Sunday, March 26, 2017

Foolishness of Christianity




Being a Christian is foolish in many ways. It is foolish from the perspective of this world. It is foolish to the majority of people living in this world. It is especially foolish from the seemingly enlightened ethos of the modern, twenty-first century, humanism that has become the hegemonic worldview of the post-Christian civilization that dominates the advanced world. One of the problems inherent in living in a post-Christian era is, at least for the evangelist, that most people think they know what Christianity is all about, even if they’ve never read a Bible or gone to church. Because, as is expressed in the term itself, the modern world is “post-Christian,” Christianity is assumed to have outlived its usefulness, and society is presumed to have progressed beyond its former, tribal roots. Education has replaced the need for mythology and superstition. Rational thought can advance and regulate society, and humanity no longer needs Christianity, or religion, to maintain social order.

Is Christianity foolish? By many standards, I believe it really is. But those standards are based upon a humanistic worldview that I don’t subscribe to. I will, however, use that worldview to explain why modern society is rapidly becoming hostile towards Christianity, even in nations that were once beacons of Christian freedom and evangelism to the world. I will expose the foolishness of Christianity from ten viewpoints, all of which have become dominated by humanism. Understand that these viewpoints, or disciplines, in and of themselves are neither humanistic nor theistic in nature, but they are dominant methods for explaining and understanding the world and human behavior, and they have all been influenced by humanistic presuppositions. If we can understand how much these viewpoints influence modern society, and how much the modern practice of these influences have become biased, then we can understand why modern society at large is rejecting the Christian faith. We will also see how the acceptance of some of these values have influenced others. Admittedly, many of my assertions herein are derived from my own observations. Since this concept of “humanism” has already been mentioned, and will be referred to frequently hereafter, it should be defined. The concept is complex, but the operative definition used for this treatise will be, “a doctrine, attitude, or way of life centered on human interests or values; especially: a philosophy that usually rejects supernaturalism and stresses an individual’s dignity and worth and capacity for self-realization through reason.”1

