It seems in this thread that EVERYBODY has had something very useful to input, so I'll skip the "ditto's" and "amen's".
What I find when people talk about these things in two separate categories is that they're really just using figures of speech and not really refering to "categories" of knowledge.
The "head knowledge" group, for example liberal theologians or even atheists who KNOW the content of the Bible and even of the Gospel, but don't BELIEVE it, are very capable of elaborating on the doctrine of Christ, or of faith, or the Trinity, etc.
Now it seems that the label of having "head knowledge" is often used as a derogatory label towards those who in any way want to defend doctrine against the errors of the super-emotional/romantic individuals who "just want to love Jesus and get along." The value put on "thought" these days is so low (unfortunately, especially in the Christian community) that anyone to whom the "head knowledge" label is applied is automatically thought to be lower than the "heart knowledge" individual. Kind of like a queen beats a rook in Chess.
However, if and when WE are accused of having "head knowledge not heart knowledge" perhaps we too easily and quickly dismiss it without introspection into what our accusers may see in us. I can't remember who said it but someone talked about how in a way "our enemies can be our friends" because of the way they can point out in us what we ourselves are blind to.
But usually I think the case is simply that the unthinking and unlearned want a quick "no-thought" reply to an argument posed to them and so they throw out the ad-hominem to you thinking they have satisfied any obligation of further thought.
My
