The Better Story

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

How do we know what we know is true?

The end of the modern era spells the end of the modern pretension that we can logically prove that objective truth is knowable and provable. It is not. Because it is not knowable and provable in the abstract, proof requires that truth be knowable and provable to a human audience. An argument must both make sense and feel right in the context of the human condition. In the context of a confusing and dangerous world, who has the best story, one that you can bet your life on?

The Gospel Story

The Gospel story is the story of Jesus’ birth, life and ministry, death, and resurrection. This story is the focus of the four Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—in the New Testament and of faith statements, like the Apostle’s Creed.

Christianity began in a graveyard with the resurrection. The resurrection could not have occurred without Jesus’ crucifixion and death which was, in turn, associated with his life and ministry. Because Jesus’ life and ministry was chronicled looking back from the resurrection, each sentence in the New Testament should be prefaced with these words: Jesus rose from the dead, therefore . . . Jesus’ life, ministry, suffering, death, and resurrection are the Gospel story.

Christians, like Mary Magdalene, are the ones running from the cemetery to tell the rest of the world that Jesus lives (Matt 28:8).

After the Gospels themselves, the story of Jesus is the subject of many New Testament sermons by both Peter (Acts 2:14–41; 10:34–43) and Paul (Acts 13:16–41).

Context for the Gospel

In Genesis 11:1-9 we read the story of how men schemed to build a tower up to heaven to force God to come down and bless their city. The God who created heaven and earth (Gen 1:1) looked down on this effort and just laughed. These devious and obviously stupid men thought that they could manipulate a god that stood outside of time and space having created both. To prevent further foolishness, God confused them with different languages so that they would not be able to scheme together any further.

Because God transcends the material world and time itself, no physical or metaphysical tower can reach up to heaven.Towers, temples, religions, philosophies, and sciences are all equally vain. God must come down to us; we cannot reach up to him. The story of God’s efforts to reach down to us is recorded in scripture; he himself came down in the person of Jesus of Nazareth (Matt 1; Luke 1). God reversed the curse of Babel on the day of Pentecost with the giving of his Holy Spirit and the founding of the church (Acts 2), the oldest, continuous institution known to humanity.

But this story is not over; the church is not a museum of the past. Jesus points to the future and promises to reunite with his disciples:

“And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also.” (John 14:3)

Because the future is in Christ and we worship a loving and all powerful God, we know that our future is secure. In the midst of the traumas and tribulations of life, our hope is assured.

The Better Story

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter: http://bit.ly/2018_Lead

Continue Reading

Postmodernism

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

In his book, Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism, James Smith (2006, 26) Describes post modernism as a kind of pluriform and variegated phenomena, an historical period after (post) modernism, heavily influenced by French philosophers, especially Jacques Derrida, Jean-François Lyotard, and Michael Foucault.  Adding to the confusion, Smith observes that postmodernism does not make a clean break with modernism, but tends to intensify certain aspects of modernism, particularly notions of freedom (Smith 2006, 19-21, 26).

Smith starts with the intriguing premise that the basic ideas of these three postmodern philosophers have misunderstood. When properly understood, postmodern philosophy and the traditional teaching of the church remain compatible.  The collapse of the church in our lifetime can accordingly be seen to lay the groundwork for a revitalization of the church around traditional teaching—once purged of its modernistic thought patterns (Smith 2006,  22-23, 29).  This re-imaged traditional teaching he refers to as radical orthodoxy and has an incarnation focus which takes time, place, and space seriously and which affirms both the liturgy and the arts (Smith 2006, 127).

Jacques Derrida

Smith’s premise that these philosophers have been misunderstood because of weak bumper-sticker summaries of them. For example, Derrida’s misunderstood statement is: “there is nothing outside the text.” (Smith 2006, 36)  The idea that one can simply read a text, particularly an ancient text written in another language, and understand its meaning is to misunderstand the role of language, context, and interpretation. 

While often said to mean that the Bible cannot be read and understood by just anyone, Smith says that this is not what Derrida is saying. Derrida’s point is simply that all understanding of texts requires interpretation—the context and the interpretative community—which implies that there is no such thing as 

objective truth.  Interpretation is always required (Smith 2006, 38-40, 43).

Jean-François Lyotard

Smith also sees Lyotard’s idea of a meta-narrative as misunderstood in its bumper-sticker characterization. Postmodern critics have trouble with the meta-narrative or big story of scripture—creation, fall, redemption, and eschatology.  Smith disputes, however, that the scope of meta-narratives is Lyotard’s main concern.  Smith sees Lyotard’s main concern being the truth claims of modern use of meta-narratives—science is itself a meta-narrative but falsely and deceptively claims to be universal, objective, and demonstrable through reason alone. Smith writes:  “For the postmodern, every scientist is a believer.” Lyotard is perfectly okay with the idea of faith preceding reason, following Augustine  (Smith 2006, 62-72) and Anselm, who cites Isaiah 7:9.[1]

Michael Foucault

Foucault’s concern about institutional power structures is hard to reduce to a bumper-sticker characterization, in part, because he resists reductionism in his writing style and focuses on tediously pure description.  Smith sees Foucault preoccupied with disciplinary structures, but wonders what his real intentions are.  He talks about two readings of Foucault:  Foucault as Nietzschean and Foucault as a closet enlightenment liberal (Smith 2006, 96-99).  Smith (2006, 102) writes:

“What is wrong with all these disciplinary structures is not that they are bent on forming or molding human beings into something, but rather what they are aiming for in that process.”

Smith sees Foucault offering three lessons to the church: to see “how pervasive disciplinary formation is within our culture”; to identify which of these disciplines are “fundamentally inconsistent with…the message of the church”; and to “enact countermeasures, counter disciplines that will form us into the kinds of people that God calls us to be” (Smith 2006, 105-106).

Weakness in Modern Witness

Smith sees hope in the Derrida’s critique because the modern understanding of the Christian message is itself a distortion of traditional church teaching.  In attempting to frame the Christian message in ahistorical truth statements (God is love), the narrative tradition (God showed his love by sovereignly granting the exodus of the nation of Israel from Egypt) has been lost.  Because the Christian message is contextual in biblical accounts and is interpreted by the church, it meets Derrida’s primary concerns.  Consequently, according to Smith, the church must, however, abandon modern stance and language in order to thrive in the postmodern environment (Smith 2006, 54-58).

When exactly did the church relinquish its internal discipline and why?⁠[2]  Smith (2006, 107) sees communion, confession, foot washing, and economic redistribution as the kind of disciplines that need to be maintained.  A more normal reading of discipline might ask why the teaching of the church—church doctrine—is ignored and no dire consequences follow for those most engaged in the ignoring.

References

Davies, Brian and G.R. Evans [ed}. 2008. Anselm of Canterbury: The Major Works. Oxford World Classics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Longfield, Bradley J. 1991. The Presbyterian Controversy:  Fundamentalists, Modernists, and Moderates. New York:  Oxford University Press.

Smith, James K.A.  2006.  Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism:  Taking Derrida, Lyotard, and Foucault to Church.  Grand Rapids:  Baker Academic.

Footnotes

[1] In his Proslogion, Anselm writes: “I believe so that I may understand.” (Davies and Evans 2008, 87)

[2] Longfield (1991, 79-91) chronicles changes 1925-1936 in the Presbyterian Church from dropping the five fundamental of faith as ordination requirements in 1925 to changes at Princeton Theological Seminary serving to allow theological diversity within the denomination. These changes also effectively removed doctrinal basis for church discipline, accept in the case of gross error.

Postmodernism

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter: http://bit.ly/2018_Lead

Continue Reading

The Banality of Evil

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple Faith“And lead us not into temptation,

but deliver us from evil.” (Matt 6:13)

By Stephen W. Hiemstra

One of the primal experiences in life is the experience of evil, yet in our postmodern world many people work to deny its existence and its ultimate manifestation in the person of Satan. By contrast, the early church routinely practiced exorcism as part of the baptismal service because “The exorcisms [meant] to face evil, to acknowledge its reality, to know its power, and to proclaim the power of God to destroy it.” (Schmemann 1973, 70-71)

Evil Personified

The proclivity to deny evil shows today in our attempts to define it away. We are not born in sin, as Augustine (Foley 2006, 9) argued; we are born basically good and able to live an righteous life. When someone points out an obvious sin, the blame is shifted away (he was poor, disadvantaged, in great pain, and so on). Even Adolf Eichmann employed this defense.

Many people avoid making decisions hoping that they can escape accountability. Hannah Arendt was a German Jew who, having escaped Nazi death camps before coming to America, was asked to report on the Adolf Eichmann trial in Jerusalem (1961) for the New Yorker magazine. Eichmann was the German officer during the Second World War who organized Adolf Hitler’s program of extermination of the Jews known as the “Final Solution.” Arendt attended the trial expecting to see a hateful, anti-Semite only to discover that Eichmann was more of a petty bureaucrat, someone unable to think for himself. In the case of Eichmann, the face of evil was that of someone unable or unwilling to think for themselves (Arendt 1992, 97–101).

The Eichmann trial changed Arendt forever. She devoted her life to studying the mind and no doubt out of anguish coined the term “banality of evil,” which speaks to the commonplace nature of evil (Arendt 1976, 3). In some sense, denying the reality of evil is intellectually on par with denying the existence of the Holocaust. 

Sin Defined

Sin and evil are birds of a feather. Sin is a broad term encompassing several related ideas: sin, trespass, and iniquity. 

In the Greek language where it comes from, sin is an archery term that means to fall short of the mark. When we strive, but fail, to do good, we sin. 

Trespass is a legal term that implies the breaking of a rule or law. Driving at 90 miles per hour on a road with a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour is a trespass.

Iniquity, like sin, can also take a broad meaning but it is helpful to think of iniquity as failing to do something good. Watching someone drown when it is possible to throw them a rope, may not be illegal, but it is an iniquity.

Evil Defined

Evil is often defined today as the absence of good. When God created light, he declared it to be good (Gen 1:3). The absence of light, darkness, could be thought of as evil—the absence of good without the pejorative inference. But this definition for evil wishes away the problem of pejorative evil.

Viktor Frankl (2008) offers numerous tips to prospective concentration camp inmates during the Second World War on how to survive, such as:

  • Don’t draw attention to yourself from sadistic guards.
  • Shave daily, walk briskly, and stand up straight to look healthy enough for work.
  • Applaud profusely when sadistic guards read poetry.
  • In walking in formation, stay in the middle or the front to avoid those that stumble and the beatings that follow.
  • Offer free psychiatric counseling to guards in need of it.

The key term in this description is sadistic. Evil pollutes those that touch it encouraging further evil. True evil is never simply the absence of good.

The Importance of Purpose

James K. A. Smith offers an interesting ethical insight into the nature of evil—an instrument (or person) is good when it is used with its purpose in view.  When it strays from its purpose, it commits sin and engages in evil.

He asks how one would evaluate a flute used to roast marshmallows over a fire—we would never say that a flute used this way was a bad flute. Why? The measure of a flute is how it is used to play music, not roast marshmallows. Smith (2016, 89) observes:

“…virtue is bound up with a sense of excellence: a virtue is a disposition that inclines us to achieve the good for which we are made.”

Because of original sin, we are not inclined to love virtues and to practice them. Being created in the image of God implies that are on a mission in worship to develop the virtues through ritual and sacrament that match God’s intent for our lives (Smith 2016, 88). 

Satan in the Bible

Satan’s role in tempting us and promoting evil in the world is found throughout scripture. In the Garden of Eden, Satan is pictured as a snake who rebels against God and tempts others to sin by rebelling with him.⁠1 God later advises Cain to be good because, otherwise, sin will strike like a snake crouching at your door (Gen 4:7).

Another important image of Satan is given in Job 1 where Satan is depicted as a ruthless prosecuting attorney in God’s court. Satan’s cruel lies slander a righteous Job. Still, Satan cannot afflict Job without first seeking God’s permission (Job 1:6-12). In spite of Satan’s cruelty, Job remains faithful. In the end, God not only acquits him of all of Satan’s charges, Job is compensated for his losses (Job 42:10).

In the synoptic gospels, the Holy Spirit leads Jesus into the desert where the devil tempts him.⁠2 Much like Adam and Eve are tempted with food, the devil starts by goading a hungry Jesus into turning a stone into bread. The devil tempts Jesus three times. Jesus cites scripture in response to each temptation. In the final temptation, the Devil’s temptation starts by misquoting scripture, but Jesus corrects the deception and resists the temptation.⁠3

Like Job and unlike Adam, Jesus remains faithful to God’s will in life and in death. Jesus’ death on the cross then fulfills the prophecy of Satan’s defeat (Gen 3:15) and pays the penalty for sin—we are redeemed. Because the curse of sin is broken, the death penalty for sin has been rescinded (1 Cor 15:22). The resurrection accordingly proves that we have been reconciled with God.

In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus asks us to pray that we not be tempted and that we be delivered from evil. Because Satan must ask permission to tempt us, God can deny that petition and our deliverance is within his power. King David writes: “Preserve me, O God, for in you I take refuge.” (Ps 16:1) Jesus has promised us that when we turn to him in weakness our salvation is secure (John 10:29).

References

Arendt, Hannah. 1992. Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Arendt, Hannah. 1996. The Life of the Mind: The Groundbreaking Investigation of How We Think. New York: Harvest Book.

Foley, Michael P. [editor] 2006. Augustine Confessions (Orig Pub 397 AD). Translated by F. J. Sheed (1942). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.

Frankl, Viktor E. 2008. Man’s Search for Meaning: A Classic Tribute to Hope from the Holocaust (Orig Pub 1946).[1] Translated by Ilse Lasch. London: Rider.

Kline, Meredith G. 2006. Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers.

Nouwen, Henri J. M. 2002. In the Name of Jesus: Reflections on Christian Leadership. New York: Crossroad Publishing Company.

Schmemann, Alexander. 1973. For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy. Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press.

Smith, James K. A. 2016. You Are What You Love: The Spiritual Power of Habit. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press.

Footnotes

1 For example, Kline (2006, 302) writes about the people of God and the people of the serpent.

2 Mark 1:12-13 gives a brief overview while Matt 4:1-11 and Luke 4:1-13 are longer. The Luke version has the most detail. The second and third questions posed by Satan appear in different order in Matthew and Luke.

3 Each temptation Jesus faces is a challenge facing all Christians, particularly leaders. Nouwen (2002, 7–8) summarizes these leadership challenges as the temptation to be relevant (provide food), to be spectacular (show your divinity), and to be powerful (take charge).

The Banality of Evil

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter: http://bit.ly/2018_Lead

Continue Reading

Salvation and Eternal Life

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

A lot of people scoff at the idea that salvation and eternal life are real because of skepticism about the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul, for example, writes about the importance of the resurrection for our faith in these terms:  “if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” (1 Cor 15:14) The resurrection of Christ implies that Jesus lives and will return in the future to bring us home to our true residence in heaven.

The Mechanics of Resurrection

Knowing that the future is in Christ, through faith we know that the future is secure and is good, because we serve a God who loves us and is himself holy and good. Jesus is our rock, as he reminds us:

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock.” (Matt 7:24-25)

But not everyone is convinced. How do we know the sequence of events in our salvation and the path to our eternal life?

The Apostle Paul, who met the Risen Christ on the Road to Damascus, answered this question this way:

“that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.” (Phil. 3:10-11)

In other words, I know that I will be raised from the dead because I have shared in Christ’s suffering and death.

Faith and the Soul

In his letter to the church in Corinth, Paul writes again this subject:

“For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body– Jews or Greeks, slaves or free– and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many.” (1 Cor 12:12-14)

Here Paul is talking specifically about the nature of the church, but a second interpretation is possible.

In Christian thinking, we often talk about the soul, which today we might refer to as our identity. In Hebrew thinking the word soul implies body, mind, spirit, and the people who will are in relationship with. When we come to Christ, we invite the Holy Spirit into our lives, which means that we are also from that point forward in relationship with God. Our soul has forever changed. Much like we are one body in Christ (the church), we are also one with God, who is eternal.

Being one with God implies that our identity is now held in common with the people of the church and with God. Because God is eternal, being in union with God implies that our identity is now eternal.

Example from Alzheimer’s Disease

For those of you unaccustomed to this notion of shared identity and the soul,

what happens to your identity when your mind is taken over with a disease, like Alzheimer’s? Do you stop being a person? Do you loose your identity because you no longer remember who you are? Not at all. When you meet a person with Alzheimer’s disease, their identity is retained, at a minimum, by the people around them who order their favorite foods and tell their stories. 

It is no different when we die. When we die, our identity is retained not only by all of the people that knew us, but also for the Christian by the Holy Spirit, who is eternal. God who created us from dust can easily recreate us, complete with our identity, our souls, because we are in relationship.

