really are true, this process of questioning will only make them more solid.
Nothing I say is against faith, but it is against a cheap kind of faith. Instead, I recommend a more vested form of faith. One that is more careful with each step, not so fragile to competing arguments, and embedded in wisdom.
