P4 - Aiming to better understand the existence of God in a world of evil and suffering - God's glory

Habakkuk 3:2 "Lord, I have heard the report about You and I fear.O Lord, revive Your work in the midst of the years, In the midst of the years make it known; In wrath remember mercy."

Introduction and Review:

These past few posts have been dedicated to offering a Christian understanding of evil and suffering in the world.  Dr. William Lane Craig's reformulation of the classic moral argument for God's existence has been used as a basis for our posts:

If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist

Evil exists

Objective moral values and duties exist

Therefore God exists

In ways we can never fully comprehend but nonetheless must acknowledge - evil's existence does not negate the reality of God's existence. The whole contention has been that God, though not being the author of evil, has morally sufficient reasons for will to permit such. 

We have proposed four key Biblical themes to aid in our exploration of this difficult subject:

1. Providence

2. Evil

3. The Cross

4. Glory

Thus far we have explored the first three, with "the cross" shedding light on how there is no conflict between the understanding of a world governed by the Sovereign God of Providence and the presence and persistence of evil in this world.  Today's post is going to conclude this series by showing the purpose for which evil and suffering are included in God's Sovereign purposes: God's glory.  As we consider this theme of God's glory, we will once more consider the prophet who faced the problem of evil head-on - Habakkuk.

God's ultimate will is to demonstrate His glory

So what is the highest good? How one answers that question determines how one will approach the problem of evil and suffering in this world. According to Habakkuk, and so many other Biblical authors, the highest good, and thus the chief purpose as to why God would will to permit evil in the world is His glory.  Habakkuk's book is about a discouraged and disgruntled prophet complaining to God about the sinfulness of his nation. God's answer surprises, initially confounds and even a times causes great fear in the prophet.  

However we see Habakkuk not holding bitterness against God. Why? Because He sees that though we may not understand all of God's ways, the character of God and the purposes for which He does thing are never in conflict.  God's glory is found thoughout Habakkuk's book:

1. Habakkuk 1:12 "Are You not from everlasting,O Lord, my God, my Holy One?
We will not die. You, O Lord, have appointed them to judge; And You, O Rock, have established them to correct."

2. Habakkuk 2:14 “For the earth will be filledWith the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, As the waters cover the sea."

3. Habakkuk 3:18-19 "Yet I will exult in the Lord,I will rejoice in the God of my salvation.
19 The Lord God is my strength,
And He has made my feet like hinds’ feet,
And makes me walk on my high places."

God's glory, through the cross, is the greatest way we can get through pain and suffering

Just as we saw how the cross enables us to make sense as to why God in His Providence would will to allow evil and suffering in this world, the cross also enables us to find great comfort in the glory of God.  Chuck Swindoll notes: "The Sovereignty of God may not answer all of my questions, but it does relieve me of all my fears."  Saints of God in the pages of holy scripture found such comfort in knowing that all of the suffering we go through and the injustice that pervades our world will ultimately be dealt with and that God as a purpose. 

Perhaps no book outside the Bible has made the strong case for God's glory being the grand purpose for creation, salvation and thus answering the question: "why evil" as Jonathan Edwards' book: "A dissertation concerning the end for which God created the world." Note this excerpt from what he writes: "The glory of God is spoken of in Holy Scripture as the last end for which those parts of the moral world that are good were made."

Whenever you consider the fact that there is no greater good than God's glory, then you realize how it could be God would choose to use evil and suffering to somehow accomplish such a purpose.  Again the glory of His love shown through the cross is the clearest evidence for this hard to understand truth.  Habakkuk was able to cope and navigate through his struggle over God's usage of the Babylonians to punish Judah and Jerusalem. 

Again consider what he writes in Habakkuk 3:16-19 "I heard and my inward parts trembled, At the sound my lips quivered.
Decay enters my bones, And in my place I tremble.  Because I must wait quietly for the day of distress, For the people to arise who will invade us.  17 Though the fig tree should not blossom And there be no fruit on the vines, Though the yield of the olive should fail
And the fields produce no food,
Though the flock should be cut off from the fold And there be no cattle in the stalls,
18 Yet I will exult in the Lord, I will rejoice in the God of my salvation. 19 The Lord God is my strength, And He has made my feet like hinds’ feet, And makes me walk on my high places. For the choir director, on my stringed instruments."

Closing thoughts and summary

Habakkuk saw the Providence of God at work in the life of his nation, and God's choice to use the ruthless Babylonian empire certain caused Habakkuk to struggle.  Yet he saw what we would know to be a prophetic glimpse of the cross, as seen in Habakkuk 2:4.  In understanding through God's redemptive purposes could bring about a better understanding of how God's providence and evil could be at work in the same world without cancelling out God's existence or evil's reality, what was needed was the purpose for it all.  Habakkuk concludes by rejoicing over the glory of God. 

