I always tend to wince a little at relying on knowledge though. For me, faith and knowledge are not out of the same mold. Knowledge is relying on information and fact where as faith is relying on what can't be seen. When what can't be seen becomes seen, is it knowledge? Or revelation?
Knowledge seems to depend on proof. Proof, like knowledge, for me, is also not cut from the same mold as faith. For me, again, I'm not trying to be confrontational or proving rightness . . .good grief . .not even close . .but for me knowledge is connected to mindsets. You can't teach faith, but you can teach knowledge. Reason being is that the natural mind is not intended to comprehend what distinctly faith is.
Carnalism can put on a display that appears to be light, but in reality, it's source still comes from darkness (ignorance/no intimacy) Logic has the appearance of light, but it's based on human understanding rather than spiritual revelational truth. That's what Jesus was referring to when he stated that the light we "think" we have in us is actually darkness, how great is that darkness . . .
22The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. 23But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
We may actually be saying the same thing here when what you call as knowledge, I call reality. It's just, like I said, my grasp of what knowledge is, is very closely related to relying on natural understanding rather than on spiritual revelation. One requires facts, the other is based on faith.