Salvation and Eternal Life

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter: http://bit.ly/2018_Lead

Continue Reading

The Myth of Perpetual Youth

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

The phenomena of adulting may seem like a curiosity of postmodern slang, but it is actually at the heart of a powerful shift in American culture having profound implications for the Christian church. Since the Reagan administration in the 1980s, the American economy has failed to deliver on the “American Dream” for the majority of citizens prompting a search for a new cultural myth to replace it. Unable to deliver an increasing standard of living for everyone—a nuclear family, house, two cars, healthcare, and pension—even though denial continues to be practiced, the “myth of perpetual youth” has increasing substituted for the American Dream. In effect, advertisers have led the way in declaring—don’t worry about not having a spouse, house, car, health plan, or pension—just enjoy being young: age is just a number.

The Christian Family

This increased focus on youth stands in opposition to the Gospel.

One of the defining characteristics of the Christian faith is honoring each individual as being created in the image of God. The Apostle Paul’s writing is particularly clear on this point. He writes:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28)

No ethic group is better than any other; no economic class is better than any other; and no gender is better than any other. But Paul goes further in his household codes:

“Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor your father and mother (this is the first commandment with a promise), that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land. Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” (Eph 6:1-4)

He is essentially saying that because we are all created in the image of God, no age group is better than any other.  Neither a new born nor a senior standing at the gates of heaven is better than one another. Christians are to value life stages equally, honor the stage you are in, and not cling to any particular stage as if it were intrinsically preferred. 

In this sense, Christianity is a holistic faith that embraces each stage of life with equal joy. This makes particular sense in a Christian context because our faith is rooted in history. Creation is the beginning and the second coming of Christ will be its end. Knowing the end is in Christ, we can journey through life in Christ meeting the challenges of each stage in life without fear. 

The Allure of Youth

The holistic nature of the Christian lifestyle puts it in direct conflict with today’s youth culture where putting on a big of weight or allowing people to see your gray hair puts you at risk of being shunned and ridiculed. Celebrities in our culture—athletes, movie stars, musicians, fashion models, the rich—all hide their age judiciously and show as much skin as possible to reinforce the illusion that they remain young. The Christian idea that beauty consists of character and appearance in sync runs counter to this obsession with appearance.

Promotion of Inadequacy

While this obsession with youth may seem random, the disfunctionality of remaining an adolescent well into adulthood and encouraging adolescent attitudes about market purchases is a direct consequence of strategies employed by advertisers. Inadequacy marketing directly assaults the spirit of most religious teaching, irrespective of theology, because most religions aid our maturation and help us to contribute to society. Hence, the phrase—the dark art of marketing—is truly dark.

Marketing expert Jonah Sacks (2012, 89) writes:

“all story-based marketing campaigns contain an underlying moral of the story and supply a ritual that is suggested to react to that moral.”

Inadequacy marketing has two basic steps. Step 1 focuses on creating anxiety focusing on an emotion at the base of Maslow’s pyramid, which ranks needs from physical needs (base) to emotional needs (top).⁠1 The advertising moral always begins with “You are not…and plays off of at least one negative emotion: greed…fear…lust.”  In step 2, the ritual proposed is implicitly or explicitly to shop and buy a particular product—pictured as a magical experience (Sachs 2012, 89 and 93).  While not all marketers employ inadequacy marketing strategies, the airwaves are inundated with them daily and the same strategies are employed by authors, film-makers, advertisers, religious leaders, and politicians of all stripes. Advertisers use inadequacy strategies because they work, but an inadvertent result of so much of it is to encourage base instincts and a negative self-image particularly among children and those already prone to suggestion.

Implications

If large corporations find it in their financial interest to keep us feeling inadequate, then the increasing focus on youth in our culture is likely not a random outcome. If people regress to a younger age or never mature beyond a adolescent (teen or preteen) view of the world, what does that imply?

The obvious implication is that an environment is created that mitigates the natural maturation of young people and encourages adolescent attitudes and behaviors. One could speculate that even darker outcomes are possible, such as:

  • Is the increased violence in society a consequence of this immaturity, because adolescents are much less likely than adults to associate their actions with consequences? 
  • Is the growth in anxiety associated with problem that more people have not developed the coping skills required to survive in an adult world? Alternatively, is anxiety among young people to be attributed to the excessive attention from other age groups following their every move and mimicking their behavior?
  • Do the increasingly androgynous tendencies in society (gender confusion) reflect a preteen asexual mentality? Does the tendency towards hypersexuality (or perhaps even pedaphia) reflect a teen mentality being adopted by other age groups?

Clearly, much is at stake in encouraging people to follow a normal pattern of maturation rather than getting stuck in a particular stage in life.⁠2

References

Jonah Sacks. 2012. Winning the Story Wars: Why Those Who Tell—and Live—the Best Stories Will Rule the Future. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 

Footnotes

1 Sacks (2012, 130) lists Abraham Maslow’s needs as: physiological (base), safety, love and belonging, self esteem, to self actualization.

2 This ts a theme of a popular song: U2 – Stuck In A Moment You Can’t Get Out Of (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emFUtuotHL4).

The Myth of Perpetual Youth

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter at:http://bit.ly/2018_Trans

Continue Reading

Resilience of the Gospel

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

The history of conversions to Christianity has a surprising number of staunch critics of the Gospel that after examining the biblical evidence (sometimes without any witness other than the Gospel itself) admit their own errors and profess faith in Christ.

Even though the final stages of their decision process is often idiosyncratic, many go through a period of deliberation extending over years, suggesting that coming to faith has emergent properties (the product of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts) that are not easily explained.

If the criteria for accepting evidence in the postmodern era focuses on who tells the better story, then these conversion stories provide substantive evidence that the Gospel is indeed one of the best stories around.

The Apostle Paul

The pattern set by the Apostle Paul is emblematic. The Book of Acts introduces Paul, formerly a devout and highly educated Jew known as Saul, as a key instigator in the stoning death of Stephen (Acts 7:58). As a prosecutor of Christian converts from Judaism, we can surmise that Saul’s only evangelists were Christians being dragged off to prison and, likely, killed (Acts 8:3).  And Saul was not just another prosecutor, he was infamous among disciples, as we read:

“But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.” (Acts 9:1-2)

But even this prosecutor was not beyond salvation. On the road to Damascus Saul met the risen Christ and was blinded by the experience. He was then led by hand to Damascus where he refused to eat or drink anything for three days. On the third day, God appeared to a disciple named Ananias instructing him to visit Saul. Knowing  Saul’s reputation, Ananias objected.  Nevertheless, Ananias visited Saul, healed his blindness, and baptized him. Within days, Paul began preaching that Jesus is the son of God in the synagogues and learned that his former colleagues among the Jews were plotting to kill him. Paul escaped Damascus by being lowered at night over the city walls in a basket (Acts 9:3-24). 

Paul’s conversion changed his life from chief prosecutor to Christian evangelist (that is, wanted criminal) within no more than a couple weeks. Paul’s conversion story made a big impression on the church, which we know because the author of the Book of Acts, Luke, repeated the story three times (Acts 9, 22,  26) and because many Christians never got over their fear of Paul because of his role in persecuting the church (Acts 9:26).

Confession

Augustine of Hippo (354 – 430 AD)  began life as a wealthy pagan son of a Christian mother who as a young man had a son by a concubine. Fond of partying, sexual immorality, and keeping questionable company, he confessed of robbing a neighbor’s orchard just for kicks and giggles. When at age 32 Augustine finally came to his senses, he confessed his sin to God in private, as he reported:

“Such things I said, weeping in the most bitter sorrow of my heart. And suddenly I hear a voice from some nearby house, a boy’s voice or a girl’s voice, I do not know, but it was a sort of sing-song, repeated again and again, Take and read, take and read.” (Foley 2006, 169)

Augustine borrowed a book of scriptures from his friend, Alypius, and opened it randomly coming to this verse:

“Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy.” (Rom 13:13)

Convicted immediately of his sexual sin, he took this passage as a word from God to him personally and went to his mother to announce that he was a Christian (Foley 2006, 160).

Hounds of Heaven

Having lost his mother at an early age and being dispatched to various, questionable boarding schools thereafter by his father, C.S. Lewis became a bitter young, philosophical atheist. Nevertheless, Lewis writes using different metaphors about God’s pursuit of his soul. For example, he writes:

“But, of course, what mattered most of all was my deep-seated hatred of authority, my monstrous individualism, my lawlessness. No word in my vocabulary expressed deeper hatred than the word Interference. But Christianity placed at the center what then seem to me a transcendental Interference. This is my business and mine only.”(Lewis 1955, 172)

and

“And so the great Angler played His fish and I never dreamed that the hook was in my tongue.”(Lewis 1955, 211)

But for Lewis the metaphor that he highlights most obviously is that of a divine Chess master in two separate chapter titles: check and checkmate (Lewis 1955, 165, 212). What metaphor would appeal to a scholar and intellectual? Lewis writes of returning to faith in 1929, when he was 31 years old (Lewis 1955, 228).

Taking Stock

Other stories of conversion abound. Among the most dramatic stories are those of Muslim converts who have grown up knowing really no Christians at all, but drawn for some reason into studying the Bible and becoming believers. Or consider the story of atheist and journalist with the Chicago Tribune, Lee Strobel (2016), who, after learning that his wife had become a Christian, sets out to prove Christianity is a hoax and ends up becoming not only a believer, but also an evangelist and pastor. Or how about Rosaria Butterfield (2012), who, as a leader among lesbian feminists, set off to write a research paper on the Christian Right only to come to faith and become a pastor’s wife.

The template for these conversions is often hostility to the Gospel, deep study of it, and a final ah-ha moment—often unexpected—when the decision for faith takes place. This template suggests that the Gospel story is compelling, but it requires serious reflection and the journey of faith is unique to the individual.

References

Butterfield, Rosaria Champagne. 2012.  The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert:  An English Professor’s Journey into Christian Faith.  Pittsburgh:  Crown & Covenant Publications.

Foley, Michael P. [editor] 2006. Augustine Confessions (Orig Pub 397 AD). 2nd Edition. Translated by F. J. Sheed (1942). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.

Lewis, C.S. 1955. Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life. New York: Harcourt Book.

Strobel, Lee. 2016. The Case for Christ: A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (Orig Pub 1998). Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Resilience of the Gospel

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter at:http://bit.ly/2018_Trans

Continue Reading

Classifications as Boundaries

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

Common characteristics of many postmodern philosophies and secular religions are that they impose implicit costs on other members of society and impede normal character development. The idea that becoming an adult can be a verb—adulting—suggests that growth in maturity has been impeded deliberately presumably to extend youth, which is, of course, a form of denial with tremendous implications for faith, life, and society.

Problems with Individualistic Philosophies

For example, if a normal, relatively healthy young person goes to the doctor and is prescribed medication, no problem, but what if that same young person has more medications than your grandmother? Instead of regular exercise, she invests in expensive cosmetics and repeated plastic surgeries; instead of making time for friends, he invests in a lot of boy-toys and plays video games every waking hour; both require anxiety medication and background music to distract from dark thoughts. The pattern continues as it becomes obvious that the normal challenges of life are being deferred or medicated rather than dealt with so the individual in question can retain control of every aspect of life without learning from their mistakes or acting on the advice of others, such as family members or the community of faith.

Why is this pattern a critique of the Christian worldview? When carried to extreme, the focus on individual control causes problems even for the individual that pose less of a problem for those willing to live in and take advice from their families and the community of faith. The Ten Commandments, for example, can be viewed as provided healthy spiritual and relational boundaries necessary for a healthy life. The prohibition against adultery, if routinely violated, can isolate one from friends, break up families, and contribute to violence. Having suffered these outcomes, one might easily get prescribed anxiety medication even though the better (and potentially cheaper) solution would be to live within the boundary—do not commit adultery.