P3 Aiming to better understand God's existence in a world of evil and suffering - the cross

Habakkuk 2:4 “Behold, as for the proud one, His soul is not right within him; But the righteous will live by his faith.

Introduction and Review:
These past couple of days have been dedicated to developing a Christian response to evil and suffering. We saw a couple of days ago that when we reformulate the problem of evil into what has been the moral argument for God's existence, we discover that unless there is an all-powerful, all good God, evil cannot be considered a "problem". That is to say, unless there is such a thing as objective moral values, then on Atheism and worldviews like it, evil and good have no way of being distinguished. Only Christian theism can consistently address this issue - even though no one claims to have comprehensive understanding of God's moral sufficient reasons for allow evil to persist in our world. 

We have proposed four key ideas that aid us in navigating this very difficult issue: Providence, Evil, The Cross and Glory.  So far we have looked at the first two of those ideas.  Normally when one reads a typical treatment on this subject of offering a response to evil and suffering, very few spend a whole lot of time on the cross.  Yet without the cross, not only can't a Christian view be developed, but making any sense of why there is evil and suffering in a world ruled by a Sovereign, Good and All-powerful God cannot be achieved. 

Why God's Providence and the existence of evil can only make sense when we consider the cross of Jesus
Tim Keller in his book: "Walking with God through Pain and Suffering", page 119-120, notes: "The book of Job rightly points to human unworthiness and finitude, and calls for complete surrender to the Sovereignty of God. But taken by itself the call might seem more than the sufferer could bear.  Then the New Testament comes filled with an unimaginable comfort for those who are trusting in God's Sovereignty. The sovereign God himself has come down into this world and has experienced its darkness. He has personally drunk the cup of its suffering down to the dregs. And he did it not to justify himself but to justify us, to bear the suffering, death and curse for sin that we have earned."

As you study the pages of scripture, you discover that before the creation of the world, God had already planned the cross.  It is this author's contention that if we are to truly make any sense of the presence of evil and suffering, we must begin and end with the cross.  The cross all at once was the most unimaginable demonstration of the evil of men and the most magnificent demonstration of the love of God.  Further thought would contend that the whole of creation revolves around the revelation of God in human flesh and the particular events of the cross and resurrection. 

Mapping out God's plan for redemption, then creation, and ultimately recreation.
Where do we find evidence in the Bible that the cross was planned before creation? Consider the following verses:

1). John 1:29 "The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"


2). Luke 22:22 "For indeed, the Son of Man is going as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed!”

3). Acts 2:23 "this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death."

4). Acts 3:18 "But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled."

5). Acts 4:28 "to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur."

6). 1 Peter 1:20 "For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you."

7). Revelation 13:8 "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

From surveying other scripture, we understand that the cross was an agreed upon plan or covenant of redemption between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.  Passages such as Ephesians 1:1-14; 1 Timothy 1:9 and Titus 1:2 indicate that the Father planned redemption, the Son agreed to purchase it by becoming a man and shedding blood and the Holy Spirit agreed to apply it to all Whom He calls according to the Father purposes of grace, repents and believes.

The cross shaped what particular kind of history was going to come forth once God said: "let there be light" in Genesis 1.  With creation underway, God made beings who could choose.  Those beings chose against Him.  Despite willing to permit the fall, God already had in mind to graciously redeem our fallen parents and thus begin the process of redeeming fallen human beings who by His grace trust in Jesus.

The goal of creation, and its subsequent fall, includes there being a point when God will restore the creation that was lost.  All who have by grace through faith believed on Christ will be included in the glorious recreation - called in Revelation 21-22 the "New Heavens and the New Earth."

The black cloth that is evil and suffering is used by God to show forth His glorious redemptive purposes.  Two passages in Romans bear out this marvelous truth of how the cross gives us clarity to navigate through this difficult issue of evil and suffering.
Romans 3:24-26 "being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

Then we see Romans 8:20-21 "For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." Personally I think this passage brings us the closest we will ever get to answering the big "why question" (i.e. "why evil"). The cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the redemptive purposes of God are at the heart of this answer. 

Again Tim Keller in his book: "Walking With God Through Pain and Suffering", page 121, notes: See what this means? Yes, we do not know the reason God allows evil and suffering to continue, or why it is so random, but now at least we know what reason it is not. It cannot be that he does not love us. It cannot be that he does not care. He is so committed to our ultimate happiness that he was willing to plunge into the greatest depths  of suffering. He understands us, he has been there, and he assures us that he has a plan to eventually wipe away every tear. Someone might say, "but that's only half an answer to the question why? Yes, but it is the half we need."

