Evidence for God

The primary evidence, to my mind, apart from the life, teaching and resurrection of Yeshua of Nazareth (which is THE primary evidence) is that God as creator prior to and external to the world (the entirety of the cosmos), his creation, is the only adequate and reasonable ground of our sense of transcendence -- expressed in our pursuit of relationship, beauty, joy, delight, even peace; none of which are finally meaningful in any way in a materialist conception of the cosmos. The obvious expression of transcendence in daily life is the mind and the fruitfulness of our awareness of and fellowship with other minds. Mind transcends material.

Our desire for God (or its inverse, often vehement in atheists, libertines, hedonists and Epicureans) expresses this ground - that we are not merely supervenient upon matter -- whatever that may be--but are truly connected to the source of mind, of life, and all significance which flies in the face of death, that comes from that connection.

Being the creator, Christ -- back to the true prime-- integrates our experience of the creation or sense of meaning and purpose and stands as the explication of the human dilemma and its resolution.

The human dilemma? Man cannot be his own integration point: it manifests in his discontents arising from alienation: the sense of disquiet, of separation (sin in the Bible). Man cannot be his own integration point because he is limited and contingent and must reach outside himself for resolution of his manifold disjuncts with reality. To casual observance transient (Ps. 103:14ff), or ephemeral, inexplicably ungrounded in a creator-less conception; or, on closer knowledge, navigating his own futility as all his being appears to collapse in death and be rendered nugatory -- yet, there is the paradoxical wonder of personhood and relationship.

The starting point of self-hood: I am not not myself, but distinct and individual, is content-less in isolation and forlorn in mere contingent human relationship. It can only be integrated in fellowship with the one who is, necessarily: resolution by our union with Christ for fellowship with our creator, Yahweh.

Peter Kreeft

In a commencement address he gave very recently, Peter Kreeft ended with this:

"God did not put you in this world to be successful he put you in this world to be faithful."

Perhaps one of the most encouraging words I've heard in a long time.

The crucible of creativity

My letter to Quadrant responding to an article by Simon Cowen

The distinction Rabbi Cowen draws between contemporary trends in the visual arts (and possibly applicable to all creative arts) and so-called ‘traditional’ views of the arts is instructive. It could go further, however, on the premiss that all art is religious. All art takes a position on the nature of reality, the nature of people, and the nature of the (dis?)continuity between the two.

The ‘modern secular’ art he decries has a religious position in broad brush strokes. Underlying it, I aver, is the most popular but sub-articulate ‘Religion of Me’. In its train, this peculiar modern version of paganism and its arid monist view of reality presents its vapid revelations as new.  They are introverted banalities at best. They tell us nothing, depleting the human spirit, rather than cheering it on to flourish.

One salient outcome of this monist vision is the suppression of true otherness. Something that is demonstrated and echoed in marriage (I reserve that term to a declared union of man and woman with the general prospect of raising a family. If the marriage does not join the sexes, it is not about the other, but, rather, the ‘same’, as a reflection in a mirror. Of itself unable to contribute family to enduring civilisation).

In the Judeo-Christian religious vision, this is demonstrated in the generous missionary spirit of much of Christianity and of Judaism. Christian mission efforts are well known. Less well acknowledged is the implicit Jewish mission of the diaspora. Jews being everywhere, contributing to all sorts of societies unstintingly, distinctively, and unremittingly. This great spirit is regrettably inverted by their heretical, effectively monist, offspring, Islam.

This religious tradition unfolds from the notion of a transcendent personal creator: mind at the source of all that we know and experience, growing from the Noahcian seed that prepares for Messiah. A creator who is radically ‘other’ but who reaches across the otherness of his transcendence for fellowship with his creation. The Genesis story of creation etches this to dramatic and striking effect.

I differ from Cowen and do not extend this notion to paganism. Its vision of ‘creator’ if there is one, is impersonal, solipsistic, and results in an inert spiral of self-absorption.

The three main events.

The Bible tells of three moments when God and his creature are together.

The creation: made for the fellowship of God and man, for life together. The creation is done in the terms of that relationship to show the ground of that relationship.

That relationship is broken at Genesis 3:8. This is the day that the relational ideal is shown, the day the idea of evolution started (the idea that separates God from man and denies his love) and the day it was shown that harmony had left the creation.

God and man are richly together in Genesis 1 and 2.

