The Wisdom of God in a "Wise" World
In this day and age of religious pluralism and syncretism Christ-followers often find themselves battling the ideas of the age. Even though we know the Truth, which has set us free from our sin and ourselves, we still hit barriers as we seek to obey the Great Commission. However, 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 states very clearly that this is all part of God's plan. While I do not preach from the following translation, sometimes its good to read familiar passages from a fresh perspective (New Living Translation):
"18I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize this message as the very power of God. 19As the Scriptures say,
"I will destroy human wisdom
and discard their most brilliant ideas."
20So where does this leave the philosophers, the scholars, and the world's brilliant debaters? God has made them all look foolish and has shown their wisdom to be useless nonsense. 21Since God in his wisdom saw to it that the world would never find him through human wisdom, he has used our foolish preaching to save all who believe. 22God's way seems foolish to the Jews because they want a sign from heaven to prove it is true. And it is foolish to the Greeks because they believe only what agrees with their own wisdom. 23So when we preach that Christ was crucified, the Jews are offended, and the Gentiles say it's all nonsense. 24But to those called by God to salvation, both Jews and Gentiles, Christ is the mighty power of God and the wonderful wisdom of God. 25This "foolish" plan of God is far wiser than the wisest of human plans, and God's weakness is far stronger than the greatest of human strength."
"Oh, what a wonderful God we have! How great are his riches and wisdom and knowledge! How impossible it is for us to understand his decisions and his methods!" (NLT)
posted by Charlie Wallace at
11:11 AM
12 Comments:
"it takes child-like faith and understanding to come to Christ, not winning philosophical debates or backing your opponent (the person you are evangelizing) into a corner. "
i.e.
don't ever question anything, and being stupid is better than being smart?
McF,
I suppose by that statement you are equating being a child with being 'stupid'? If so, then I rest my case and you have proved my, as well as God's, point.
first of all, from your lack of response i'm assuming you're okay with the whole never questioning anything.
secondly, are children stupid? YES! not stupid in respect to others that have the same amount of life experience, but compared to adults.. yes. Is it stupid to eat nothing but french fries and milkshakes? I know a number of children who, if left to their own devices whould do just that. It's up to those intelligent people to make sure children don't do that. People give kids too much credit. Just because a kid is innocent doesn't make him some great "faithful" being who we should all strive to be.
One should approach god with child-like faith? The same kind of faith that children have in the easter bunny, santa, and the tooth fairy?
My whole point is that if one is going to engage in philosophical debate, one cannot when backed into a corner just say "your wrong for being smarter than me." This is exactly why religion and reason should be seperated.
1) All Christians question their faith at some point, which can be a good boost for their beliefs.
2) Again, you have proven the point of my post. Thanks for commenting.
mcfeely proves your "point" bc your point is based on a circular argument. that means that no discusion about your "point" can be meaningful bc it doesnt go anywhere. just round and round in circles like a merry go round. while merry go rounds might amuse children, i find it rather pointless. but i suppose instead of seeking to learn about the world and watching the news and reading books i ought to watch cartoons and just take everything people say as the truth without questioning it.
and the point of my comment on your last point was that dr mohler's argument doesnt make sense. he asks whether or not the academic believes in the easter bunny. where was he going with that? thats my quesiton. what's his point.
maybe it was that we should, like children, believe in the easter bunny.
Dantzler,
If you feel comfortable telling God that belief in Him is based on a circular argument (heavens no - not the dreaded 'circular argument, the cardinal sin of philosophy), be my guest. If you find God's reason "pointless" as you,as well, have proved God's point, which is why Scripture is so wonderful because it has accurately predicted and prescribed your reaction. How has it done this? Because God has created you and knows the hearts of men.
Also, I cannot speak for Dr. Mohler - feel free to email him your question at mail@albertmohler.com. He can give you a better snyopsis of his point then I can since he wrote it.
i am a god. if you believe in me then you will be saved. if you dont believe in me it is simply bc i have created people in a certain way that their frivolous reason can get in the way of their belief in me. now you may wish to argue that i am not a god. but in fact by arguing that i am not a god, you only prove that you are allowing reason to fool you and therefore cannot see the truth that i am in fact a god.
do you believe that i am a god, or are you allowing the reason that i endowed in you with upon your creation?
Nice try, Dantzler. Classic tactic of twisting Scripture. That's how cults are started. You get an "A" for Effort.
"Nice try, Dantzler. Classic tactic of twisting Scripture. That's how cults are started. You get an "A" for Effort."
I think it was just an example of "the dreaded 'circular argument, the cardinal sin of philosophy." You see what you do here, on this blog, is that whenever anyone presents a point or question that you either do not agree with or do not have an answer for, is you just simply ignore it and write something else. You could have just as well written "I like sandwiches" in response to his post. That's what I was going to write after your response to mine. If I proved your point with my last post, then I also proved dantzler's.
Here, let's do a brief rundown of our conversation
Charlie: it takes child-like faith and understanding to come to Christ, not philosophical debate
Jeff: so it's better to be stupid than smart?
Charlie: Hah! You proved my point.
Jeff: so people should come to god with the same faith that children have in santa?
Charlie: nice try, you proved my point again.
What does this even mean?!?!?
"If you feel comfortable telling God that belief in Him is based on a circular argument (heavens no - not the dreaded 'circular argument, the cardinal sin of philosophy), be my guest. If you find God's reason "pointless" as you,as well, have proved God's point, which is why Scripture is so wonderful because it has accurately predicted and prescribed your reaction."
You just said that belief in god IS based on a circular argument. So are some circular arguments okay and some, like dantzler's, are not? This does not make sense.
And now I'd just like to take the time to point out that I am not arguing the existence of "god" with you. I believe that one's belief or disbelief in a higher power is purely personal. By posting here I am only discussing the things you post on a level of reason and rationality. I am not, and have not, attempted to discuss them on a religious level. When you go back and forth between reason and religion you are no longer participating in the discussion. The conversation needs to be on the same level for it to be worth anything. If we were to discuss homosexuality and you proved, through reason, that your point was valid, it would make no sense for me to respond "my god says your wrong. you just proved my point."
Agnostic Avengers,
First of all, you've taken much of what I've said out of context (again) and I don't have time to pick apart what you've said and defend myself as I've been doing for the last 6 months or so.
If you'd like to ask questions about following Jesus, that's fine. I have spent endless hours 'reasoning' with you and one could label it 'circular' because we just cover the same ground over and over. Frankly, I'm tired of it and don't care anymore. You're free to comment at your own will but I'm not going to respond unless it is a genuine question of interest and not simpl a tactic to undermine the faith, or a feeble attempt to paint belief in Christ as some intellectually impossible action. It's getting old, guys. Don't you have anything better to do? You don't find me trying to poke holes in your belief system constantly - what you're doing could be labeled as intolerant by the Katie Couric if you're not careful. Oh wait, she's scared of the "Evangelicals." By the way, as to your belief sytem - what is it? how do you think one gets to Heaven, for instance?
If there's a reader out there, and there is, who'd like to jump in to battle our two superheros, then feel free. Frankly, I'm surprised the Avengers keep coming back to the site.
I like sandwiches.
"Agnostic Avengers"
That could actually be a good cartoon.
Hey guys,
I'd love to jump in here and add a few comments. I know that Charlie's
been discussing with you guys pretty regularly for a while now, so
maybe I can add some comments that will being a different perspective
to the discussion.
I know a while back we went round and round for a long discussion, but
I don't know how much we accomplished... Do you guys really want to
discuss, or are you just coming here to blast Christian beliefs? I
know that you asked Charlie the same thing, but I want to make sure
that you're both willing to discuss as well.
As a student of Christian Philosophy and Apologetics, I have a pretty
high view of giving a rational (reasonable) defense of the Christian
faith. Charlie and I may feel differently on this point, but I don't
think that having a child like faith and having a robust Christian
philosophy and apologetic are antithetical.
Jesus does say that we need a childlike faith to live in the kingdom
of God with him. But this comparison of "childlike faith" and
"christian faith" is an ANALOGY, and all analogies are NOT meant to be
taken as one to one correspondence.
Also, in another of Jesus' teachings, he says to his disciples,
""Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be
wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." (Mt 10:16) So I don't think
that Jesus has a problem with us being wise per se.
I believe that when Jesus says that we need to have faith like a
child, he is giving us instruction on our FILIAL RELATIONSHIP with our
heavenly father. Christian doctrine says that through faith in Jesus,
we enter into a parent-child relationship with God. So if we are to
relate properly to our heavenly Father (Abba), then we must have
"faith like a child."
My dad was a pretty good one growing up. I knew that even if I
couldn't figure out why he wanted me to do a particular action, I
could trust that he had my welfare as his goal. I had a child's faith
in my dad. In an analogous way, we are to have faith in our heavenly
father. But notice at the same time, this is a REASONABLE FAITH. I
know that my heavenly father has greater love for me than any earthly
father could ever have, so I put my faith in him confidently, just
like a child would.
Interested to hear back from you guys,
Ross
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home