Other Boundaries

The Book of Genesis begins by outlining a number of binary separations—heaven and earth, light from dark, day from night, evening and morning, water from dry land, male and female (Gen 1). Later, God rested on the seventh day—a completely arbitrary decision. He also brought all the animals and birds to Adam to see what he would name them (Gen 2). These separations and names gave structure (basic nouns in language) to how we think about time and the physical world around us. 

It is hard to image language developing in the absence of clear definitions yet today the simple definitions from nature, especially with respect to gender, are being challenged, once again, to allow greater freedom to choose for individuals and businesses chiding under the implicit restrictions they impose. For example, historian David Hart (2009, 223-226) sees that in postmodernism the nation state has finally removed all accountability to the church, an objective of governments for the past two thousand years. Once again, when carried to extreme, the focus on individual control causes problems even for the individual that pose less of a problem for those willing to live in and take advice from their families and the community of faith. 

The Problem of Spillover Effects

If an industrial plant employed a coal-burning energy source and polluted the local environment cause disease and early to local residents, then these spillover effects would be charged back to the firm in the form of regulations requiring cleaner fuel sources, additional taxes, and other regulations. But what if personal choices resulted in spillover effects being imposed on the rest of society?

Fuzzing boundaries, even just conceptually, can not only lead to anxiety, engaging in risky behaviors can also lead to disease, suicide, and early death.⁠1 All these outcomes affect society by raising the cost of providing health care and related social services. If these behaviors lower birth rates, the funding of social programs, like social security and medicare, are threatened because the programs currently tax the young to pay for the old. Lower birth rates may also encourage excessive immigration, raising social tensions. If these behaviors breakup families (or never even form them), then the costs of child raising and education may be transferred to others. 

The point is that risky behaviors encouraged by individualistic philosophies frequently transfer the costs of this freedom to others in the form of spillover effects. Consenting adults who engage in risky sexual activity or use drugs or just behave badly impose burdens on society. While the courts frequently attempt to cope with these problems, even the problem of delegating such decisions to the courts entails undesirable social costs.

Implicit Tradeoffs

What is better—respecting obvious boundaries in a life under God or transgressing these boundaries and paying the consequences? The grace that we have in Christ is open to believers, but everyone else is subject to the law. One has to wonder whether the real beneficiaries of these individualistic, alternative lifestyles aren’t just the drug companies who sell the expensive pills and the corporations who love to sell products perpetuating an illusion of youth and hire employs who have lost all hope of a better life than working a low-wage job, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.The price of this indulgence and denial can be high—who wants to wake up after youth has passed you by and with it any hope of a real career and normal family life?⁠2

References

Butterfield, Rosaria Champagne. 2012.  The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert:  An English Professor’s Journey into Christian Faith.  Pittsburgh:  Crown & Covenant Publications.

Gagnon, Robert A. J.  2001. The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics.  Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Hart, David Bentley. 2009. Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Footnotes

1 For example, Gagnon (471-473) compares the risks of homosexual behavior to alcoholism and find that the risks are much greater.

Rosario Butterfield (2012) realized her mistake in adopting a lesbian lifestyle after she had grown too old to have children of her own.

Classifications as Boundaries

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter at:http://bit.ly/2018_Trans

Continue Reading

God is My Denominator

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

The postmodern era is rife with religious alternatives. In my hometown of Centreville, Virginia, we have several Hindu temples, several nearby Mosques, and, being near Washington DC, we have many devoutly secular people. It is still true, however, that most Americans still identify themselves as Christians.

Changing Christian Identity

Three out of four Americans have some Christian background, but only two in five Christians actively practice their faith. The good news is that the share of Christians who practice their faith has remained relatively stable over the generations. The decline in the share of nominal Christians, however, normally dominates the headlines. (Kinnamen and Lyon 2016, 27, 224)

Role of Faith

In her book, Anne Graham Lotz (2009, 1-2) recalls a story of a conversation that her mother, Ruth Graham, had with the former head of Scotland Yard. She suggested that he must have handled a lot of the counterfeit money over the years. He responded: “On the contrary, Mrs. Graham, I spend all my time studying the genuine thing. That way, when I see a counterfeit, I can immediately detect it.”

While most discussions of faith focus on its content and outward practice, it is helpful to view faith in terms of priorities. Citing Bruce Leafbald,⁠1 Giglio (2003, 117) defines true worship as: “centering our mind’s attention and our heart’s affection on the Lord.” What do we really worship? Giglio (2003, 13) writes: “follow the trail of your time, your affection, your energy, your money, and your loyalty … [that] is what you [really] worship.” As the First Commandment reads: “You shall have no other gods before me.” (Exod 20:3)

If God is truly the first priority in your life, your faith becomes the denominator against which all other activities in life are measured. In money terms, its like the gold standard of the nineteenth century—all prices were measured in terms of the amount of gold required to make a purchase.

Idolatry as a False Priority

The Bible pictures idols as graven images or statutes, as when we read:

“Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases. Their idols are silver and gold, the work of human hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see. They have ears, but do not hear; noses, but do not smell. They have hands, but do not feel; feet, but do not walk; and they do not make a sound in their throat. Those who make them become like them; so do all who trust in them.” (Ps 115:3-8)

But this view of idolatry is less helpful than to view idolatry as misplaced priorities. If something other than God is our first priority, then it is like trying to do business with counterfeit money—you may be able to fool a few people but pretty soon it will catch up to you. Idols invariably break.

What happens, for example, if your work is your number one priority and you become unemployed? Or if the spouse that you worship seeks a divorce? When you loose your job or your spouse that has been your idol, then you have lost not only your employment or spouse, but also your god. Idol destruction brings on an “existential crisis” accompanied by anxiety, depression, and potentially suicide, because the denominator that you measured everything else by now needs to be replaced.

Today’s Spiritual Crisis

The spiritual wanderlust that America is experiencing today starts with misplaced priorities—idolatry. Idol crashing creates a spiritual vacuum that may be filled by an infinite number of substitutes, but because we are created in the image of God (Gen 1:27), these idols cannot bring peace. Only God can fill this vacuum.

References

Giglio, Louis. 2003. The Air I Breathe. Colorado Springs: Multnomah Publishers.

Kinnaman, David  and Gabe Lyons. 2016. Good Faith: Being A Christian When Society Thinks You’re Irrelevant and Extreme. Grand Rapids: BakerBooks. 

Lotz, Anne Graham. 2009. Just Give Me Jesus. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

Footnotes

1 Course entitled: “Introduction to Church Music”, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1983. (Gigilio 2003, 140)

God is My Denominator

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter at: http://bit.ly/Sabath_2018

Continue Reading

Arguments about Creation

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

Discussions about the rationality of faith in the twentieth century invariably focus on the Genesis account of creation: its biblical interpretation, the Darwin discoveries, and the political context. Let me consider each in turn.

What Does Genesis Say?

The first chapter in Genesis paints a picture of God as divine creator who calls the universe into being with words spoken over a period of seven days. While much is made of God as a sovereign, king of kings, the language is not one of command, but of invitation: “Let there be.” God is a gentle sovereign who ruled by virtue of creative activity, not conquest nor purchase, nor chance, and in his first specific act of creation, created light—a metaphor for virtue (Gen 1:3). 

The first verse offers a summary: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” (Gen. 1:1) Who created? God created. When did he create? In the beginning. What did he create? Heaven and earth—everything. 

This one verse radically changed the perception of time and space. In the Ancient Near East, the time that mattered was day and night, and the seasons—spring, summer, fall, and winter—that controlled the cycles of agriculture. The space that mattered was the boundaries on a particular kingdom or empire. Here in this verse, God stands outside of time and space creating both. There are no paths up the mountain to this god, because he transcends both. The god of Genesis must come down the mountain to us.

How do we know? The Genesis account comes to us as the confession of the church. In creating the universe ex nihilo (out of nothing), the god in Genesis is nothing like other gods of the Ancient Near East, which appeared more like today’s celebrities, movie stars, and athletes. God redefined what it meant to be a god. 

Not only was he sovereign; he was completely free of the constraints of this world.  When God told Moses from the burning bush: “I AM WHO I AM”  (Exod 3:14), what he meant was: I am the real deal—a real god, not like the wish-fulfillment gods that Pharaoh created and that we create to serve our own needs.

The Darwin Discoveries

The nineteenth century brought amazing discoveries about our world in agriculture, manufacturing, science, and medicine. While authors like Marx and Freud likened religion to being on drugs and being delusional, Darwin stuck to his knitting in exploring the biological world taking stock of the fossil record and the diversity of species. Theorizing that ancient species of animals evolved into those that we see today, his theory of evolution quickly became viewed as a competing vision of the creation account in Genesis. 

Political Uses of Evolution

From the spontaneous generation of life from inorganic compounds to the development of human species, Darwin gave Marxists and other secular religionists a creation account that erased God from the picture. National Socialists in Germany likewise picked up on Darwin’s survival of the fittest to posit the existence of a master race, the German folk, among humans. The attacks on the creation accounts in Genesis quickly elevated quickly into power politics on a world scale. If as Nietzsche philosophied, God is dead, then anything goes. With our gentle God out of view, the secular religionists quickly built concentration camps and fired up the gas chambers. Millions perished.

Returning to Genesis

Ironically, while Marx and Freud were atheists, Darwin was a practicing Christian. Think about it. God’s invitation in creation does not describe how the instrument of creation beyond the invitation. Borrowing a legal analogy, when Congress passes a law, it usually does not care how the President implements the law beyond offering resources and perhaps a target deadline. God could easily have used evolution to see to it that his invitation in creation takes place. When your father flicks on a light switch and announces—let there be light, you could say that he, like our Heavenly Father, has a sense of humor, even if it is a dad joke.

A Doubting Church

The problem in the nineteenth century arose as doubt in society seeped into the church. Rather than calling out Marx and Freud for slandering God and his church, the criticism sunk in. Some found refuge in philosophic defenses of God’s existence, while others labored to make sure that Christians experienced deep emotional experiences in the pews on Sunday with great music and a good sermon. 

This adoption of Greek anthropology, separating thinking and emotions, weakened the church and mimicked stereotypes of men as thinkers and women as emotional. Without ritual, without deep teaching, without deep commitment and church discipline, the church acted as if the Bible were little more than a source of bedtime stories for the kids. Without moral training that recognizes the tension in practice between different theological principles, like purity of the church and evangelism, churches began to split over affinity to one theological principle over another.

Science in Service of Faith

The fascination with science peaked in World War II. With the invention of numerous instruments of mass destruction—mass bombings, napalm, death camps, nuclear weapons, and political uses of psychology and euthanasia—people woke up to the need for limits on scientific investigation. 

Several aspects of science proved helpful in understanding our faith. One is to notice that the scientific method—felt need, problem definition, data collection, analysis, recommendations, responsibility bearing—starts with assumptions about what is needed. These assumptions about how our world works start with the words we use and our faith. Is it any wonder that numerous modern languages began with a translation of the Bible into the local dialect? The King James version of the Bible played that role in English; Luther’s Bible played that role in German.

The Big Bang theory of creation started from measurement of the direction and speed of partials in space that point to a partial time and place where the known universe began with a singularity—a single point. In an instant, the entire universe came into being. No one can say why, but the evidence that it happened is written in the stars. And guess what? The confession of the church in Genesis is completely consistent with this theory from science.

Who has the better story? Which story would you rather live into?

Arguments about Creation

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter at: http://bit.ly/Sabath_2018

Continue Reading

Arguments for God’s Existence

Stephen W. Hiemstra, Simple FaithBy Stephen W. Hiemstra

A core tenet of the scientific method lies in using reproducible empirical evidence to validate or fail to validate a hypothesis. Because God created the heavens and the earth, he lies outside the created order, where direct evidence might be found. Therefore, scientific testing of the existence of God is impossible. However, we can infer the existence of God from the created order, much like we might observe fingerprints of a potter on the pottery—a kind of indirect evidence.

Introduction

In part three of his recent book, Making Sense of God, Timothy Keller (2016, 217) summarizes six arguments for the existence of God from: 1. existence, 2. fine tuning, 3. moral realism, 4. consciousness, 5. reason, and 6. beauty. These bear repeating.

From Existence

For existence to even be, it had to have had an uncaused cause (Keller 2016, 218). Think about the evolutionary hypothesis that posits that life spontaneously emerged from non-biological substances and evolved until the creation of human beings. But who created the non-biological substances? The usual response is that the universe just always existed. However, according to the big bang theory, the universe has not always looked like it does today. According to one online dictionary:⁠1

“a theory in astronomy: the universe originated billions of years ago in an explosion from a single point of nearly infinite energy density.”

Given that the universe shows evidence of an uncaused cause, it is reasonable to infer that God created the universe in his own inscrutable way.

From Fine Tuning

Constants in physics appear to be precisely adjusted to allow life to exist. Keller (2016, 219) writes:

“The speed of light, the gravitational constant, the strength of the strong and weak nuclear forces—must all have almost exactly the values that they do have in order for organic life to exist…the chances that all of the dials would be tuned to life-permitting settings all at once are about 10-100.” 

Given the small probability that the laws of physics randomly aligned in this way, many scientists have concluded that the universe was intentionally planned. It is kind of like finding a working clock on the beach. No reasonable person would assume that this close was randomly created—the existence of a clock suggests a clock maker.

From Moral Realism

Most people, even ardent atheists, believe that moral obligations, like human rights, exist that we can insist everyone abide by. Keller (2016, 221) writes:

“…some things are absolutely wrong to do. Moral obligation, then, makes more sense in a universe created by a personal God to whom we intuitively feel responsible than it does in an impersonal universe with no God.” 

Even an argent atheist would not idly stand by and watch another person drown or be killed in a burning house when something could be done to aid them. This kind of moral obligation is something that virtually everyone feels, yet is counter-intuitive from the perspective of personal survival—water rescues and running into burning buildings routinely kill rescuers, even those trained as lifeguards and firefighters. Why do we feel obligated to put ourselves at such risk? Christians answer that God created us with a moral compass.

From Consciousness

Keller (2016, 222), citing Thomas Nagel (2012, 110), writes that “all human experience has a subjective quality to it.” It is pretty hard to argue, as does Francis Crisk (1994, 3), that

“You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.” (Keller 2016, 224)

Keller (2016, 224) summarizes: “Consciousness and idea making make far more sense in a universe created by an idea-making, conscious God.” 

From Reason and Beauty

Keller (2016, 225) reports that has been popular in recent years to argue that our reasoning and appreciation of beauty both developed from the process of natural selection because they helped our ancestors to survive. Evolutionary psychologists have gone a step further arguing that even our faith in God is a product of evolution and natural selection.

The problem exists, however, that many animals seem to have survived just fine without developing any capacity to reason at all. Furthermore, if our faith is a product of natural selection, why wouldn’t we trust our reasoning capacity to tell us the truth? The arguments for beauty parallel those for reason.

Keller (2016, 226), citing Luc Ferry (2011), writes: “truth, beauty, justice, and love … whatever the materialists say, remain fundamentally transcendent.”  In other words, they all point to the existence of a loving God.

Limits to the Proofs

Most proofs of God’s existence focus only on making it sensible to believe in God in an abstract or philosophical sense. They really do not give us a detailed picture of God’s character, as revealed in the Bible.

Philosophers remind us that God transcends our universe because he created it—God stands outside time and space. He is also holy—sacred and set apart. God’s transcendence makes it impossible for us to approach God on our own; he must initiate any contact that we have with him. Christians believe that God revealed himself to us in the person of Jesus Christ.

The Uniqueness of Christ

The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ makes the case that God not only exists, but that he is God of the Old and New Testaments. Keller (2016, 228) makes the stunning observation that only Christianity is truly a world religion; it has had indigenous believers fairly evenly distributed across all regions and continents of the world, long before it became a religion in Europe and North America. He writes: “today most of the most vital and largest Christian populations are now nonwhite and non-Western.”

The arguments for God’s existence must be compelling (or Christians must have come to faith for other reasons) because Christianity continues to grow in spite of strong influence of secularism in the West and obvious persecution of Christians outside the West. 

References

Ferry, Luc. 2011. “A Brief History of Thought: A Philosophical Guide to Living.” Translation by Theo Cuffe. New York: Harper Perennial.

Crisk, Francis. 1994. “The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul.” New York: Simon and Schuster.

Timothy Keller.  2016. Making Sense of God: An Invitation to the Skeptical.  New York: Viking Press.

Nagel, Thomas. 2012. “What is It Like to Be a Bat?” Mortal Questions, Canto Classics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Footnotes

1 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/big%20bang%20theory.

Arguments for God’s Existence

Also see:

A Roadmap of Simple Faith

Christian Spirituality 

Looking Back 

A Place for Authoritative Prayer 

Other ways to engage online:

Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net, Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com.

Newsletter at: http://bit.ly/Sabath_2018

Continue Reading
1 2 3 24