Closing out with the prophet Habakkuk's central statement of "The Just shall live by faith"
The verse we quoted at the beginning of this post shows us how Habakkuk began coping with all that God was revealing to Him.  Habakkuk 2:4 is among the most frequently quoted passages in the New Testament.  When that verse is quoted, it is quoted in the context of the unfolding of saving faith in the gospel. Consider two examples: Romans 1:17 "For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith.” Galatians 3:11 "But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.” In the Gospel we find the only solution to our sin and the only solution we can offer to a hurting world that is suffering.  The very God Whom unbelieving man rails against and accuses is the very One who sent His Son to suffer and provide the only grounds upon which the believing sinner can be declared innocent of all accusation.  

P2 - Aiming to better understand the existence of God in a world of evil and suffering - What is evil?

Habakkuk 1:1-4 "The oracle which Habakkuk the prophet saw.2 How long, O Lord, will I call for help, And You will not hear? I cry out to You, “Violence!” Yet You do not save. 3 Why do You make me see iniquity, And cause me to look on wickedness? Yes, destruction and violence are before me; Strife exists and contention arises.4 Therefore the law is ignored And justice is never upheld. For the wicked surround the righteous; Therefore justice comes out perverted."

Introduction & Review
Yesterday we began a series on developing a Christian understanding of the problem of evil and suffering.  The basis for this study is the Book of Habakkuk.  The reason for choosing this book of the Bible is because Habakkuk deals head-on with this very difficult issue of evil and suffering.  In yesterday's post we proposed four terms to aid us in this study: Providence, Evil, The Cross and Glory.  So far we have explored God's Providence and how it is He can will to allow evil to exist without being the Author of it.  It is worth citing some scriptures that emphasize God not being the Author of evil and suffering before moving on, as well as seeing how He is in Providential control of all things.

1. God is Good and is not the source of Evil.
1 Corinthians 10:13 "No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it."

James 1:13 "Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone."

2. God wills to permit evil and uses the moral evil of creatures to accomplish His purposes
Amos 3:6 If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has not the Lord done it?  

Isaiah 45:7 "The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity, I am the Lord who does all these.

Acts 2:23-24 "this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. 24 But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power."

3. God is Sovereign, exercising Providential control over all things - good and evil
Genesis 50:20 "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive."

Deuteronomy 8:3 "He humbled you and let you be hungry, and fed you with manna which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you understand that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord."

Romans 8:28 "And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose."

With those passages capturing more of what we looked at yesterday, we will now head into the proverbial lion's den and consider what exactly is evil.

What is meant by "evil"
When we consider the Bible's presentation of the subject of evil and suffering, we are introduced to its beginnings in the hearts of two key figures.  The first is Lucifer, an archangel who would rebel in Heaven to become Satan. (Ezekiel 28). Lucifer's rebellion seduced 1/3 of the angelic realm to rebel against God, with some losing their places, some being chained in reserve for judgment and still others being allowed to roam freely on the earth. (2 Peter 2:4; Revelation 12:7) Satan appears in the garden in Genesis 3 to wreck havoc upon the second key figure: Adam. 

Romans 5:19 states "For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous." By the original Adam's rebellion, all were consigned to the curse of sin. 

Did God know that such treachery would occur? Yes.  Did God in His providence include the fall? Scripture indicates that He did, being that the cross (which will be the focus of tomorrow's post) was ordained in eternity before creation. (Acts 2:23-24; Revelation 13:8).  Did God cause Satan or Adam to fall? No. Any fault, choice to do evil or failure to grasp the grace of God lies in the bosom of the creature.   Lucifer was in a perfect heaven and failed. Adam was in a perfect garden and rebelled.  Every grace was available to them.  How could they had done it? Scripture does not say - except to say that they chose to do it. 

Evil has been described as being likened to "rot" in wood or those spoilages that occur in fruit or vegetables.  In doing words studies on "evil" and "sin", such meanings emerge like "falling short", "trespassing", "stumbling" and "law-breaking".

The best response to evil and suffering is not to attain full understanding of why it happens, but to trust in the Goodness and Providence of God
As you turn to Habakkuk's prophecy once again in Habakkuk 1:5-6  “Look among the nations! Observe! Be astonished! Wonder!
Because I am doing something in your days—You would not believe if you were told. 6 “For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans,
That fierce and impetuous people
Who march throughout the earth
To seize dwelling places which are not theirs." Habakkuk's response in 1:13 tells us something very important about evil and God's providence: "Your eyes are too pure to approve evil, and You can not look on wickedness with favor. Why do You look with favor On those who deal treacherously? Why are You silent when the wicked swallow up those more righteous than they?"

What we discover in this chapter of Habakkuk is God's plan to use a more wicked people than those whom Habakkuk complained about (his own people).  Habakkuk wanted a solution - God tells him what He is going to do - and now Habakkuk expresses bewilderment.  But then we see him settle down and respond by faith in Habakkuk 2:1 "I will stand on my guard post And station myself on the rampart; And I will keep watch to see what He will speak to me, And how I may reply when I am reproved."  Habakkuk teaches us that it is not comprehension of the "why" question that is going to sustain us through evil and suffering, but rather faith in trusting that God in His Providence knows exactly what He is doing.  Habakkuk 2:4 says it all - “Behold, as for the proud one, His soul is not right within him; But the righteous will live by his faith."

