For our purpose, we will first revisit some of the previous articles. Then, we will draw some conclusions from them about the tendency of the popular theological mindset and how we must address the problem.

In "Blinded by Atheism,"¹ I deal with an objection against the metaphysic and epistemology of biblical occasionalism.² Although the most central and obvious factor in my position is the constant and active power of God, the critic completely removes God from his representation of it. The error is identical in principle to the one found in "In God We Trust." There I confront an objection from an atheist who alleges an inconsistency in our approach, only that his accusation also fails to factor in our trust in the constant and active power of God.

Such an oversight certainly betrays the incompetence of our critics, but the problem is deeper than that. We are reminded of Paul's words in Romans: "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them" (1:18-19). The difference is that our critics are even more blatant. We repeatedly speak of God to them, but they have already suppressed all thoughts of him by the time they answer us. Incompetence is reinforced by deep-seated irreverence.

We expect this kind of incompetence from unbelievers — the Bible tells us that their minds are darkened, foolish, depraved, and without understanding. Their stubborn prejudice against belief in God also plays a part in such an oversight, in that they assume their atheism so strongly that they cannot even entertain his existence in other people's worldviews. However, the same objections could have easily come — and indeed sometimes have come — from those professing Christians who oppose the doctrine that God works to sustain and control all things.

The main character in the story of our philosophy is a God who is always present and active, knowing all things, sustaining all things, and controlling all things. But our critics revise our story so that this main character — the only one who truly matters — is altogether absent. Thus, whether these are unbelievers or professing believers, it is atheism that dominates their thinking and perspective. This atheistic tendency is so strong that they cannot keep God in the conversation even when he is the topic of the conversation.

I mentioned that the objection raised in "Blinded by Atheism" exhibits a number of errors, so that it could be addressed from several angles. Indeed, several readers have sent in their own responses to it, all dealing with the objection from a more technical viewpoint. But I have chosen the most central, the most obvious, and the most simple answer, because it strikes at two of my primary concerns at the same time. First, of course, it exposes the critic's intellectual incompetence, and most readers probably understand how irrational thinking irritates me. But what irritates me even more than intellectual incompetence is irreverence, here revealed in the critic's audacity to exclude God in a conversation in which he is the central figure.

Of course we do not expect unbelievers to exhibit any degree of reverence. But compare this ministry's publications with the writings of those critics who claim to be Christians. Without fear of contradiction, it is obvious that our concern is to exalt God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, along with the Holy Scripture, infallible and inerrant, through which they reveal themselves. Every aspect of our philosophy and every section of our commentaries emphasizes the greatness and the wisdom of God. In responding to objections, whether they are directed at us or to our faith, we consistently weave into our answers the power of God, the work of Christ, and the perfect coherence of divine revelation. On the other hand, our critics exhibit a self-centered attitude that seems to care about whether they are in the right rather than whether they are in the right about God, and whether they are doing their part to exalt him before all men. This is a generalization, and it might be that not all of our critics are this way. But read for yourselves.

Soon after "Blinded by Atheism" was released, it was indicated to me that the article was attacked because of what I claimed about myself in it. I was aware of the criticisms that those statements would incite when I wrote them, and as usual, the answer is already embedded in them. I certainly said that I can never be defeated in debate, but in the same sentence I also said that this is "because I depend on God's word." And of course I said that I stand on top of the world looking down at the rest, but in the same sentence I also said that this is "where a person is when he stands upon God's word." Moreover, I insisted that "This place belongs to every Christian," and earlier I mentioned that any Christian could possess the "same equipment" as I do even if I might be more proficient at using it.

Any critic who wishes to attack these statements faces three problems. First, since I give all credit to the word of God, to attack me would be to attack the word of God. Second, if he attacks me without any recognition of how all my "boasting" is in fact an exaltation of God's wisdom, it means that he has excluded God from the conversation again — yes, again. Third, either he disallows this exalted position to the wisdom of God, or he insults all Christians everywhere by implying that none of them could attain this height of intellectual enlightenment even when they depend on the word of God. But I say that all Christians could and should attain to this. The most arrogant and self-centered person here is in fact the critic.

Why did I make these statements — and numerous others like them in my writings — knowing that they would invite criticisms? Nowadays false humility characterizes Christian expressions to the point that we are either lying or blaspheming, and those who personalize the truths of Scripture are persecuted. Am I supposed to say that the wisdom of God is above all human wisdom, but it does not lift me above all the foolishness of this world when I rely upon it? That would be ridiculous and contradictory, and an insult to God's grace in redeeming my mind from the effects of sin. Am I supposed to quote the verse, "Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" and then turn around and say that I might lose in a debate? No, because I depend on God's wisdom, and because I have the mind of Christ, of course I will win every debate. It would be dishonest to say otherwise.

So why I did I say these things? I did it, and will continue to do it, for you. I want to show Christians someone who actually possesses the confidence that God's word ought to inspire, so that they in turn might possess this confidence. Only this level of confidence is consistent with reverence toward God and his revelation. On the other hand, by their false humility our opponents show that although they honor God with their lips, their hearts are far from him. There has been much talk about "humble apologetics" recently. Of course we ought to be humble in ourselves and about ourselves, but it is not our place to be humble for God. In fact, it is the very zenith of arrogance and impiety to say that we might be wrong when we believe what God has revealed, for then we are really saying that he might be wrong.

I do not make great claims about myself in myself. But when it comes to God and his word, I am going to make the boldest claims that he enables me to come up with. Now if his mind is closed to me, and if his wisdom is withheld from me, then of course there is no basis to make great claims. But if he has revealed himself to me, and if we have the mind of Christ as Scripture says, then as a Christian I must personalize this wisdom and tell about the difference that this has made in me. I have the mind of Christ, and the eyes of my understanding are enlightened. My Father is greater than all, and if I believe what he says, how dare I not say that I stand on top of the world? Scripture tells me that I am now seated with Christ in heavenly places. I am a child of the light, a son of the God of Heaven. Unlike some people, I do not just argue for Christianity — I actually believe it. Am I boasting about myself, in what I have attained? But we proclaim that this is a sovereign gift and work of God.

I express this faith — knowing that I would be attacked for doing so — so that other believers might be inspired to do the same. Only when a person realizes this can he correctly understand and interact with my writings. And someone who answers me by excluding God altogether or by mistaking my bold statements as self-exaltation clearly fails to grasp where I am coming from and what I am trying to accomplish. And lest anyone fails to notice, even this article is not about answering critics, who are used as examples and then dispensed with, but it is about teaching reverence toward God and confidence in his revelation.

 

NOTES

¹ I have not taken the time to read any critical responses to "Blinded by Atheism." The following comments are not directed to any critic in particular, but address possible responses, actual responses to similar statements in previous writings, and actual responses to the article that I have not read but that have been mentioned (not quoted) to me.

² Other names that I favor include biblical rationalism and biblical foundationalism.

Posted in Theology, Philosophy, Apologetics, Spirituality, Ministry | Permanent Link