The foolishness of Christianity:
I.                 Scientifically: The definition of science is lengthy, but a good summation is, “knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation.”2 Now let me be clear; I am not claiming that there is anything wrong with science or its pursuit. Even from a theistic perspective, much benefit can be derived from pursuing knowledge and truth regarding the natural world through the scientific discipline. But the modern, hegemonic doctrine of the practical application of science in the academic arena is to deny, and attempt to invalidate, traditional Christian (and other religious) doctrines. The modern application of science operative under humanistic principles rejects the supernatural because its practitioners have no method for observing and testing it. In reality, by definition, anything outside of scientific methodology should not be part of scientific discourse. However, operating from a humanistic agenda, the modern scientific community has crossed the boundary of the discipline to claim that the natural universe is the only reality. Even though macro-mutation as an operative necessity of modern evolutionary understanding has never been observed or tested, it has been accepted as truth. One reason is because any supernatural explanation must necessarily be false, as the existence of the supernatural has already been rejected. Under such a presupposition, the foundational Christian doctrine of creation is a falsehood, and those who believe it are foolish. Other foolish Christian doctrines include the virgin birth, resurrection, and belief in dualism (body and soul/spirit). As these concepts cannot be observed or tested, they are declared fallacy. These practitioners have used presuppositions that already violate the scientific method (macro-mutation as causal of the evolutionary origin of species; denial of the non-natural as reality by currently measurable standards) to disprove other concepts that cannot currently be validated using the scientific method. But it is clear to see how, since science is accepted by some as the only way to understand reality, by scientific practitioners asserting Christian concepts, such as creation, the incarnation, the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, resurrection, the soul/spirit, angels, and even God Himself, are unscientific, those who belief in such concepts must be foolish. The irony is that many of the concepts defined as supernatural might simply be unmeasurable by current scientific understanding and technology, and may be measurable in the future. Perhaps many things currently understood as supernatural may only occupy dimensions beyond those currently measurable; the three spatial and time. Of course, while many people use the mythos propagated by these humanistic practitioners of science to assert that Christianity is foolish, the Bible asserts that, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”3
II.               Philosophically: Just as with science, the definition of philosophy is lengthy, but likewise, a good summation is, “the study of ideas about knowledge, truth, the nature and meaning of life, etc.”4 Again, I am not of the opinion, nor am I claiming, that philosophy as a discipline is intrinsically opposed to theism, or Christianity. In fact, there have been many Christian philosophers over the centuries of the discipline’s practice. But there are two concepts that have risen to prominence as generally accepted philosophical truth, both of which directly oppose foundational Christian doctrines. These philosophical arguments are not necessarily true, but they are generally accepted by many as uncontestable, and are therefore accepted by modern society. The first concept is the argument known as the Epicurean Paradox, or the Problem of Evil. While many may not be familiar with its name or even the individual premises that create its structure, its conclusion seems to be widely circulated and generally understood. In its most simplistic form, it asserts, ‘If an all-powerful, all-knowing, and perfectly good God exists, then evil should not exist; evil does exist; therefore, God does not exist.’ I have discussed this argument at length in another writing of mine, and plan to revisit another aspect of it in the future. For now, let me just say that the long-form of the argument can be dismantled based upon at least two flaws; one being that it commits an informal fallacy of containing a logically flawed premise (which I have written about), and the other being that it contains (at least) one presuppositional assertion that is unprovable (which I plan to write about). Nevertheless, whether the argument stands the test of logic or not, it has gained general acceptance as a basis for rejecting, or at least questioning, the existence of God. The second concept that has gained general acceptance in the mainstream ethos of post-Christian modernism is that of relativism, and specifically, moral relativism. I will refrain from defining or countering this tenet here, as I think most people understand what it means, and the purpose of this writing is not to argue against these viewpoints, but rather to understand how they affect society’s view of Christianity. Needless to say, historic, or traditional, Christianity asserts and assumes moral absolutism, as defined by God, as a foundational truth. Since modern society has accepted both the Epicurean Paradox and moral relativism as truth and standard, it is clear to see how the concept of God, according to Christian theology, and the Biblical standard of morality both become obsolete, and Christianity becomes foolish for continuing to promote both ideals. On the other hand, the Bible asserts, “A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”5

So far, I have discussed two of the ten viewpoints that I wanted to analyze in order to understand and explain how the world views and judges Christianity. Now I will speed things up as we look at the next eight.