Coping with the problem of evil and suffering in a world ruled by God's providence
In Tim Keller's book: "Walking with God through Pain and Suffering" pages 109-110, he recounts the testimony of a woman named Mary who endured much suffering and hardship in her life.  Her statement is worth quoting in bringing understanding on evil's reality in a world ruled by providence: 


"What I discovered about heartaches and problems, especially the ones that are way beyond what we can handle, is that maybe those are the problems He does permit precisely because we cannot handle them or the pain and anxiety they cause. But He can. I think He wants us to realize that trusting Him to handle situations is actually a gift. His gift of peace to us in the midst of the craziness. Problems don't disappear and life continues, but He replaces the sting of those heartaches with hope, which has been an amazing realization."

In scriptures such as Genesis 50:20 and Romans 8:28, we learn a principle that many times is difficult to accept but is nonetheless true: God permits what He hates in order to accomplish the good He intends.  To understand that evil is included in God's providential plan is crucial, since the only other alternative is to believe evil and suffering are random.  Furthermore, God's providential control not only speaks of a purposeful universe, but one that is also moral. Habakkuk's consolation was found in trusting in God's purposes, even if he did not fully understand them.  The revelation of God's words soothed Habakkuk's soul.

Conclusion:

We have thus far considered God's providence and the reality of evil. There is yet another theme which will be the focus of tomorrow's post that if not considered in the whole scheme of things, will render any hope of developing a Christian understanding of evil and suffering impossible. That theme is "the cross".

P1 - Aiming to better understand the existence of God in a world full of evil and suffering - God's Providence

Habakkuk 1:1-4 "The oracle which Habakkuk the prophet saw. 2 How long, O Lord, will I call for help, And You will not hear? I cry out to You, “Violence!” Yet You do not save. 3 Why do You make me see iniquity, And cause me to look on wickedness? Yes, destruction and violence are before me; Strife exists and contention arises. 4 Therefore the law is ignored And justice is never upheld. For the wicked surround the righteous; Therefore justice comes out perverted."

Introduction:
Worldviews such as Atheism, Agnosticism, Naturalism and others cannot explain nor provide the underpinnings for objective moral values and duties. We can note the following moral argument for God's existence as articulated by Dr. William Lane Craig:

If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties don't exist

Objective moral values and duties exist

Therefore God exists

At this point the skeptic may shoot back and say: "but what about evil and suffering in this world? Does not the abundance of evil, pain and sadness overturn the moral argument for God's existence?" Surprisingly, in using Dr. Craig's same argument, we can add an additional premise that still shows that evil does not negate the existence of God. How? The all Good, all powerful God of the Bible has morally sufficient reasons for willing to permit evil in our world. I heard Dr. Craig one time put it this way:

If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties don't exist

Evil exists 

Objective moral values and duties exist


Therefore God exists

Though God is not the author of evil and suffering, He does for morally sufficient reasons will to permit it to run its course. In the next several posts, this blogger will attempt to show from the Biblical worldview how we can reconcile the reality of evil on the one hand and advocate the existence of the God of the Bible on the other hand.  

The Book of Habaukkuk and the problem of evil

If there is any book of the Bible that takes on the problem of evil and suffering - it is Habakkuk.  The prophet asks a question I am sure we have all ask: "Why Lord?" At the time of Habakkuk's prophecy, the city of Jerusalem, capital of the Southern Kingdom of Judah, had experienced a mighty revival and series of reforms under King Josiah.  2 Kings 22-23 gives the background for all that took place. Following what was the final revival and glimmer of hope for a nation steeped in sin, Josiah dies and his son takes over the throne in Jerusalem. Whatever reforms and revival had taken place under Josiah were wiped clean by his son Jehoahaz's brief and reckless regime. Egypt invaded the land and the Pharaoh of that day imprisoned the wicked new king, replacing him with his even more wicked brother Jehoiakim.


If would not be long until Jerusalem and its surrounding inhabitants would be taken away into exile to Babylon, with the temple being burned and the flame of hope in Jerusalem being extinguished. 


It is in the midst of these circumstances that The Holy Spirit prompts Habakkuk to write his prophecy.  Stirred up by the hypocrisy, failure and wickedness of his fellow Jews and the sheer shock of the actions performed by Jerusalem's wicked kings, Habakkuk vents his anger. In the opening of his prophecy he begins with a question: "how long, O Lord, will I call for help?"  


What follows is God's conversation with Habakkuk of not only how He is going to deal with the injustice in the nation, but also how through the usage of the even more wicked empire of Babylon, God is somehow going to bring about redemption and restoration. 

