Reasonable Faith

-
“Christianity is a rational religion. If it’s not rational, it’s not Christian.” – John Wesley

“That knowledge [knowledge of God] is at least rational knowledge.” – Francis Schaefer, commenting on John 17:3

According to one online service, something is rational when it is “consistent with or based on or using reason.” Examples of the word’s use are: "rational behavior"; "a process of rational inference"; "rational thought."

Christianity is the most reasonable of religions. In fact, I would call it the only reasonable position to take.

We have nothing to fear from the facts. Unbelievers have good questions, but I find that those questions are rarely, if ever, new questions. The answers have been around for a long time. Many of them were answered by the Apostle Paul, and he used answers given him by study and meditation on Old Testament texts.

There is another part of this. A part that does not reflect well on American Christianity.

Another definition of “rational” is “intellectual: of or associated with or requiring the use of the mind. Examples of this use are: "intellectual problems"; "the triumph of the rational over the animal side of man.”

A sober analysis of Christianity as it is practiced in America yields a different answer with this definition: Christianity is certainly not rational. We do not engage in the life of the mind, particularly as it relates to religion. We simply do not use our minds at church.

I wonder if we will get back to the intellectual “heavy lifting.” We desperately need careful application of Bible truth to all of life. It’s the only reasonable thing to do. I like John H. Gerstner’s use of tautology: “It stands to reason: it is not reasonable to avoid reason.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Face of Terror

-
Osama Bin laden is dead. Since the rest of the internet is buzzing with opinions on that death, I thought I would weigh in. First, this is not the end of global terrorism. Like the Hydra of old, when one head is chopped off, two more take its place. We still need diligence in our fight against global terror. U. S. and allied Armed Forces still need our prayers. We still need a strong military and intelligence community. We have not yet cut off the Hydra’s immortal head. Second, the way to get to the ‘heart of the matter’ is with Christian missionary efforts. We must reach the people who make up those societies and population segments that produce terrorists . To tell a story I have told here before : Early in the twentieth century, Baptist evangelists preached through rural Mississippi and Alabama with such effectiveness that moonshiners could no longer sell their whiskey: All their customers were getting converted! In desperation, the whiskey sellers hired two men to murder on
Read more

The Canons of Dort

-
I believe that the Canons of Dort are true. This is a statement that came out the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619. The Canons of Dort outline the system of theology known today as the “five points of Calvinism.” The problem I have with most “five-point Calvinists” is that the Canons of Dort contain much more than five points. Many explanations of the TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints) are gross simplifications of the Canons of Dort. [This is especially true of explanations given by those who oppose Calvinism. It is easier to knock down a straw man than it is to knock down a real man, and so it is easier to criticize an oversimplified Calvinism that the more robust form.] Some of those who teach the “five points” leave out some of the quotes below: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than
Read more

Intelligent Design

-
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement makes much of the argument from irreducible complexity. Dr. Michael Behe has become famous for a simple example, the mousetrap. He points out that the mousetrap will not perform its function without all of its parts. The wooden base, the metal hammer, a spring, a catch and a metal bar to hold back the hammer are all necessary parts. One component by itself will not catch a mouse. Mainstream evolutionary science has a counter-argument. To paraphrase Dr. Kenneth Miller, if you disassemble the mousetrap, each component can serve as something useful on its own. If we take away the catch and metal bar, we have something left that can serve as a paper clip. The spring could make a simple two-section key chain. The wooden base makes a paperweight. Evolutionary processes like random mutation and natural selection can combine and retain the useful parts as the complicated evolves to perform the complex function. The useful parts are combined into the mousetr
Read more