Unreasonable Faith

I just stumbled across Daniel Florien’s blog, aptly titled “Unreasonable Faith.”  Florien is an apostate Christian who now seems bent on attacking evangelical Christianity constantly.  Reading his arguments on various issues, I am reminded of a passage from G. K. Chesterton:

As an explanation of the world, materialism has a sort of insane simplicity.  It has just the quality of the madman’s argument; we have at once the sense of it covering everything and the sense of it leaving everything out.  Contemplate some able and sincere materialist, as, for instance, Mr. McCabe, and you will have exactly the same unique sensation.  He understands everything, and everything does not seem worth understanding.  His cosmos may be complete in every river and cog-wheel, but still his cosmos is smaller than our world.

Unbelief is a false religion.  It is built on the unproven (and self-contradictory) assumptions of anti-faith.  It cannot claim to stand in an unbiased, objective position from which to evaluate all other viewpoints, including Christianity.  In fact, as Van Til said, unbelievers are like the child who climbs up in her father’s lap in order to slap him in the face; they cannot even attack the Christian faith without standing on Christian assumptions about themselves, about rationality, about predication, about the external world.  Unbelief subsists only on borrowed capital.  Not only is it a false religion, it is also quite boring to boot.  Mr. Florien’s story is a sad one.

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Unreasonable Faith”

  1. Brian Patrick Cork Says:

    Or, Daniel is pushing back and questioning.

    Some times it takes more courage to not accept.

    Could this be a form of open-hearted searching? It certainly invites dialogue and never requires judgment.

    Cork

  2. fenderpooh Says:

    It most certainly requires judgment. “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.'” (Psalm 14:1).

    Let’s not forget that Daniel is the one judging and attacking evangelical Christians. He obviously believes we are worthy of his denouncement; can this sword cut both ways, especially in light of the fact that he blasphemes the God of Heaven? Make no mistake about it: this is a deeply moral issue, upon which I will not refuse to render a moral judgment.

    But I am not in the place of God. I have no authority to stop Daniel from doing what he is doing, and in this sense I will refrain from judgment. Nor can I say that he is forever cut off from the grace of God. I hope that he will find his way back to the faith and into the forgiving arms of his Savior. And dialogue is perfectly fine with me; in fact, it’s something of what I was aiming for in this post, but nobody who reads this blog seems to want to dialogue about this.

    As for the courage of unbelief, this is how I see it: Timothy McVeigh was courageous in a sense. It took a lot of guts to put together the plot that he did in order to bomb the federal building in Oklahoma city. And if one accepts his premise, that the US government is a tyrannical oppressor and that guerilla warfare carried out by private citizens is the only recourse we have in light of such, then his actions make perfect sense. He was willing to face the condemnation of society, and even death, for what he perceived to be a righteous cause.

    But is the courage of Timothy McVeigh praiseworthy? No. Courage that is misdirected only exacerbates sin. If someone sees things the wrong way and then acts courageously on that basis, that kind of courage is forever tainted by the root from which it grew. The same is true here. Atheism is a delusion; it is not true to reality, nor can it cohere with the very foundations of rational thought that it presupposes. It may be courageous in one sense to denounce belief in God, knowing that your community will render moral judgment for that act, but if that act of moral judment on the part of the community is justified, then your courage is not really any more praiseworthy than that of Timothy McVeigh. Courage is only morally praiseworthy when it is employed in the service of truth. Truth, then, and not merely courage, is the real question at issue.

  3. Brian Patrick Cork Says:

    Who knows what opportunity knocks?

    Cork

  4. fenderpooh Says:

    I’m not following the intention of that question. Do you care to elaborate?

  5. Brian Patrick Cork Says:

    More of a supposition.

    Florien could yet be a seeker.

    Action creates activity. I am not trying to be cagey or mystical here. But, anyone that puts so much effort into a stance – even one like atheism, natural laws apply. There is the potential for an opposite reaction with additional stimuli.

    Thumping scripture and verse rarely works. Reflection and representation establish credibility. Scripture can be powerful. But, it’s one-sided. If you really care about Mr. Florien, come up with other positions.

    Cork

  6. markbey Says:

    ” Unbelief is a false religion. ”

    Not believing in god is not a religion my friend. This statement is crap, if not believing in any god is a religion then please explain to me how not believing in Leprachauns, Unicorns or bigfoot not a religion.

    Also if Unbelief in the christian god is a religion then please explain to me how Unbelief in the Ismlamic, Jewish or hindu god not a religion.

  7. fenderpooh Says:

    You’re mixing apples and oranges here. I am speaking of “religion” as a reference to one’s ultimate philosophical commitments. This has nothing to do with Unicorns.

    What I am saying (with an admittedly loose usage of the term “religion”) is that we all have an ultimate commitment to something, whether it be to God, to ourselves, or to something else. Unbelief is not some neutral vantage point where pure, disinterested reason is the only criteria. It too is a faith commitment, every bit as much as Christianity is.

    I am trying to counter the silly notion we picked up from the Enlightenment that naturalism is the result when people use pure, unbiased reason, but all those “religious” folks have corrupted reason with unsubstantiated presuppositions. The truth is that none of us view the world without presuppositions. None of us can avoid making some kind of ultimate faith commitment. Unbelief, in this sense, is just as much a religion as is any other.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: