Intellect and Faith

Photo by Tyler Drendel - Sunset at Fermi Lab
Photo by Tyler Drendel – Sunset at Fermi Lab

Following from part one of twobeing honest about the who and what of our underlying presuppositions

Think about it: can a finite being measure or define, let alone manipulate, an infinite God?

If God is “big” enough to create a universe so large that we cannot see past the beginning or the end, how do we expect to measure such a God?

We are more comfortable in our own element. We can understand the what and the how of the world we live in, but the who is another matter altogether. Non-believers go no further and declare, the “what” and the “how” to be all there is.

At the same time, believers should not be afraid of facts or science. Facts and science help us to know and understand the what and how of creation – and they point to the Who. If we have an attitude open to the Who, we will see the evidence for God. In fact, it will seem self-evident. If a person wants “proof” before belief, such a person will never be satisfied – especially when the proof is a priori limited to the what and the how.

Continue reading “Intellect and Faith”

A Time for Courage

 (c) Can Stock Photo

(c) Can Stock Photo

We don’t always think about the courage necessary to be a follower of Christ.  Sure, we know the words that Jesus spoke: If you deny me before men, I will deny you before the Father.[1]  But we tend to view those words through the fear of being found wanting.

Fear is a bad motivator. I don’t think our tendency to be afraid of losing our salvation serves us very well.  Perfect love casts out all fear. God is looking for the courageous, not the fearful.

Jesus actually spoke those words in the context of fear.[2] And the message from Jesus is: do not fear! Continue reading “A Time for Courage”

Be Faithful to the Gospel This Election Season

canstockphoto2856260/csp2856260
canstockphoto2856260/csp2856260

Our freedoms in this country may just be the one thing that most undermines the Christian faith in the United States of America. This election cycle has had me doing lots of soul searching. In the process of that soul-searching, it dawns on me that our freedom to choose which person we will vote for in November puts us squarely in a position where we have to compromise our faith.

People have been talking about Donald Trump as if he were the Nebuchadnezzar of the present day, but he isn’t. The people in the days of Nebuchadnezzar had no choice. In the present day, we do have a choice. When Daniel was faced with compromising his faith or being a loyal servant of Nebuchadnezzar, he chose not to compromise his faith, in spite of the consequences.

He could have easily justified a different choice. Continue reading “Be Faithful to the Gospel This Election Season”

Destined for Tribulations

canstockphoto22892406
(c) Can Stock Photo

“I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation[1] and the kingdom and the patient endurance that are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.”

This is how John begins relating the revelations he received that are preserved in the Book of Revelation, the last book of the New Testament. Sometimes we read over things quickly that other times will stick out. This verse sticks out today, perhaps, because we have a good friend who is fighting cancer. Today is also the 15th anniversary of 9/11.

I recently wrote about the charge from atheists that people have faith in God because of wishful thinking. Nothing could be more wishful. True faith is forged only in tribulation. Continue reading “Destined for Tribulations”

Evidence, Love and Faith

Pat, Don & Mulligan 4 - Copy


The 2010 debate between Richard Dawkins, and John Lennox, both professors at Oxford University in England, is interesting to consider if you have the time and inclination. Dawkins is famous for his books supporting atheism and opposing religion. Lennox is a mathematician and philosopher of science who is an outspoken Christian.

The debate uses The God Delusion, a book by Richard Dawkins, as the backdrop. The outline consists of six points (theses) from the book to frame the debate whether science and faith are compatible. Richard Dawkins famously maintains that science and faith are not compatible, and Lennox takes the opposite position.

At one point in the debate, Dawkins attempts to define faith to exclude evidence or reason. Faith is commonly defined as “strong belief or trust in someone or something”. The dictionary definition does not make any reference to evidence. Faith could mean strong belief or trust, with or without evidence. The definition of faith does not necessarily include or exclude evidence or reason.

Dawkins’ definition of faith is loaded – his definition of faith is belief without evidence, or “belief in the teeth of the evidence”. Lennox defines faith as belief supported by strong evidence, and robust faith supported by robust evidence.

In this context, Lennox asked Dawkins a question: he asked, “I assume you have faith in your wife. Is there any evidence for that?” Grinning nervously at the personal nature of the question, Dawkins responded that he had “plenty of evidence” regarding his wife,  and proceeded to give evidence for how he knows his wife loves him.

Dawkins clearly misunderstood what Lennox meant. Lennox was only asking about faith that Dawkins’ wife existed. Dawkins assumed,  however, that Lennox meant whether Dawkins’ wife loved him. This assumption made for an interesting twist to the debate. Continue reading “Evidence, Love and Faith”