God and man are richly together in Revelation 21 and 22

God and man are together in the created world in the incarnation. Yeshua shows how different the world is from how it should be: he, its creator, is rejected by it; but only to turn the tables on that rejection and take up his life again, to bring us into his kingdom. Thus Revelation 21 and 22; where it is all headed.

Why are you a Christian?

There are lots of ways of answering this question. I'll keep writing them up as they come to me (from experience as well as musings).

 

I was told of a  neat approach at a local high school Christian group: all the seniors were asked for their answer to that question. In one sentence.

 

A real challenge. Give me 5 minutes or half an hour and I'd be OK. But one sentence?

 

Let's give it a go:

"The driving factor is the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. In his resurrection he showed that he had dealt with the final human frustration and guaranteed his chief claim: following him makes you part of God's family."

Why are you Christian?

Ever been asked?

What would you say?

I think as a young person I would have delivered a conversation stopper:"Because I am saved from my sins by Jesus." and made part of his family for ever...if I wanted to extend it a little.

All true, but not guaranteed to promote conversation with the questioner.

If asked today, I'd first ask 'why do you want to know?' If they say they are curious, or similar, perhaps enlarge on their curiosity. The enlargement can be either genuine, or not, and either convivial or oppositional; that is, to set you up for ridicule.

Taking all that into consideration I'd answer: 'because the Christian story of reality is comprehensively descriptive of life and how we experience it.' [its more than this, but, as in sales, you don't deliver the whole story like a recitation, you use the conversation to build a natural relationship].

Then you might have opportunity to discuss how God ‘out-graces’ our wrecked lives and gives us restored relationship with him replacing our disrupted human condition with peace, joy and deep satisfaction of new life in God’s family.

Or, briefly: because its true (in how it describes life and our relationship to reality).

See ColdCaseChristianity articles: not for any of these reasons,  not because it works for me. Also have a look at fear of death and how can you know truth for certain?

If they are aggressive in deprecating you, there's either a friendly response, or a 'tough' one.

Friendly: 'are you so aggressive because your own world view won't  stand up to real life/is too challenged by mine?'

Tough: 'so I guess you're an atheist or materialist, am I right? Or maybe into scientism? [person assents]. Then how is your world view anything worth even thinking about: a trivial meaningless life full of sh*t and then you turn to dust'

Rarely a person will not be in the materialism squad and will be a 'new ager' or a mainstream Eastern spiritualist. Both deny the final reality of the person, believe in an impersonal spirit, have a diffuse view of creation and no room for beauty, joy or true value other than contingent transient reactions, of the 'I like icecream' variety.

**Scientism is the usually informal or unconscious belief that the physical sciences are exhaustively and entirely descriptive of reality.

Course reading

If Christians were serious about educating people in the faith, they would run seminars, and they would have readings with the seminars.

The Australian Christian Lobby has a commendable program 'GPS'. I don't know if it comes with pre-readings or even readings to accompany each seminar, but either way, if I was running it, my pre-readings list would be this:

Required reading:

Greg Koukl's trilogy: Story of Reality, Relativism, and Tactics (in that order).

Encouraged reading:

Francis Schaeffer's trilogy: The God Who Is There, He is There and Is Not Silent, and Escape from Reason.

Background reading:

Olsen, the Mosaic of Christian Belief.

Recommended reading:

Moreland and Craig: Philosophical Foundations of a Christian Worldview

Geisler: Christian Apologetics

Mittelberg: The Questions Christians Hope No One Will Ask.

Alpha questions in the Guardian

In a couple of old Guardian articles (the newspaper, the leftist rag from the UK) from 2000, Jon Ronson reports his participation in an Alpha course at Holy Trinity Brompton, the founder of Alpha, Nicki Gumbel's parish.

In the group time, Gumbel invites questions.

Ronson mentions "If there's a God, why is there so much suffering?" and reports Gumbel's pamphlet in reply: Why Does God Allow Suffering? (answer: nobody really knows)

So much to say about this.

First, the question: to the average non-church-goer "Do you believe there is suffering?" ..."Do you think that suffering is wrong?"..."Do you think that suffering brings any benefits?"

These are just 'dimensioning' questions. If the person is even a vague theist, they will have a conception of God which is in some contrast to their idea of a world that includes suffering; even if they are an atheist and ask as a challenge to the integrity of the Christian world-view, they will pre-suppose a definition of God to make the challenge.

