BibleIssues

This blog contains some of the author's reflections on the Bible and its contents. For discussions of religious controversies, click here. For discussions of more basic philosophical issues, please go to www.megaquestions.com. Also, you can view the pages in other languages (click here to do this).

Name:
Location: Concord, California, United States

Resident of Concord, CA

Monday, September 06, 2010

Christian Theism: Only Two Logical Options

Historic, biblical Christianity, by its very nature, is an all-or-nothing proposition. It can only exist if the Scriptures are true. Anything short of that would be something other than biblical Christianity.

What is the best approach to choosing the right option? Perhaps the best way is to approach it just like any other issue in which you have two options, both of which have important implications for your life.

To begin with, in a strictly logical sense, if the methodology for arriving at a given conclusion is defective, it does not necessarily mean that the conclusion is incorrect. It only means that the conclusion is not supported by the methodology, and hence, from a strictly logical point of view, the question remains open. If the methodology for arriving at a given conclusion is sound, however, and the starting premises are correct, we have no reason to doubt the conclusion.

Next, we need to ask, "What makes Christianity unique?" In the Scriptures we have accounts of multiple eyewitnesses to historic events, and the most unique event is surely the resurrection. How pivotal is this event? As the apostle Paul states, ". . . if Christ is not risen . . . we are of all men the most pitiable (I Corinthians 15:16-20). For if Jesus was resurrected, then the only rational option is that He is who He said He is, and by extension we are duty-bound to understand, believe, and submit to the teachings of His apostles. Conversely, in a strictly logical sense, if Jesus was not resurrected, the teachings of the apostles would not simply be non-authoritative, but those who preach them would be guilty of giving people a false hope and perpetuating a lie. (Of course, in a logical sense, if the atheists are correct, no one would have a basis for saying anything is right or wrong, and such a world view easily accommodates a "might makes right" approach to things.)

Finally, if Christian theism is correct, which would necessarily mean that apostolic teaching is absolutely authoritative, since the biblical record of apostolic teaching does not address every issue in explicit detail, it is still possible to arrive at many incorrect conclusions regarding what the apostles taught due to the use of defective methodology. Therefore, the burden of proof would be on those who promote any teaching which is not unambiguously and explicitly stated in the biblical record of apostolic teaching. Even if such teaching could be clearly shown to accurately reflect apostolic teaching, it certainly would not belong in the same category as that of the inspired text of Scripture.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,