HOME Doctrine Contact Bookstore Biographies Links Events Seminars
HOME Doctrine Contact Bookstore Biographies Links Events Seminars
Scriptural – Separated – Sound
T
Foundational Thoughts for a
Reasonable Faith
by Allen J. Dunckley, Th.D.
by Allen J. Dunckley, Th.D.
The Scriptures state how important it is to think the right thoughts for it says, “As he thinketh in his heart, so is he.” The New Testament admonishes the reader to “renew his mind” (Romans 12:1). One aspect of God creating us in His image is the fact that an individual has the capacity to think. Thinking is what humans do – it what makes us different from other nephesh life. God created that capacity in the human makeup so that there could be a personal and meaningful relationship between man and Himself. However, sin entered the equation and not only created a great boundary to separate man from God eternally, but also caused man to lose the ability to naturally “think” properly about God. That is, man’s mind is in a corrupted state brought on by the fall, and in such a state, it will develop its own presuppositional faith by either distorting or completely rejecting the Truth about God and the Supernatural. This writing will focus on how presuppositional faith develops, how it distort one’s view of God, and how five givens about God and His Word can lay the foundation for a reasonable faith. Every person believes something and this something rests on presuppositions. How do these presuppositions come into existence?
Every One Develops A Suppositional Faith
Whether one is an atheist, agnostic, or a Christian, the basis of their position has come about through certain developed suppositions that become presuppositions. A basic definition of “supposition” is to believe something is true apart from having positive knowledge.1 These suppositions arise through the experiences in one’s life and one’s responses to them. For instance, a person may determine that one who loves will alleviate pain and suffering. This then develops into a supposition. This could be due to how the parents reared this individual, or it could be the result of one’s own reasoning. Whatever, this becomes one’s current supposition. Because of this, it will color the individual’s thinking process.
Therefore, when someone confronts this individual with the message that God loves him and that he should make God part of his life, the recipient proceeds to analyze this offer in the light of his or her developed supposition: “One who loves alleviates pain and suffering. Since there is pain and suffering in the world, how could there be a God of love; therefore either this God of love is powerless to eliminate pain and suffering or he just doesn’t exist at all.” Consequently, the conclusion reached is, “I will not believe in god.” (I purposely used small letters for god.) This individual is now exercising “faith” in their own supposition that there is not a god worthy to be accepted; based on the reason that there is pain and suffering in the world. Consequently, this person decides to continue as an atheist. At this point, the supposition becomes the individual’s presupposition – a barrier to theological belief. Everyone has suppositions that become or will become presuppositions; it is with these predetermined beliefs one exercises their own subjective presuppositional brand of “faith”—usually against Biblical issues. Hence, everyone has a faith in something they think is true, whether it is atheism, Marxism, evolutionism, humanism, hedonism, or Islam. Presuppositions not only can hinder our acceptance of Gods existence, but they can even effect our theological understanding about God.
Therefore, when someone confronts this individual with the message that God loves him and that he should make God part of his life, the recipient proceeds to analyze this offer in the light of his or her developed supposition: “One who loves alleviates pain and suffering. Since there is pain and suffering in the world, how could there be a God of love; therefore either this God of love is powerless to eliminate pain and suffering or he just doesn’t exist at all.” Consequently, the conclusion reached is, “I will not believe in god.” (I purposely used small letters for god.) This individual is now exercising “faith” in their own supposition that there is not a god worthy to be accepted; based on the reason that there is pain and suffering in the world. Consequently, this person decides to continue as an atheist. At this point, the supposition becomes the individual’s presupposition – a barrier to theological belief. Everyone has suppositions that become or will become presuppositions; it is with these predetermined beliefs one exercises their own subjective presuppositional brand of “faith”—usually against Biblical issues. Hence, everyone has a faith in something they think is true, whether it is atheism, Marxism, evolutionism, humanism, hedonism, or Islam. Presuppositions not only can hinder our acceptance of Gods existence, but they can even effect our theological understanding about God.
GOD versus g-o-d
One’s presuppositions about GOD determine to what extent acceptance of the supernatural takes place. Most atheists view god simply as “g-o-d” as we designate in miniscule letters. This god is impotent, incapable of total control, less knowledgeable and more fickle than the atheist who has deemed him such by a faith in his own subjective presuppositions. Therefore this god-type, according to the atheist, cannot create anything, cannot control anything, cannot know anything, and is helpless to provide meaning to his worshippers. As the letters infer, this “god” is miniscule and man is far superior. This is the god-type of the scientific humanist regardless of whether he recognizes this god as such or not.
On the other hand, there is an idea about GOD, which we can designate in all majuscule letters i.e. G-O-D. This GOD is very GOD. This GOD can do all things that He wills to do; He is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent and possessor of all things good. Since He is omniscient, there is no end to the knowledge He knows; consequently, He knows things that have not ever crossed the mind of any human who has ever lived. Hence, He knows how to do anything He pleases to do. In addition, this GOD is omnipotent, meaning that He is completely able to do anything He wills to do; if He wishes to perform some creative act, GOD as GOD has the wherewithal to accomplish it. Moreover, He is able to do so in the time frame He chooses, in the way He chooses, and through the means He chooses. Therefore, GOD as GOD possesses unlimited capabilities to perform whatever He wills to perform. In the light of this GOD, man is inferior and accountable. This God-type is the GOD not only of the Bible, but also of such scientists as Johann Kepler, Lord Kelvin, Isaac Newton, William Maury, and Werner Von Braun. What makes the difference? The difference comes by thought processes that have accepted five key givens for a reasonable faith.
On the other hand, there is an idea about GOD, which we can designate in all majuscule letters i.e. G-
Five Givens of the Christian Apologist
With out a “given,” a geometric syllogism becomes unsolvable. A “given” in geometry is simply a starting fact accepted as true apart from empirical verification that directs the thought flow of the problem to the proper conclusion. Certain accepted-as-true givens must be the starting point to properly work through the problem to a correct answer. The correct answer then serves as the verification to the truth of the accepted givens. Since givens are necessary to arrive at the proper conclusion mathematically; givens also work to arrive at the proper conclusions on the theological level.
These “givens” on a theological level come from an intuitive knowledge that God has placed in the human heart. That is, ‘knowledge that we know is true with out having any empirical evidence to verify it. This is what David Snoke refers to as “perception” that is “knowledge which is written directly into our consciousness without . . . fabrication.”2 The Scriptures clearly state it this way, “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them” (Romans 1:19). God has manifested this intuitive knowledge in the heart of man. This idea makes up the basis of the Ontological Argument3 for the existence of God, and is the basis for these Givens. From this, we see that the atheist must purposely reject this intuitive knowledge to accept his unbelief. This is what Peter refers to when he states, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.”4 (Emphasis mine). These givens are different from subjective presuppositions because they exist apart from one’s experiences and influences and need to be confronted on the rational level.
Let us consider five key “givens” that form the foundation by which one can build a reasonable Faith. These are as follows:
These “givens” on a theological level come from an intuitive knowledge that God has placed in the human heart. That is, ‘knowledge that we know is true with out having any empirical evidence to verify it. This is what David Snoke refers to as “perception” that is “knowledge which is written directly into our consciousness without . . . fabrication.”2 The Scriptures clearly state it this way, “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them” (Romans 1:19). God has manifested this intuitive knowledge in the heart of man. This idea makes up the basis of the Ontological Argument3 for the existence of God, and is the basis for these Givens. From this, we see that the atheist must purposely reject this intuitive knowledge to accept his unbelief. This is what Peter refers to when he states, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.”4 (Emphasis mine). These givens are different from subjective presuppositions because they exist apart from one’s experiences and influences and need to be confronted on the rational level.
Let us consider five key “givens” that form the foundation by which one can build a reasonable Faith. These are as follows:
|
1.
|
That there is a GOD. As GOD (not god) does He have unlimited capabilities? There are only two answers to this question: “Yes” or “No.” If one answers, “No”, he moves to humanistic atheism. If one answers, “Yes”, then he accepts that “with GOD all things are possible” and will consider the next, given.
|
|
2.
|
That this GOD is Capable of communication. As GOD, does He have the capability to communicate with mankind? The answer here is either Yes or no. If one answers “no” then one is confused about GOD’s abilities and must go back to ponder the full ramifications of Given No. 1. If one answers “yes”, then the next Given is ready to be explored.
|
|
3.
|
That this GOD has communicated with man. Through the capability of communication, has GOD communicated with man? The answer again is a “yes” or a “no.” If the answer is “no”, then one must not be aware of the many claims from various religions to have holy writings. Since these writings differ from one another in many ways, GOD could not be the Author of them all. A Perfect GOD would not be the author of confusion for confusion is less than perfect, therefore only one of the holy writings, not all, would find their source in GOD. The others may find their source in a miniscule “god” but that is another topic. Again a “Yes moves us to the next consideration.
|
|
4.
|
That this God would communicate in a discernable Way. Do divine writings exist that make the direct claim to be from God? Yes, the Scriptures of the Judeo / Christian perspective make this claim more than any other “scriptures”. These Scriptures make this claim directly over 3,000 times in the Hebrew writings alone. Even the Christian Greek Testament makes the claim, “All Scripture (Hebrew/Greek) is given by inspiration of God . . .”5 One may not accept this, but the point is made that these Scriptures do make the direct claim to be from GOD. In addition, that direct claim is found nowhere but in the Judeo / Christian Bible, which leads to the next Given.
|
|
5.
|
That this GOD would provide Scriptures, that meets the reasonable expectations of a Divine communication to mankind. Do the Judeo/Christian Scriptures meet these expectations? Yes, we find that in all areas in which the Judeo / Christian Scriptures speak, whether it be in the areas of history, geography, and science, it is uncannily accurate. A quality other writings of alleged divinity severely lack, which puts the Judeo / Christian Scriptures at the top of the heap so to speak. Moreover, we can study these Judeo / Christian Scriptures to come to a fuller understanding of God through this revelatory source.
|
These Givens Are Accepted by Faith
These five Givens are suppositional in nature, which means they are assumptions the believer “accepts as true apart from positive knowledge.” This “positive knowledge” is not lack of knowledge; instead, it is knowledge that is faith based. This does not mean a “leap into the dark” as some puerile unbelievers would argue. More accurately, this means accepting the axiom as certain with the expectation [faith] that facts or experience will confirm it. For example, some scholars did not believe that the biblical Greek word polytarchs referred to a legitimate office in the city of Thessalonica. Archaeologists working in the ruins of the ancient city eventually found an artifact with that very word inscribed on it confirming (not undermining) the accuracy of the Biblical text. Those that by faith accept what the Bible says can rest assure that what is in the dark today may be brought to light tomorrow. The same thing happened with the people referred to in the Bible as the Hittites. Ill-informed liberal scholars scoffed at such a people saying that they were made up, e.g mythological. Again, archaeologists found ruins with many artifacts identifying that they belonged to the so-called mythological people called the Hittites.
GOD expects man to exercise faith. Therefore, to that purpose GOD has not fully communicated all things to man. There are issues outside the realm of observation and special revelation that GOD expects man to simply accept by faith because God IS GOD. This means that there will always be something in the Holy Scriptures that will be puzzling or obtuse to the seeker of truth. That is, there will always be what seems like contradictions in the Word. However, the problem is always with the limited knowledge of the seeker, not the Word. For these are GOD’s tests to prove the faith of the seeker, i.e. God saying, “Are you trusting Me to be GOD even in light of what you don’t understand? The writer of Hebrews expresses this truth as follows:
“But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”6
This verse is the basis of these givens. The person must believe that GOD is GOD first! Then and only then will the evidence make sense. Evidentialism, also known as classical apologetics, is making an appeal to human reason through providing evidence for the claim. However, one can only use evidence to reinforce and build their faith not to create it. Only when one accepts by faith that God is GOD, will God provide the evidence on which to build one’s faith. There is no “evidence” that will convince a GOD rejecting unbeliever, per se. The unbeliever simply must stop rejecting his version of “god” and by faith acknowledge the GOD of the Bible as the True GOD -- the GOD who can do anything, and has revealed Himself in the Judeo / Christian Scriptures, then and only then will the evidence start to make sense. If one is not able to do this, then they are simply operating within the realm of humanistic atheism.
Conclusion
The Christian faith is not “blind” faith; it is reasonable faith. To accept the five givens, one bases their faith on elementary reasonable assumptions. It is basically reasonable to assume that if GOD is GOD, He is capable of doing anything He chooses to do, including infallibly communicating to mankind through the written word. It is reasonable to assume that if GOD is GOD, that this written word would meet the expectations of a communication from the Supreme Being. For instance: If the Bible is from the omniscient God; then it should be accurate in areas of history. Do we find this true? The answer is,“YES”! Although the Bible is not a history book in the conventional sense, there is remarkable evidence to this end. So much so that top archeologists, William Albright, and especially Nelson Gluck, verified the historical accuracy of the Judeo / Christian Scriptures. Albright worked and confirmed the Biblical historicity. The peers of Nelson Glueck considered him a great Israelite archaeologist. Dr. Glueck was great because he used the Bible to direct his work making this claim:
“A proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions has often led to amazing discoveries . . . They form tessarae [small rectangular tiles] in the vast mosaic of the Bible’s almost incredible correct historical memory.”7 (brackets in the original)
Again, if the Bible is from the omniscient, omnipotent God; then it should be accurate in areas of science. Do we find this true? The answer is, “YES”! There is remarkable evidence to this end although the Bible is not a science book. One of many examples of this is that Matthew Maury found and charted the currents of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans because of the reference the Bible made to “paths in the seas” in Psalm 8:8.8
There are other areas that GOD expects man to explore by faith based on and within the boundaries of His revealed Word – Science is one of these areas.
Acknowledgements
A special thanks goes to my wife, Mae, for reviewing and making suggestions for smoothness and flow of the text, many of her suggestions I have used. In addition, I want to thank to Mr. Charles Green for his critique and encouragement. I especially want to thank Max Herrera for his input and critique to make this article valuable to the cause of our Great Lord and Savior Jesus Christ
References
1. __________The Random House College Dictionary. Rev. Ed. Jess Stein, Editor In Chief. New York: Random House, 1980. s.v. “supposition”.
2. David Snoke. “The Apologetic Argument,” Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith. (June 1998):108 Electronic copy retrieved 12/04/01 at <http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Apologetics/PSCF6-98snoke.html>
3. This argument finds in the very idea of God itself the proof of His existence. Thiessen cites Hoeksemas definition as “That we have an idea of God. This idea of God is infinitely greater than man himself. Hence, it cannot have its origin in man. It can only have its origin in God Himself.” Henry Theissen. Lectures in Systematic Theology. Rev. Ed. Vernon D. Doerksen, Editor. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1979. p30.
4. 2 Peter 3:5, KJV
5. 2 Tim 3:16, KJV
6. Hebrews 11: 6, KJV
7. Michael Bere. Bible Doctrines for Today. Pensacola: A Beka Book, 1987. P53.
8. IBID. P49. It should be noted that these examples are just a few from many more examples of this kind.