We serve a certain God, not a probable God!

Posted: June 11, 2012 in Covenental Apologetics

Do we serve a probable God, or a certain God?

If we were to ask, do you love your wife/husband, or another family member dearly? I am sure that you would answer emphatically that you did, and that you loved them very much!

Would we not find it odd then, if I asked you, does your wife/husband/family member exist, you would reply : “probably”?

Would you not think it a very odd thing?

In the same way, if you are a Christian, if I were to ask you, do you love God and His Son Jesus Christ, I am also sure that you would emphatically say that you did, even lament the fact that you lapse in a perfect demonstration of it and that you would like to love Him more!

Yet we seem content to answer the next question and render God as a mere probability, even by those calling themselves Christian apologists!

Might I suggest something is deeply wrong and clearly inconsistent here?

Firstly, probability itself, as with anything else, is not a ‘neutral’ thing. There is no neutrality between the believer and the unbeliever, every fact of the universe is either the way it is because God has already given it its interpretation, or that it is uninterpreted and still to be done so by man.

Probability is based on possibility – and this instantly puts us in antithesis with the unbeliever, as they do not believe God exists, or that He can even be a possibility in their world-view, therefore attempting to appeal to what is probable with the unbeliever is simply a fools errand! God determines what is possible, and what is probable – these are NOT neutral concepts.

To quote Greg Bahnsen on this in regards to a quick history of Christian apologetics:

“Historically, when David Hume and Immanuel Kant exposed the invalidity of the theistic proofs, apologists generally balked at returning to revelation as the basis for their certainty of God’s existence. They elected, rather, to maintain status in the blinded eyes of the “worldly wise” by attempting to prove Christianity’s credibility by means of arguments that hopefully pointed toward the probability of God’s existence and Scripture’s truth. They settled for a mere presumption (plus pragmatic assurance) in favor of a few salvaged items (i.e., “fundamentals”) from the Christian system. Refusing to presuppose the sovereign God revealed in the Bible as the source of all material and logical possibility, and hence failing effectively to challenge or internally criticize the very feasibility of knowledge, logic, factuality, interpretation, or predication as based on the boasted autonomy of “free-thinkers,” apologists found their defenses razed by those who (likewise) postulated that bare possibility was a principle more ultimate than God. Deterministic science disqualified miracles, positivistic sociology relativized morality, historical criticism faulted the Bible, and Kant’s transcendental dialecticism invalidated cognitive revelation. Idealism made God finite, pragmatism made Him irrelevant, and logical analysis made Him meaningless. Process thinking limited God by pulling Him down from the throne of His sovereignty and pulling everything up into Him for the panentheistic drive to omega point, while phenomenology made the universe into a machine for the fabricating of gods, and existentialism made man himself the being who strives to become God. By appealing to probability, apologists saw Christianity relegated to the museum of mere religious hypotheses (i.e., “possibilities”), rather than embraced as the actual truth of God. The present urgency for Christians, then, is to submit to and adopt a revelational epistemology and scriptural apologetic that are honoring to God and powerful tools against unbelief. The Christian apologist must not trade away the certainty of knowing God for a probability or subjective moral conviction; he must unashamedly presuppose the truth of the Word of Christ in Scripture as congruous with the inescapable self-revelation of God in nature and man’s constitution. Then he will be equipped with spiritual weapons that are mighty to the pulling down of every reasoning that exalts itself against God. God’s self-attesting revelation must be taken as the firm foundation of all knowledge, the final test for truth, and the standard for living. We are under obligation to submit every facet of our lives to Scripture—whether it be morals, vocation, emotions, deliberations, reasoning, or even the use of logic.”

Bahnsen, Greg (2009-03-01). Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated & Defended (Kindle Locations 390-415). American Vision. Kindle Edition.


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