By Pastor Stephen Feinstein
Hello everyone. I do apologize in not writing last week, but
I was swamped with many obligations. Well, I now I get to continue with an
important subject. Last time I wrote about the existence of personality, and
how the fact that we are persons truly creates a problem for all non-Christian
worldviews. Well, Francis Schaeffer, in the The
God Who is There, builds upon this by also arguing that Christianity
provides a unifying theory of knowledge. Unbelievers cannot find the grand
unifying theory since they have separated knowledge into two categories. If you
have no idea of what I am talking about, just read a few of the previous posts
and you will pick it up quickly. In this posting, the focus will be on God’s
communication with mankind.
Because God is personal, and because He made us to be
personal, then it stands to reason that God can communicate in a meaningful way
to His creatures made in His image. The mysticism viewpoint (regardless of its
variant) declares God to be unknowable, but this is because they believe God to
be impersonal. But my last post showed how this is nonsense. Derivative persons
(humans) are real, and thus an original person (God) must exist. And given that
God and man are both personal, it stands to reason that God can communicate as
one person to others.
Human beings have the unique gift of language, by which
communication is possible. Communication can occur three ways: between God and
man, between man and man, and between man and himself. Words have meaning, and
therefore they can communicate real and true things that could be understood.
If this were not the case, then all fields of knowledge are really nonsense and
we should not trust that we know anything. Of course, hardly anyone will ever
say this unless they are able to apply this rule only to theology. Besides the
fact that such thinking is the fallacy of special pleading, common sense tells
us that if God wanted to talk to us in words of human language, then we can
understand those words. This is precisely what God has done through the Bible.
And by communicating with humanity by this means, we do have a unification of
knowledge.
It is impossible to separate knowledge into the two
categories mentioned in previous posts. You cannot separate science and history
from metaphysical truth. You cannot separate our senses from the fact that
absolutes really do exist. God did not reveal His Word to us as fables or
fortune cookie statements of wisdom. Instead, He revealed His word in history.
The Bible contains books that record history. There are historical settings,
circumstances, and people within these books, and God decided to reveal
religious truth in this context. So if the Bible is what it claims to be (God’s
Word) then what the Bible says about history must be true.
The same can be said about science. The Bible speaks of the
creation of universe, and man was placed within that universe. Therefore, what
the Bible says about the universe must be true and is relevant to science. Now
of course, this does not mean that the Bible is a history or science book. It
is not. It is God’s Word given to His people in the context of history and the
universe. Therefore, the presuppositions that it grants to us do help us to
rightly perform and interpret science and to write and interpret history. This
truth refutes the New Theology, whether it be Neo-Orthodoxy or New Liberalism,
because they argue that the Bible has historical and scientific errors. What
sense would there be for an omnipotent God to reveal truth in the course of
history, but to then make historical errors in doing so? What sense would there
be for an omniscient God to reveal truth to man that He placed within the
universe, but then to make errors about the nature of the universe? It would
make no sense at all.
Thus, from the Christian perspective, the Scriptures provide
the unity over all knowledge since God has spoken truth in linguistic
propositional form concerning Himself, man, history, and the universe. There is
unity in knowledge because God has spoken truth into all areas of knowledge.
Some might falsely say that if God has spoken truth into the field of science,
then why do science at all? It would be wasted energy. This simply is not true.
Just because God communicates truly does not mean that God communicates exhaustively.
In other words, what God has communicated is 100% true in what it says, but it
is not 100% exhaustive. He tells us true things, but He does not tell us
everything.
Finite beings could not meet the requirement of being able
to learn exhaustively anyway. Think of it this way. No man on earth can have
exhaustive knowledge of even a square inch of the earth. To have such knowledge
would require that a man could possibly know every subatomic particle of that
square inch not just now, but for the past, present, and future. He would have
to know all of the weather conditions for all of history and the future and be
able to show how this changed or altered the square inch. He would have to know
every human foot that stepped over that inch along with every animal. I think
you get the point. Exhaustive knowledge is impossible, but true knowledge is
possible. God has revealed true knowledge to us, and He has given us the
ability to discover countless amazing things about the universe that He
created. These discoveries count as true knowledge. He has created a uniform
universe with predictable laws of nature so that experiments have lasting meaning.
He created humans with the capacity to use logic so that we can compare classes
and categories to make correct deductions. These facts alone demonstrate that
God wants finite man to learn of the truth He has built into the external
world. Christians should be the most ambitious of scientists since every
discovery shows one more truth about the world, and demonstrates in yet another
way just how awesome God really is.
Theological liberals believe we have an inescapable tension
with our beliefs about God communicating with man. If God is infinite, and man
is finite, then how can God communicate truth about Himself in a meaningful way
to finite creatures? After all, by nature we cannot understand infinite.
Therefore, they would say that it is impossible for God to communicate to us in
a meaningful way. So to them, the Bible cannot be what it says it is. Francis
Schaeffer shuts this down rather easily. God does not relate to us through
infinity, but through personality. In other words, God is totally unique in His
attribute of infinite. We are no closer to God in this regard than a single
rock in my backyard. We are not less finite than a fish, dog, tree, etc. There
is an inseparable gap between infinite and finite. However, in terms of
personality, we are far closer to God than anything else. Dogs, cats, fish,
trees, etc., are not persons. They do not have the attribute of personality as
we do.
Schaeffer illustrates this with two diagrams. The first
diagram is titled “infinite” and is set up as follows: 1) God is listed at the
top; 2) A line representing a chasm is placed beneath God; 3) Man, animals,
plants, and machines are placed together below that line. Man, animals, plants,
and machines are all equally distant from God in terms of infinite. As I said,
we are no less finite than those other things listed. However, the second
diagram is titled “personality” and is set up as follows: 1) God is listed at
the top; 2) Man is listed right under Him; 3) The chasm line is below man; 4) Animals,
plants, and machines are placed below the line.
Since man is above the chasm here, it means we share the attribute of
personality with God, and therefore through that means God can communicate with
us.
The theological liberals simply assume that God is not
personal, and thus they erase the second diagram. If only the first diagram
existed, then it is true that God could not communicate in a meaningful way
with us, since He would be infinite and impersonal. However, God is personal,
and He created us as persons, and therefore the second diagram does exist and
it accounts for meaningful divine communication. Remember what I said earlier.
The fact that derivative persons exist (us), an original person must be the
source (God). No human has ever observed the personal come from the impersonal,
but we have all observed the impersonal come from the personal. We have seen
personal humans create impersonal machines. We have never seen an impersonal
machine create a personal human. So the very experience of reality proves that
God must be personal since we are persons. This then not only makes divine
communication possible and
understandable, but it makes it necessary. This attribute shared between us and
God necessitates a relationship, and this relationship necessitates
communication.
An important implication comes from this. Abstract absolutes
such as love, justice, good, evil, etc., are real things that we understand
precisely because God defines them as such. We, being made in His image, are
hardwired to understand these absolutes and live according to them. This is why
no human can escape them as I demonstrated in previous posts. Everyone who
claims to live without absolutes simply lies to themselves. Well, if there are
no absolutes, and all that exists is an impersonal reality, then something as
important as love does not really exist. It cannot be reduced to matter in
motion, otherwise it would be meaningless. It cannot exist if no objective abstract
absolutes exist, since love is an abstract absolute. Yet, all humans talk about
love, fall in love, and claim to support love. However, apart from the God of
the Bible, love cannot and would not exist as a meaningful reality. It would be
a nonsense word. Love exists because God exists, and God is love. The members
of the Trinity exercised perfect and pure love toward one another for all
eternity. Love is a property of persons, not things, and thus the three persons
of the Trinity exercised this personal attribute of love to an infinite degree
for all time. We as persons, made in the image of God, also are able to
exercise this attribute of love as though it is a real thing because it is a
real thing. Unbelievers have no reason to treat love as though it is real, but
they do.
They even get political about it and support notions like
gay marriage. They do this all in the name of love. They treat love like it is
real, but then deny the only foundation that love could ever be based upon –
God. And that very foundation (God) has defined and declared what love is like.
He has authority over love since it is His attribute. And yet with gay
marriage, fallen man rebels against what God has revealed about love. It is
quite strange. They appeal to love even though it would be meaningless on the
grounds of their worldview, they demand us to agree with them, and all the
while they thoughtlessly reject the foundation of love. So even in the manner
that the world loves, they rebel against God. It is absolutely astonishing.
Due to the fact that we are persons, and God is a person,
communication is possible. This divine communication to humans also grounds the
abstract absolutes in an unchangeable reality. It explains why they exist and
why we live by them. And it objectively defines such attributes setting the
standard for them. Truly then, divine communicate is the basis for humans
having a grand unifying theory. Not surprisingly, fallen man blinds himself to
all of this and perverts the absolutes that God has given us. They then
hypocritically claim all is relative, but then attempt to force all people to
accept their definitions of these things. Only one word can them – irrational.
No comments:
Post a Comment