Tag Archives: Justin Brierly

Why some people aren’t Christians or ‘Preppers’

24 May

Ps 78:32  

In spite of all this, they still sinned; despite his wonders, they did not believe.

I was listening to someone explain how & why he had lost faith in the God he had enjoyed throughout his childhood.  It happened like this: he fell in love with a gal in high school who wasn’t a Christian.  That relationship led him to question what he had been taught from church and the Bible about why there are some people who aren’t Christian. The evidence he saw around him upon investigation caused him to abandon confidence in the truth of the Bible and what he had learned at church.

As he detailed the events, he offered this distinction:

  • I don’t claim to prove whether God exists or not.  I just don’t believe in God.

Hearing him draw a contrast, I began to see that though intertwined, these are indeed two different issues. (You can listen to the interview or access his written account of the unraveling of his faith at the link above.)  What struck me was the following statement:

  • “I might be wrong about God. But what I’m sure of is that my search for the truth has been genuine and my beliefs are sincere.”

Some questions for thinking logical Joes and Janes:

  1. What added value does ‘genuine’ bring to one’s search for the truth?
  2. Does it matter if beliefs are ‘sincere’?

I’m bothered by his (and many others’ I encounter) almost cavalier, yet ‘sincere’, dismissal of just not believing in God.

Is Christianity a matter of choosing to believe?  And what does it mean to ‘not believe’, or even ‘to believe’ for that matter?  And what about truth?

We have a friend who is a ‘survivalist prepper’.  You’ve heard of those folks. They stockpile vast supplies of food, weapons and other necessary goods so they can live independently for weeks and even months in various apocalyptic scenarios.  My husband and I have not taken those kind of ‘what if’ precautions, although we do have some supplies in the event of a power outage due to storms.

Our friend, who seems very rational, might accuse us of living in denial if we say, “We don’t believe in the realistic eventuality which grounds your preparation.”

How SHOULD we respond to possible mega disaster events?  Just like how we should respond to the possibility of there being a real God.

The only questions are:

  • What evidence is there for a likely event for which we should increase our preparation?
  • What evidence is there for the supernatural God as described in the Christian Bible?

And given the evidence, what is the most reasonable (reason-based) response one should make?

A more honest conclusion on the part of the man who lost his faith would be:

  • I don’t like where the evidence points, because I don’t want to deal with the God that the Bible describes.
  • And as a fully-aware, but perhaps irrational adult, I deliberately choose to put off dealing with what will happen to me when I die

Friends, I don’t know about the odds of an apocalyptic scenario happening in my lifetime.  But what I do know is that there is a preponderance of evidence to give us a high degree of certainty that the triune God of the Bible (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is who He says He is as recorded in the 66 books of the Bible.  Therefore, I assert that we can TRUST the written record.

Only fools ignore that kind of certainty.

 

Another reason for believing God

31 Aug

Do you accept God for who he says he is in the Bible because the written words are true?

And do you know that the words are true because there is enough external evidence to warrant true belief?

Or do you trust God and his words because you always have and don’t really think about why you do?

I ask because I learned of another way to justify one’s belief in God.  Listening to a podcasted discussion (Unbelievable with Justin Brierley) between 2 philosophers the other day introduced me to the concept of ‘properly basic beliefs’ and ‘non-propositional’ logic.

As a layperson, I gleaned that a properly basic belief is one not based on other propositional truth or on evidence, but accepted and trusted.  These are beliefs that can’t be proven. Examples might be:

  • the sense or knowing that there is more to life than what we see
  • 2 + 2 = 4

The American philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, offers this example:

  •  I think other minds exist because I have a mind and I exist, but I can’t prove it.  All might be an illusion (remember The Matrix?).
  • Nonetheless, we humans do accept that if we exist, then others exist. And if we acknowledge THAT as a rational belief, then might we not also accept as rational the proposition that God exists?

This way of ‘argumentation’ does presuppose that we humans have the capacity to think rationally.  (to use this lingo, “the belief that humans are designed to think rationally” is properly basic)

Plantinga points to the ‘sensus divinitatis’ in every human as evidence that the existence of God is a rational conclusion.  This sense of the divine appears in every culture across the expanse of history.

So what do you think?  For Christians who are commanded by Jesus to explain the good news of God’s rescue plans to all we encounter in our daily lives, is this approach sufficient?  Probably not.  But as we live out ‘the Great Commission’ we are learning and assembling a ‘tool kit’.  I’m reassured just knowing that intelligent Christian thinkers across the centuries have vetted what is probably common to all people I meet.  There ARE convictions we hold as rational without being able to articulate any propositional or evidential reason other than, “I just believe it!”

 

Logical Gal and parsing God’s role in evil

23 Apr

A sign of maturity is the ability to live with tension between several messy concepts.

I was listening to Justin Brierly interview Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in NYC.  Keller has just written a book on suffering.  You can buy the book here

Tim Keller's book on suffering

When asked how he pastorally responds to the question of evil and suffering, he described how his seminary professor led his class to consider this theodicy (problem of defending God). All the students read a chapter about the doctrine of God in a textbook, authored by Herman Bavink. Two of the views distinguishing God’s role in evil and election are big words:

supra-lapsarianism” and “infra-lapsariansim

According to Keller, the ‘supra’ version is the argument that God DID choose to create a world in which there is evil …….because THOSE circumstances will best glorify Him.

The ‘infra’ variation maintains that God did NOT decide to create a world with evil and suffering in it. But because of the Fall, He did purposefully elect some people out of it, yet did not ordain to save everyone….because THOSE conditions would best glorify him

So there is this argument back and forth.

Keller’s seminary professor then made the case that the Bible doesn’t actually let us choose either one of these.  The Bible says that you mustn’t come down too hard in one direction or the other.   Because if on the one hand you say, “God didn’t ordain evil.  He couldn’t help it, ” you’re left with a bigger problem.  For if evil wasn’t His design, then you really don’t have a god.  You have something else in charge of the universe and we really don’t know what that is. If on the other hand you say, “Yes, God DID create a plan to include evil so that it would glorify Him,”  then that view of God does not fit in with a lot of what the Bible says about His purposes and design as well as His heart and love for the world.

So what does one do with this dilemma, this either-or?

Dilemma

Keller continues with how his seminary professor and Bavink suggested they think. God’s ordaining of evil and good are not identical. They are rather ‘asymmetrical’. That is, His permissiveness in allowing some evil and His purposes in ordaining good are different.

In other words, these two Calvinistic views, the supra and the infralapsarian explanations,  are both right and wrong. (or another conclusion is that we cannot know one way or the other!)  So stick with what the Bible affirms.  Grow to be able to accept that in this life, there WILL BE loose ends.

We are, after all, finite creatures attempting to comprehend an infinite super-natural power.  Yes, God has communicated with us through the written word.  We can’t know everything, but we can know SOME things.  We can have certainty about His character, but His purposes are another matter.

God says in Deuteronomy 29:29 –The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but what has been revealed belongs to us and to our children forever, so that we might observe the words of this Law.

Question:  How comfortable are you at accepting uncertainty about some of these important issues in life?