III.              Psychologically: Again, the discipline of psychology is neither inherently hostile nor affirming of Christianity. But the positions, assertions, and methods of its practitioners can influence society’s views. The modern community of practitioners of psychology in general, similar to the aforementioned disciplines, have embraced a form of humanism. Using another definition of the term, I would characterize this manifestation of its influence as, “a system of values and beliefs that is based on the idea that people are basically good, and that problems can be solved using reason instead of religion.”6 This view of humanity is in direct conflict with the historic, traditional Christian doctrine of original sin, or inherent depravity, of human beings. To most modern, secular psychologists and their counterparts, the concept of depravity would be considered destructive of human self-worth, self-confidence, and the ability improve one’s condition, life, or self. Therefore, from the perspective of these practitioners, who have again influenced the mainstream of society, the Christian concept of depravity, and essentially sin by extension, are false. After all, what the Bible calls sin, psychological practitioners have redefined as poor choices, mistakes, justifiable behavior under the conditions existing, etc. Adherence to said concepts would therefore make one foolish. By their opinion, this modern version of psychological truth is superior, and they possess greater wisdom than an ancient text. But the Bible says, “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.”7
IV.              Culturally: On the whole, western cultures typically promote the value of the individual, while eastern cultures typically promote the value of the collective. While both can have merit, both can also have drawbacks. But for the purposes of this writing, we will focus on western concept of promoting individualism. Nowhere in history has this concept been more prevalent than the modern world. In modern, western cultures, the value of individualism is supreme. This value has only been enhanced by the philosophical promotion of relativism, and the psychological promotion of justified behavior. Tolerance is the modern mantra; despite the intolerant behavior of its proponents towards those who disagree with their views. Generally speaking, the guiding principle of individual behavior in modern, western cultures is the belief that, as long as it doesn’t hurt someone else, then it isn’t wrong. This attitude is in direct conflict with the absolute moral standards of the Bible, which have been historically promoted by the Christian faith. Building upon the denial of an afterlife by the strict naturalist perspective, it makes perfect sense to live this life in pursuit of one’s pleasures, regardless of whether or not those pleasures are deemed sinful by God’s Word, since God is probably a fable and there might not be an afterlife. Even if God and the afterlife are real, modern practitioners of psychology and science have justified human behavior based upon conditioning, circumstances, and biological impulses anyway, so God won’t judge people according to some ancient tribal codes written down by unenlightened people that lived thousands of years ago. I have engaged in a little bit of hyperbole here for illustration, but it is very easy to see how the values that have become imbedded in modern culture could cause Christianity to further appear foolish. “But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”8
V.               Religiously: It may appear somewhat confusing at first that I would analyze religion as a modern viewpoint from which to declare Christianity foolish. But because of Christianity’s claim of exclusivity as being the only faith through which one can enter relationship with God, it becomes clear why, from the perspective of all the other religions of the world, as well as those who hold no faith, Christianity’s claims appear foolish. Not only does Christianity claim exclusivity, which certainly is absurd to some, it also claims that human beings can only be saved by God’s grace, rather than through their own good works. In fact, Christianity goes so far as to claim that mankind cannot truly perform good works apart from God’s enabling. This is quite contrary to other religions, as well as the generally accepted practical assertions of modern psychology, as previously discussed. Christianity also holds as its central figure, a Savior who was crucified. And finally, for nearly two-thousand years, Christians have been claiming that Jesus will return one day; and for nearly two-thousand years, He hasn’t. From the perspective of those outside the faith, this might start to look embarrassing. For Christianity to claim exclusivity, and to be the sole faith which claims that salvation isn’t merited by works, makes it unique in comparison to many other religions. And for its primary figure to be martyred, and for its prediction of Christ’s return to be unfulfilled for nearly two millennia, makes it look absurd. So it isn’t difficult to see how, from the perspective of religion, Christianity may appear foolish. “For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.”9 “Know this first of all, that in the last days, mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.’”10
VI.              Economically: In general, the modern world promotes and values accumulation of wealth and possessions over most, if not all, other considerations. To accumulate wealth can even be considered a civic duty in some cultures. Contrast this value system with that of historic, traditional Christianity, which teaches that the love of money is at the root of a host of evils. Not only that, but Christianity has traditionally promoted giving to the poor, and giving to the Church for the needs of fellow Christians. Now, I’m not claiming that the world doesn’t have non-Christians who give of their finances altruistically, as this would be erroneous. But I am claiming that the value Christianity places upon temporal wealth stands in contrast to the value placed upon it by the world. The world teaches that one should seek comfort in this life, most often obtained through wealth, because this life is all that we know for sure exists (remember the assertion of modern naturalism). Whereas Christianity teaches that one should invest in heavenly riches in the hereafter and not seek after worldly gain. It is easy to see how, from an economic perspective, the investment values of Christianity can appear foolish. “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?”11 “And I’ll say to myself, ‘You have plenty of grain laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.’ But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’”12
VII.            Socially: This next portion speaks to current, ongoing controversies. The western world has been experiencing a radical transformation over the last few decades regarding its social values. High upon the list of current social issues are the topics of abortion and sexuality. While society at large has moved towards general acceptance of abortion and sexual/gender preference, even renaming the issues as freedom of choice or reproductive rights, and marriage equality or transgender equality/rights/tolerance, Christianity still seems to struggle with acceptance of these issues. What is the problem here? While one side claims that a fetus isn’t human, the other side claims that abortion is murder. While one side claims that people are born with same sex desire or as transgender, the other side claims that such issues represent sexual deviancy or rebellion against God’s natural order. While I won’t try to tackle the issues here, I will simply assert that the movement of societal values has been steadily towards acceptance, and at an increasing pace. As more of society accepts these ideals, Christianity, insofar as its adherents cling to historical positions, appears to stand opposed to progress and thus seems foolish, or worse, hateful. “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.”13 “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools”14
VIII.          Progressively: Although this viewpoint aligns with the aforementioned, I aim to examine different aspects here; namely, education and liberation. Public education has moved beyond simple reading, writing, and arithmetic (not to mention history, science, and other academic disciplines), to embrace an agenda of promoting social change. Oftentimes, this change stands in opposition to the Christian worldview. Likewise, progressive, social liberation from Christian values regarding moral absolutes (sin), sexuality, the nuclear family, gender roles, etc., delegitimizes traditional Christian positions. As society continues to embrace these values deemed as progressive in terms of public education and moral liberation, Christianity will continue to appear more foolish. “Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?”15
IX.              Politically: Let’s be direct here. Expediency wins in politics. Give the people what they want. If one wants to advance in politics, one must learn the art of compromise. Historical, traditional Christianity is not expedient. It doesn’t compromise. There might be organizations or individuals who claim to be Christian that are willing to compromise. But there is always a group that doesn’t. This group has always been around. They were thrown to the lions during the Roman persecutions. They were killed by the medieval inquisitors. They were persecuted by the communists. And they are still persecuted today in various parts of the world for not compromising their faith to align with whatever temporal authority holds the power of life or death over them. Why are they so stubborn? Why do they insist on obeying God rather than man? What do they persist in such folly? From the world’s perspective, what fools these Christians are. “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.’”16
X.                Pragmatically: When all else fails, let’s be pragmatic. Let’s be practical. Theology is just theoretical. Belief is just idealistic. What will actually help me to get where I want to be in this life? That’s what I’m interested in. It’s impossible to know what comes after this, so why waste my time. Why should I endure unnecessary persecution? I don’t even know if the religion is really true, after all. Why suffer? I want to advance. I want to get ahead. Isn’t that what God would want for me anyway? I’ll deal with all these religious things later, after I’ve secured myself and my future. Even if Christianity is true, these Christians say that God is love anyway. He’ll understand; after all, He made this world and put me here. Or He didn’t; in which case, I might as well do the sensible thing, since I’m on my own, after all. “But God chose the foolish things of this world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.”17

True Christianity always has, and always will, stand in opposition to the ways of this world. The world has been upside down ever since the first humans rebelled against their Creator. God has been about the business of restoring human beings to Himself ever since. He is patient, and He allows people to choose to reject Him. But for the sake of His righteousness, His patience has limits. There will come a day when the false wisdom of this world will crash against the reality of His truth. Call upon Him now, while He may be found, for He will save all who call upon His name. (Isaiah 55:6; Romans 10:13)

If being wise in this world means rejecting the Bible and my Lord, then I would rather be a fool for Christ. (1 Corinthians 4:10)

Grace and peace.

Footnotes
1.      Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 3/26/17, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/humanism
2.      Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 3/26/17, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science
3.      Psalm 14:1, New International Version (NIV)
4.      Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 3/26/17, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/philosophy
5.      Proverbs 18:2, English Standard Version (ESV)
6.      Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 3/26/17, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/humanism
7.      1 Corinthians 3:19, New King James Version (NKJV)
8.      1 Corinthians 2:14, NKJV
9.      1 Corinthians 1:22-24, New American Standard Bible (NASB)
10.   2 Peter 3:3-4, NASB
11.   Matthew 16:26, NKJV
12.   Luke 12:19-20, NIV
13.   Proverbs 14:12, NKJV
14.   Romans 1:22, NIV (Romans 1:20-32 for context)
15.   1 Corinthians 1:20, NIV
16.   1 Corinthians 1:18-19, NIV
17.   1 Corinthians 1:27, NIV

No comments:

Post a Comment