When dealing with the problem of evil and suffering, we often find answers we don't want to  questions we don't know how to ask.  Through it all God finds us, which in turn leads us to find Him in the darkness of our night and the pain of our heart.  Such situations are how He brings about healing and redemption. 

I want to briefly lay out four themes we see in this prophecy that can aid us in grappling with the problem of evil and suffering: Providence, Evil, Redemption & Glory.  We will deal with the first one: Providence.



Providence and the presence of evil in our world
What is providence? Providence is how God guides and directs history, circumstances and human beings to His intended ends.  The Baptist Confession of 1689 gives this definition of God's Providence: "God the good Creator of all things, in His infinite power and wisdom, upholds, directs, disposes and governs all creatures and things, from the greatest to the least, by His most wise and holy providence, to the end for which they were created."


So in accords to this definition, God has ends or purposes and uses means or instruments to accomplish those ends.  By His own character of wisdom and unending power, God directs the course of every affair.  The 1689 Baptist confession continues by noting two implications of this statement:

1. God governs according to His infallible foreknowledge and the free and unchanging counsel of His own will;

2. for the praise of the glory of His wisdom, power, justice, boundless goodness, and mercy.



So we see how God exercises His providence - by way of His unending knowledge of all things.  Then we see the chief purpose for which He exercises His will - His glory. 

It is with a high view of God in His providence we see statements such as Habakkuk 1:12 of God being "from everlasting".  Certainly the purpose of God's Providence to accomplish His glory is spelled out in Habakkuk 2:14 “For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, As the waters cover the sea."

Without a doubt Habakkuk retains this high view of God reigning in Providence.  Yet the issue of the presence of evil and suffering in history is raised by the prophet as well.  How can it be that an all-powerful, all knowing God could allow evil to not merely exist, but flourish in Jerusalem, in the world and in the lives of individuals?

Again the Baptist Confession of 1689 aids us in verbalizing a response: "The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in His providence, that His determinate counsel extends even to the first fall, and all other sinful actions of both angels and men."  Did Adam and Eve's rebellion in the garden of Eden surprise God? No.  God's purposes included His willing to permit the fall and even the entry of sin into the creation by Satan's pride and deception - all the while not being the Author nor coercer of their evil choices. 

The Baptist Confession of 1689 lays out the following  explanation: 

1. This is not merely by a bare permission, but by a form of permission in which He included the most wise and powerful limitations, and other means of restricting and controlling sin. These various limitations have been designed by God to bring about his most holy purposes.

2. Yet, in all these affairs, the sinfulness of both angels and men comes only from them and not from God, Who is altogether holy and righteous, and can never be the author or approver of sin.

Thus as a good and wise cardiologist needs to medically break a person's rib cage to access a diseased heart, so then does God, to some reasons revealed in scripture but in most cases not told to us, choose to use the presence of evil to accomplish His most excellent ends. In other words - God has morally sufficient reasons for willing to allow evil in the creation. 

More in the next post....

Why Biological Evolution, Naturalism and Athiesm are an inadequate to explain the obligation to be moral

Romans 2:14-15 "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them."

Introduction:
For the past couple of days we have been considering how the existence of objective moral values and duties point to the existence of One Holy, All-good, All-powerful God. Philosopher and Theologian Dr. William Lane Craig has crafted a sound and valid moral argument for the existence of God that aids in bridging the reality of objective moral values/duties to the existence of the All-Good (and thus Holy) God: 

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist

2. Objective moral values and duties do exist

3. Therefore, God exists.

In yesterday's post we took the above argument and explored it premise by premise; showing that the moral argument exposes the fallacy of atheism. Today's post aims to consider possible objections to the idea of there being such a thing as objective moral values and duties. Atheists and secularists that advocate there being no such thing as objective morality hold to a form of ethics called "moral relativism". In short, moral values and duties are "relative" or "related" to whatever a particular person believes to be right and wrong. This of course contrasts with what we have been advocating in these posts - namely because God exists, objective moral values and duties exist. With that short introduction, lets look at a few possible objections and see if we can respond.

Does biological "herd instinct" instilled by evolutionary natural selection and "survival of the fittest" explain our desire and obligation to be moral
The so-called "New Atheists" (authors such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, the late Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris) claim to one degree or another that morality arose as a result of biology. Atheism (whether "New" or "Old") espouses the worldview of naturalism - which teaches that the universe, life and humanity arose as a result of chance and random organization of material atoms. Famous author C.S Lewis had himself been an atheist before coming to faith in Christ. As he wrote his epic work articulating his robust faith in Christ: "Mere Christianity", much of what he said addresses the typical objections raised by Atheists and secularists today. 