Most such definitions will define the 'god' of moralistic therapeutic deism and will leave out the Biblical information about God: he is holy, eternal, and holds out to us who he made in his 'image', the blessing of eternal life with him.

Why is there so much suffering? We live in a world of God-rejection. We reject God and seek to cut ourselves off from his life-giving love. God is only interested in a relationship that meets him and he has acted to open that to us who are in 'anti-god'. Outside that relationship, we live the experience of 'anti-god'. If we didn't there would be no indication that eternity without God awaits we who persist in lauding our anti-god lives and their idolatrous obsessions. Suffering is the foretaste of the eternal meaning of rejecting God and a reminder to us of our frailty and need for God.

And 'suffering'? The apostle Paul tells us that by comparison, we have before us an 'eternal weight of glory' the content of which has not even entered our minds.

He is Risen

Now that we do remote church; my morning's links:

St Swithun's Pymble

Hereford Cathedral 2017

Rochester Cathedral 1997

Easter from Kings 2016

Easter from Kings 2014

Heroes of the faith

Who springs to mind when you read "heroes of the faith"?

Lots of big names, I'm sure.

My parents supported a church plant (as we call them nowadays) in a low-income area of our city. We all attended. I got quite involved in children's and youth ministry, committee membership and participating in services. I made some good friends there, but there were too few as peers and I did feel rather like a fish out of water.

Nevertheless, this was our church and that was it.

People who stick in my mind:

Dolores T. Her husband had been injured in an accident on army maneuvers. Had a debilitating brain injury (an artillery shell fell during loading onto a truck and hit his head). DT was ever polite and cheerful, raising with her husband I think three or four children. I remember the two oldest: girls and their younger brother. All polite, calm and self-effacing, and with a resilient quiet cheerfulness. My mother admired and helped Dolores as friend to friend.

Norm F. He and his wife were disability pensioners. Norm had a chronic neurological condition that gave him almost continuous severe headaches, sometimes keeping him in bed for a couple of days at a time. He and his teenage daughter came to church most Sundays. His wife, also disabled by illness, rarely. He was ever faithful, quiet and humble. Always approachable, even if sometimes beset by squalls of illness.

Christine H. She was a committed, resilient and wise woman married to a dope. She had three sons. The eldest, a very quiet but intelligent electrical apprentice, was a friend. His younger brother died in mid-teens. My friend eventually got a job overseas in factory automation but died in his 50s of a lung condition (I think).

Horst S. and his wife. Horst had been in the German army in WWII. His wife English! They had a tribe of kids: well, five, that I can remember: four boys, of whom two were twins, and I think, a daughter. They had a border: a disabled older man with a chronic illness. Horst was a wonderful man. He was killed by a truck running into his bicycle. He died a few weeks after the crash. Two of his sons became ministers.

Robert V. S. Our minister. He came as a young man: he was old to me at 14, but now as an older bloke, he was incredibly young for such a challenging ministry. He was very smart, personable, wise and insightful. Could have ministered in a big city church and grown it easily. But he stayed in our small low-income church full of pensioners, the ill, and those of simple tastes. He was a huge influence on me and great encouragement.

There you have it.  From the worldly point of view, no one remarkable; no one dressed fashionably, no one drove a new car, no one had a large house, no one had a university degree, no one was known outside our circle. But for me, heroes of faith.

'Don't worry, God is in control'

This somewhat correct, but misunderstanding platitude needs rebuttal.

Here's one of mine:

We must remember that God's love and goodness are not always aligned with our tendency to 'moralistic, therapeutic deism'. God's goodness and love have other ends than our occasional comforts. They are concerned with our holiness and his kingdom proximately, and our relationship with him in the new creation, teleologically. When we nurture our personal comfort with platitudes in these times of mild testing, I think of the suffering of the saints during the English civil war (both Catholic and Reformed), or the trials of Christians in communist regimes, let alone the church in times prior to Constantine.

We still have it easy. Time to toughen up and consider our Lord, rather than our toilet paper.

More on MTD and why does it fail,  the new American religion, and how it worships.

Faith - not a leap.

The idea that Christian faith is a 'leap' is not Christian.

It's not even Biblical. Biblical faith is the assurance of things not seen (but reported by reliable witnesses, and understood by simple logic).

It comes from Soren Kierkegaard, regarded by many as a 'Christian' existentialist philosopher. As such, his theology is not up to much.

He had no secure ground for his faith (Christian faith being a response of confidence to evidence), so he had to 'leap'.

The only one who has to 'leap' for faith is the atheist, who is convinced there is no god (despite what they claim), or the Buddhist, the Hindu, Shinto, animist or astrologer.

Stand to reason has a helpful article on this.

It'll all be OK

I guess you've heard of one of the consolations of faith being quoted as Romans 8:28 (God causes all things to work together for good).

But, maybe you're not aware of the full information on this. Paul writes (Roms 8:28-30): 

And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

The end God has in mind is our eternal state with God in the new creation of free fellowship with him, living in his presence.

It is not about things working out on this Earth.

Nor is it about God manipulating events for us.

It is God weaving into his objective the contingent uncertainties of a fallen and distorted world (out of which he is saving us)  that operates according to the 'prince of the power of the air'. No matter how bad others want to make things, God will weave them into his cloth, not theirs. During which time, we persevere in prayer for courage, boldness, strength and wisdom as we await the 'eternal weight of glory (2 Corinthians 4:17)

5 part story and reprise

Earlier I posted on the five-point story of reality.

Now to reprise it, with detail

1. God (creator)

creates heaven and earth

2. Man (creature)

rejects God-relationshp and becomes anti-god

3. Christ

Christ, the creator, enters creation as a man, a creature

4. Crucifixion

Christ dies in our place  and defeats anti-god-ness (death)

5. Resurrection (consummation)

God makes all things new and brings us into life with him, forever.

The 'problem of evil'?

Many atheists will trot out this as the 'killer' blow against Christian theism.

It's not. It's the killer blow against atheism. It's their problem, not my problem!

The typical statement is:

"There's so much evil in the world, I can't believe in/there is no God"

The quick answer: "what's evil?"

[some descriptive answer]

So, you don't like it, but there's no external standard that you can apply...

[some objection]

Without an external moral standard, the definition of 'evil' amounts to mere personal preference. So all you've said is you don't like some things that happen. So what!

And even if you think this is a fatal flaw in Christianity, you still must be able to detect evil...you still must be able to say and conceive of things that 'aren't right' by some external standard. Even to start this conversation, you have to adopt a Christian world view. So, this is your problem, a problem for atheism, not for Christianity.

OTOH, I know that there's 'too much' evil in the world, it is evil because it is inconsistent with the God who is love and made us for relationship with him. There's evil because we are evil! So what are you doing about it your bit of evil? Its action, thought, belief that's missing God.

Why did God allow this to happen?

Because he made us with the ability to make real moral choices, because we are made like him in a way: our thoughts, words, and actions have real significance. They are not random chemical accidents!

Greg Koukl has a couple of great lectures on this: the new atheists, and the problem of evil.

[He made us for relationship with him, so we would enjoy him for ever, but to do this, we had to have true knowledge which meant the freedom to reject that knowledge; a problem? He's solved the problem through Christ bringing us to relationship with God; we've only got to reverse our separation from God and turn to him.]

First God, now Jesus?

A little while ago I started a series on reasons for God, care of William Lane Craig.

But, even the devils believe in God and shudder (James 2:19)

What we want to know is why you are a Christian.

1. Jesus mission on earth was to connect us to God, the creator of the cosmos, and nothing is more important and I think he demonstrated his ability to do this
2. Jesus deals with the most significant existential dilemma of humanity (evil), and brings us into relationship with God our creator.
3. Jesus holds out the promise that I will be a better person for others, enjoy live more deeply, and live forever in the company of our Creator.
4. Jesus shows us that reality is at bottom about love and relationship, not about mere matter bumping into itself. Thus we do not have an existenial/cosmic aloneness, but rather secure certainty: the hope that we have through faith (see Hebrews 11). It underpins the significance of life that we all live under the asumption of.
5. Often people talk about 'the problem of evil' as though this invalidates belief in God, but they fail to deal with the problems of joy, peace, beauty, care of others' that invalidate their rejection of God. Jesus connects us with these because they are from him. 
6. He tells us that it doesn't all end here; that our lives are for more than a brief few decades, but for life forever with the maker of love, or without him...so I choose love. 
7. He integrates live around values of peace, love, relationship, not as fiction in a messy world, not as failed opportunities, but as what really is, and will be forever when we are with him in the new creation.

Other answers I've heard:

• Because its true (this can go somewhere, or it can sound naff, if not in a relevant context)
• He saves me from being separated from him
• He gives me new life through his Spirit that he's given me.