Tag Archive: God’s Existence



“I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish.” -Romans 1:4

1 Corinthians 1:22 – “Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom.”

Much of philosophy, the liberal arts, and indeed the western tradition can be credited to the Greeks. Great philosophers like Aristotle and Plato offered up theories about the cosmos, thought and metaphysics that are still with us today. In fact, Greek philosophers were the first to suggest a theory of evolution, though it wouldn’t become known as “evolution,” until Darwin. A couple philosophers known for writing theories similar to Darwin’s are, Thales and Lucretius, some 2,300 years prior.

Now it is true that Greeks, especially the Athenians, were considered very intelligent, though their philosophical writing as a whole is made up of treatises both for and against the existence of God. Yet, their own personal belief structure was wildly polytheistic, as were the Romans.

Paul’s meaning in verse 14 is two fold, at least. First and foremost, the message is that Paul’s mission is to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. The second is, because he mentioned the Greeks specifically, that he is to preach the gospel to not only the wise, but the foolish as well. Though, it should be mentioned what’s wise and what’s foolish differ much in the eyes of the Lord than before the eyes of the world.

I myself am a student of philosophy, but I read and present it through a Christian perspective. I agree this probably isn’t for everyone, if not for any more reason than the angry writings you have to read blatantly attacking God and those who follow Him. However, I am analytical by nature and delve deeply into topics, sometimes, honestly, too much. Yet, though it has fault, I believe it is also good in some ways, and again, I utmost try and use my analytical thought to glorify God.


That being said this verse strikes me in another way. Paul and the Romans to whom he was writing would have been more than aware of the significance of this, and not of just the importance of preaching to Gentiles, which was made already apparent by Paul writing them in the first place, but that he was obligated to preach to the most brilliant minds of the time.

Now, I have heard much concerning the debate of how much the mind has a part to play in our relationship with God. Let me just say, so nobody gets the wrong impression, I consider the fact I have all these questions, and that I always have had to seek an answer, to be a lower spiritual condition, if you will, than pure faith. Indeed, it’s been something I have been accused of lacking, simply because I ask questions. Much to their credit, those who have told me this, their motives are pure and feel that it can be a stumbling block, so I don’t regard such criticisms to rude in anyway, though I do disagree that its an absolute stumbling block.

It comes down to a kind of dualism. The freedom our Lord gave us was opportunity for man to either use things the right way, or the wrong way. The scriptures aren’t opposed to the mind. I feel Paul was an amazing example of this, for when one reads his epistles, and one even has a little philosophical background, it’s apparent that Paul was exercising his spirit and his mind. The scriptures give examples of how he “reasoned,” with Gentiles concerning the Lord’s existence and the Gospel. God does not do anything arbitrarily. He gave us a mind for a reason and though I hold those who have a faith beyond questions to a higher esteem than myself, I feel there is a right way to exercise the mind pursuing God that is not only beneficial for my relationship with the Lord, but to those the Lord may place in my path. May He be Praised.


“Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.” -Romans 1:28

"Stairway to Heaven," by Jim Warren.

In a previous entry (1 John 4:19 – “On Love’s First Cause”) I explained two theories concerning epistemology and the origins of knowledge. One, is known as, “a posteriori,” which is simply that we know what we know because of empirical stimuli, or that we learn from experience.

The other is known as, “a priori,” which suggests a knowledge independent of experience. Yet, there is a debate on whether or not any a priori knowledge actually exists. However, the bible tells us here, and in 1 John 4:19 that it does indeed exist.

This verse is amazing in that it gives us some insight into what those a priori knowledges consist of. In this verse, it tells us that man didn’t “retain” their knowledge of God. To retain means to keep possession of, thus it seems that we know God, a priori, from birth and because we forsake that knowledge, the Lord may justly give us over to depravity, from which we will reap the just consequence, much like what happened in the garden.

"The Fall of Man and The Expulsion From The Garden of Eden," by Michelangelo. fresco, c. 1508-1512

God both exists in the heart and mind at birth, as does his nature, unfortunately intermingled and perverted with our disobedience as we grow in age and responsibility. It is clearly seen that we grow in sin, as we forsake the knowledge that is already there. Thus, we find that a person to deny God is a choice and thus will be held responsible in the day of judgement.