C.S Lewis writes: "(S)ome people wrote me saying, 'Isn't what you call the Moral Law (Lewis' term for objective moral values and duties) simply our herd instinct and hasn't it been developed just like all our other instincts?" Lewis' reference echoes similar sentiments by so-called New Atheist proponent Richard Dawkins who has been noted as saying that at bottom, we are nothing more than the sum total of a random collection of material properties dancing to the rhythm of our own DNA. 

So how does Lewis respond to such claims that assert morality as being nothing more than mere instinct - conditioned and refined by evolution and natural selection? Lewis writes: "We all know what it feels like to be prompted by instinct: but that is not what I mean by Moral Law. We all know what it feels like to be prompted by instinct: by mother love, or sexual instinct, or the instinct for food. It means that you feel a strong want or desire to act in a certain way. And, of course, we sometimes do feel just that sort of desire to help another person: and no doubt that desire is due to the herd instinct. But feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling that you ought to help whether you want to or not."

So Lewis is not denying that on one level - our actions are partly due to instincts. However, instincts and naturalism are not adequate to explain why we feel the sense of "oughtness" or "obligation" to help, do good, suppress our appetites or put others ahead of ourselves. Lewis goes on: "You will probably feel two desires-one a desire to give help (due to your herd instinct) and the other a desire to keep out of danger (due to the instinct of self-preservation). But you will find inside of you, in addition to these two impulses, a third thing which tells you that you ought to follow the impulses to help, and suppress the impulse to run away. Now that thing that judges between the two instincts, that decides what should be encouraged, cannot tiself be either of them."

Lewis then concludes by illustrating how our instincts are likened to a piano keyboard, with each instinct being like a separate key. Objective moral values and duties are the sheet music which tell us what tune to play, which key to push, which key to not push and thus result in the music that is morality. Now key to Lewis' illustration is the fact that the sheet music required a composer - an intelligence, that contained within them the musical score and character to compose such a piece. 

Our whole point is of course that without a Moral Law-giver, there is no objective moral law. In short, Atheism and naturalism cannot explain on their own terms why we have objective moral values and duties. Author Dean Hardy in his book "Stand Your Ground", page 152, notes: "The first realization that needs to occur is that every atheistic view of ethics rejects the possibility of having an absolute standard by which to judge what is right and wrong. Without an infinite being on which to base morality, there are simply no absolutes. So, when the atheist claims that something is right or wrong, questioning "why" often results in an interesting discussion." 

Conclusion
So does naturalism and secularism, using the standard hypothesis of evolutionary natural selection adequately explain why we desire to be moral and why we ought to be moral? As we concluded yesterday, we must conclude today that the answer is "no". The atheist may try to coin the conversation in terms of "instinct" alone, however, on atheism and naturalism, the "oughtness" of morality cannot be explained. As I noted yesterday, we are not saying that non-theists cannot be moral. What we are saying is that without God - there cannot be such things as objective moral values and duties. Hence the argument still stands:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist

2. Objective moral values and duties do exist

3. Therefore, God exists.

How the moral argument for God's existence exposes the fallacy of atheism

Romans 1:19  "because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them."

Introduction:

In yesterday's post, we labored to demonstrate that objective morality by its nature imposes itself on our obligation to carry out moral duties. This idea of "oughtness" implies a will or the ability to make a choice. To put it another way - the objective standards of right and wrong are not arbitrary - but are intentional. Hence, the Absolute Standard of Good cannot be just merely an abstract principle of morality - but an absolute Intelligence. Moreover, the concept of duty to these values means that you and I have a responsibility to excercise justice, fairness and to ensure that children do not get hurt nor thieves get away with stealing. The Absolute Standard of Good is One to Whom all human beings are accountable. Hence, there is only One Person who can fit the criteria: God. 

Philosopher and Theologian Dr. William Lane Craig has crafted a sound and valid moral argument for the existence of God that aids in bridging the reality of objective moral values/duties to the existence of an All-Good (and thus Holy) God: 

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist

2. Objective moral values and duties do exist

3. Therefore, God exists.

The objective morality that we are contending for in today's post cannot be avoided. Truth by its very nature is defined as that quality which corresponds to reality. Hence, the world/universe in which we live is most accurately described by such values and duties. Chance and mere material reality could not had produced such morality. Natural selection, herd-mentality and other mechanisms typically cited by humanists and athiests cannot account for why we feel obligated to carry out moral duties. 

How the moral argument for God's existence shows the fallacy of athiesm

Only a theistic worldview - that is to say - only a worldview that asserts believe in the existence of an All-Powerful God that is by His very nature All-Good (i.e "Holy") can account for why there are such objective moral duties. 

As the first premise asserts: if God did not exist, then such values and duties would not exist. Notice, I am not saying that someone who denies God's existence cannot be a moral person. Quite the contrary. There are examples that I have seen of Atheists acting better in some cases than professing Christians. 

Now here is what I am saying: why ought athiests, or believers in Jesus Christ - exercise moral duties? On atheism, there is no reason to be moral - since the world per Athiesm is nothing more than a random collection of atoms and material objects, spawned by chance and heading toward an eventual cold and dark cosmic oblivion. And yet, Athiests do moral things. They may say that as human beings we ought to be leaving the world a better place than when we found it. But why? 

I would contend that the first premise knocks out the Atheistic worldview's contention that there is no God, being that there is indeed objective moral values and duties. The second premise asserts the reality of objective moral values and duties, with the third premise following logically and conclusively from the soundness of the first two premises, namely: "God exists".

How Objective Morality and Duties point to the existence of God

Romans 2:14-15 "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law doinstinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them."

Introduction:

When it comes to describing our universe and world in which we live - two general features can be noted. First, we live in a physical world/universe. All the relevant laws discovered by science and the mathematical equations indicate that there is indeed a physical world outside of ourselves. Furthermore, this physical universe/world is one with which we can interract, gather information and interpret with incredible precision. Almost no one disputes this first feature of our world. 

The second feature of our universe/world is that it has objective moral laws and duties - i.e a moral universe. Philosophers and much of contemporary culture will debate whether or not there are such things as objective moral laws and duties undergirding all of reality. In C.S Lewis' book: "Mere Christianity", we note the following observation about the undeniability of objective moral laws - or what Lewis calls "The Law of Nature":

"These then are the two points I want to make. First, that human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in."

Lewis' point of what we "ought" to do drives to the heart of what we are talking about when it comes to objective moral values. Whether human beings like it or not - there are unalterable ethical principles that are true across all cultures; cutting across ethnic, geographical and language barriers. 

Illustrating why no-one can avoid the reality of objective moral values and standards of right and wrong

Whenever a typical so-called "post-modern" professor or college student balks at the idea of such objective standards - a simple test can be administered to prove that objective moral standards do exist. For the student, have the professor mark an "F" on all of their tests and assignments no matter the quality or effort they may had invested. Immediately the student will cry "foul" and say "that's not fair". The idea of "fairness" and "justness" is covered under the moral lawcode of the ten commandments and is innately resident in all human hearts. In like manner, watch what happens when the professor who insists on no such thing as objective morality discover the unpleasant experience of being "unsalaried" (a nice way of saying "fired"). They will lodge a complaint to the university administration for "unfair" treatment. 

C.S Lewis in his book "Mere Christianity" echoes what we noted in the above illustrations with this thought: "But the most remarkable thing is this. Whenever you find a man who says he does not believe in a real Right and Wrong, you will find the same man going back on this a moment later. He may break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he will be complaining 'It's not fair'.

What objective moral values have to do with God's existence

The above short discussion served to show the absurdity of denying objective moral values. To say for instance that there is such a thing as a "evil act" assumes there to be an "Ultimate Good". So then, what is that "Ultimate Good"? Objective morality by its nature carries with it the fact that the values themselves are ones that we "ought" to do. This idea of "oughtness" implies a will or the ability to make a choice. To put it another way - the objective standards of right and wrong are not arbitrary - but are intentional. Hence, the Absolute Standard of Good cannot be just merely an abstract principle of morality - but an absolute Intelligence. Moreover, the concept of duty to these values means that you and I have a responsibility to exercise justice, fairness and to ensure that children do not get hurt nor thieves get away with stealing. 

The Absolute Standard of Good is One to Whom all human beings are accountable. Hence, there is only One Person who can fit the criteria: God. 

Philosopher and Theologian Dr. William Lane Craig has crafted a sound and valid moral argument for the existence of God that aids in bringing together all we have discussed in today's post:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist

2. Objective moral values and duties do exist

3. Therefore, God exists.

The uniqueness of Christian Theism

Acts 28:28-31 "Therefore let it be known to you that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will also listen.”29 [When he had spoken these words, the Jews departed, having a great dispute among themselves.]
30 And he stayed two full years in his own rented quarters and was welcoming all who came to him,31 preaching the kingdom of God and teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all openness, unhindered."

Introduction:
In yesterday's post we began considering various worldviews and focused particular on theism. We noted that "theism" is simply referring to belief in God. After considering some detailed explanations of "theism in general", we concluded by noting how "theism in general" is based upon four key ideas about God: 

1). Creator 
2). Eternal 
3). Providential 
4). Miraculously revealing

When doing evangelism, the Christian presents not just "theism in general", but a specific type of theism - namely Christian theism. Among the world-religions, three (and sometimes a fourth) are included under the umbrella of "theism". In a moment we will look at Christian theism (the focus of today's post) and show how its uniqueness sets it apart as the only worldview that can be consistently presented by the Christian and withstand assault from would-be attacks. It will be proposed in today's post that Christian Theism's uniqueness in comparison to other worldviews is what it sets it apart among its would-be contenders. 

The uniqueness of Christian Theism as the mark of its genuiness and effectiveness as a worldview
Let's briefly consider the three other worldviews that people place under this general designation of "theism". 

1. Judaism. 
2. Islam.
3. Mormonism.

Now the question is, how do these proposed versions of "theism" compare to Christian theism? I would propose that unlike the other three - Christian theism's uniqueness is what sets it apart from the other three. I will show this by considering the four traits of "general theism" above and seeing how Christian theism and the other three perform.

1. God as Creator.
In the discussions we saw yesterday, God as an Eternal, changeless, spaceless, self-sufficient, all powerful, all knowing and necessary Being is the first premise of standard Theism. The "self-sufficiency" of the Eternal God - whereby God was in no need to create the universe and would not had been different if He hadn't - cannot be maintained without considering the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The Trinititarian doctrine asserts that the Father, Son and Spirit have perpetually related with and within one another. God as One God exists with the Three Persons. A Self-relating God has no need for creation - and has maximal freedom to choose whether or not to create. None of the other worldviews claiming to be theistic contain the doctrine of the Trinity.

Hence Christian Theism, with its unique doctrine of the Trinity - alone and consistently asserts the true and living God of Theism. Within Judaism and Islam, God has no way of relating within Himself. Mormonism does not assert Monotheism (belief in One God) but is more akin to polytheism (belief in multiple Deities), with their version of the "Father" being one deities in a long line of deities. Hence Mormonism would technically not even be considered true Theism by definition. Only Trinitarian Christian Theism can consistently, reasonably and thus uniquely declare the True and living Creator God.

2. God as Eternal
In this definition of eternity is included the idea of God being a Necessary being - meaning that if God did not exist, nothing else would. To put it another way, God is His own explanation for why He exists and thus is also His own standard for what is Good, is timeless and changeless. Islam declares that "Allah" wills what is good or evil, and thus such designations are not a part of His eternal character. Judaism again asserts God as being Eternal, just like Christianity, however the fully self-relating concept of God as existing within Three-interrelating Persons is not included in Judaism's standard definition of God's eternal existence. Mormonism, again, conceives of a string of greater and lesser deities that independently are not eternal. Once more, Christian Theism most fully articulates this point of God's eternality. 

3. Providential
Can God regularly intervene in the affairs of His creation? Islam and Judaism are silent on this score. Mormonism claims a version of this intervention - however with their concept of the Deity as really being a string of "deities", the doctrine of God's intervention and preservation of history to an intended end cannot be logically and consistently maintained. 

In Christian theism, we see the Spirit of God working in the active sustaining of creation and the moving forward of history (Romans 8:21-25). The Son is also included in the preservation and holding together of all things (Colossians 1:16-17). Then the Father exercises His will to bring together whatsoever comes to pass (Ephesians 1:11). The One God of the Bible exists equally and Eternally in all three Persons, with each Person perfectly expressing the fulness of Deity and the glory of the other two Persons. To put it more clearly - God's providential involvement in Christian Theism is Highly Personal and interpersonal. This uniqueness once again sets Christian theism apart.

4. Miraculously revealing
Christian theism has been seen to be unique and  set apart from its competitors due to the unique Trinitarian nature of the One God. In this final point, the miraculous work of God and thus His revelatory activity are uniquely revealed in Christian Theism in ways unheard of in the other versions. For one thing, Judaism and Islam no nothing of an incarnation. Furthermore, both (in different ways) do not focus their belief systems around Jesus. Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is the full revelation of God in human flesh (John 1:14). The Person of the Son has assumed flesh and truly reveals God because He is God (Colossians 2:9). Mormonism's version of Jesus assumes a body, however since they do not believe in Monotheism, the Mormon Jesus cannot be considered an incarnation of God - but only some sort of lesser deity or spiritual being. 

The second unique trait of Christian theism in regards to God's miraculous revelatory activity is the resurrection of Jesus. Islam denies Jesus ever died on the cross, and has nothing substantive to say when it comes to the resurrection. Judaism conceives of resurrection as something that will occur at the end of history, and thus the idea of any resurrection occuring beforehand is foreign to their worldview. 

Mormonism tends to focus more on alleged appearances of their version of Jesus in the Americas than his resurrection. Also, unlike the Biblical Christ, the Mormon accounts of their version of Jesus appearing in the Americas cannot be corroborated by historical investigation. Moreover, the Book of Mormon is silent on details such as the empty tomb and the discovery of such by the disciples. 

Thirdly, the Bible itself is unique in that it has verified fulfilled prophecy. Neither the Quran nor the book of Mormon has any examples. 

We could go on, but in this post we have explored Christian theism from the standpoint of its uniqueness. When engaging in dialogue with other non-Christian worldviews, we must be sure that when asserting and defending Theism - that we specify Christian Theism.