"Last Judgment," by Hans Memling. oil on wood. c. 1466-1473


“In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.” -Romans 1:27

by Kevin Tuma

Paul, in the previous verse, mentions women first as being perpetrators of grotesque sexual sin, presumably with animals, and then tells of men having relations with other men. This emphasizes the lengths of debauchery that was going on in Rome and elsewhere in Paul’s time, and, indeed, it is still with us today.

By use of the term, “likewise,” or, “in the same way” in verse 27, it indicates to us that men lusting after another man is near on par with the woman’s sexual deviance and sin against nature. Due to these sins they reserved in themselves the due penalty for their error as the scripture tells us.

In today’s society there is a push for the church to become more liberal or progressive. Some have, tragically, fallen prey to this and I know of at least one Episcopalian church that features a homosexual minister.

Numerous homosexuals tell us the bible says nothing about their actions being wrong, but in reality that viewpoint is so difficult to provide biblical evidence for that its shocking that idea is so prevalent.

Does this mean homosexuals are void of coming to Christ for repentance and forgiveness? No, they are offered salvation just as everyone, but their attempt to change doctrine has nothing to do with rationality, but rather they want all areas of life to condone and adhere to their lifestyle choices, even if its God. It is especially interesting when one considers the topic of homosexuality, for those who have, through faith, repented of homosexuality are then viciously assaulted in word and action by the homosexual community. This is a common trait in liberalism, that society should bend to accept a persons actions which make them comfortable and anyone who disagrees should be attacked mercilessly. Often in such liberalistic thinking, it is void of any rational contemplation, but rather based on emotion and the desire to alleviate the responsibility behind one’s actions.

I obviously don’t know the philosophical ideals of every Christian or liberal in the world, so my next statement should be taken as a generality. It seems reasonable to conclude that most liberals who demand tolerance, but at the same time conformity by those who disagree with their particular school of thought, indeed would consider themselves atheists. The odd thing about this is that extreme liberalism has such a hold in the world, but yet is made up of relatively few people. In fact, a Gallup poll in 2007 suggested that atheism represented only 4 percent of the American public, which supposedly, according to author Paul Copan, is the exact same percentage when a similar poll was taken in 1944. He states in his book, “Is God a Moral Monster?” –

“Rumors of God’s death have been greatly exaggerated. And when we look at the non-Western world, people are becoming Christians in record numbers. The Christian faith is the fastest-growing movement around, often accompanied by signs and wonders.”

Photobucket

If this is the case, then how do we account for liberalism’s prominence in the world? Perhaps, if Gallup and Copan are correct, it may be that the liberal community has been playing a game of chess for some time, by strategically placing liberal individuals in places like politics, media and universities. It could also mean that Christians have been somewhat silent when it comes to refuting such liberal world views. It seems there is a hesitance about getting on the bad side of the liberal community due to their propensity for anger, public insults, and quarreling. Christians should realize one general truth about those angry liberals, which may play a part in our aversion in debate. Again, Copan says:

“True, they (liberals) effectively utilize a combination of emotion and verbal rhetoric, but they aren’t known for logically carrying thoughts through from beginning to end. Their arguments against God’s existence aren’t intellectually rigorous – although they want to give that impression. Yes, they’ll raise some important questions concerning, for example, the problem of evil, but again, their arguments are a collage of rhetorical barbs that don’t really form a coherent argument. I’ve observed that while these men do have expertise in certain fields (biology and evolutionary theory in the case of Dawkins and Dennett), they turn out to be fairly disappointing when arguing against God’s existence or Christian doctrine.”

Photobucket

Paul Copan

We followers of Christ are called to love even the most detestable, for we know at one time, we lived under sin and the Law, and due to our vile sin, God’s wrath. Thus, we need to remind people that just because we disagree with someone’s actions, that it in no way necessarily leads or equates to hate. If they have this view, which honestly they may have no matter what, it severely hinders our ability to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is something we need to point out, as is commonly said, “hate the sin, love the sinner.” Remember that when someone responds to you in anger, its usually because you have won the argument. Intelligent debate doesn’t need to get nasty. It’s incredibly silly and against all logic and intelligence that Christians and even Christ are referred to as haters, just because of a disagreement or clashing viewpoint. Its based on ignorance of what the Bible actually tells us, and how it tells us to act. Imagine if all disagreements were treated in such a way? Would we have anyone? Would we even have Christ?

%d bloggers like this: