The following clip is a debate with Dr. William Lane Craig and Shabir Ally on the resurrection of Jesus the Christ. Did the resurrection actually take place? Is it really a necessity for Christianity?
The Resurrection of Jesus
JDG
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Intelligent Design: A Disguise for Creationism?
Here is a small clip from CNN on Intelligent Design. Do you think Intelligent Design is a disguise for Creationism?
***This clip does not provide a detailed description of what Intelligent Design is. I recommend further research, if you are unsure on what it is about.
Intelligent Design
JDG
***This clip does not provide a detailed description of what Intelligent Design is. I recommend further research, if you are unsure on what it is about.
Intelligent Design
JDG
An Unavoidable Question
At the very depths of every man's being, beneath a mulish heart, reason, and the enchantment of maturity, lays a forgotten child; a child that holds fast to humility, longs for innocence, and bows down to fear. It is evident across cultures and throughout the ages of time that every man, when faced with the necessity to peer at this small child, comes to realize that he desires a hero, for good to triumph evil, for a savior to save him from the peril of a fallen world. Stories have echoed this truth, while the multitudes have flocked to read their deepest desire being played out in fantasies. There is a peculiar rumor, however, that the desire is drawn to something more than fictional fantasies, and that fairy tales are mere alterations of a real story; a story with real people, a true hero, a fallen world, and a genuine hope. Mankind is a key part of this continuous story that began before their existence, and their hero has already come.
C.S. Lewis explained Christianity's offer as this, "That we can, if we let God have His way, come to share in the life of Christ." Why would any man want to share in the life of Christ? There are two natures being discussed. Man's nature is sinful, fallen, and in opposition to God's nature; he is utterly dead. It is not simply the acts that are committed, but his very nature that is evil. Everything he does is affected by this truth. For example, he loves conditionally. He first thinks, consciously or unconsciously, "Is this person worthy of my love? Will I gain recognition for my choosing to love this person? Will they love me back? What's in it for me?" A man is obligated to act according to his nature, i.e., he cannot escape the very essence of who he is. God is also compelled to act according to his nature, though it is entirely opposite of man's. His nature is good, holy, right, perfect, and just; he is life. God loves unconditionally. He does not ask the questions that man asks, but loves regardless of condition; Jesus would have still gone to the cross, even if no man had chosen to accept the hope he was and is offering.
Some are convinced and would argue that they have seen men act in the likes of God. Their sight has not misled them, but it is only one type of human being that is capable of doing this. Two events take place simultaneously as a person enters into God's plan through the Christ, and this is now getting at what Lewis was referring to. When a man humbly chooses to submit to God's will in Christ, his entire evil being is laid to rest; he has now shared in Christ's death and awaits a future resurrection at the fulfillment of all things. The Christ-man has died to his old self and contains a new hope, but he still does not find himself to be in the freedom found in only the resurrection, i.e., his perfection is not complete. However, when the man chose to die to Christ, something else took place: the Spirit of truth and life entered into him, a deposit guaranteeing what is to come. The man is still weak in his flesh, which is sinful, but now has God's spirit dwelling within him; it is the Spirit that distinguishes the Christ-man from the lost chap living next door. This entire process is a supernatural event, and it causes men to act in the likeness of God. When a witness sees a man committing extraordinary, heavenly acts, then there is only one explanation: it is God himself bearing his likeness through the man. The witness is seeing first hand the result of a transformation, a being that is on his way from fallen man to perfect man, from death to life.
This result comes only through a supernatural story, which has split history in two and has echoed through the entire cosmos. It is the story that draws all men and that only God himself could have written. Within every human being there dwells a fixation, a longing to be a part of this story; to have life, to be in perfect harmony with God, and to dwell in his glory is what men were created for. Therefore, Lewis states, "If you want joy, power, peace, eternal life, you must get close to, or even into, the thing that has them...Once a man is united to God, how could he not live forever? Once a man is separated from God, what can he do but wither and die?" It is only in Christ that men find escape from their sinful nature, and it is only in Christ that men truly find what they were created for, i.e., they become what a man was intended to be. It is by the cross that mankind was forgiven, and by the resurrection that they were given a new hope in Christ. Paul writes, "[God] made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions."
The question, why would anyone want to share in the life of Christ, is the wrong question. It should be asked, "How could anyone not want to share in the life of Christ?" That small child within every human being longs for something more, longs for hope, and longs for God's story; Jesus the Christ is the true hero that has saved the world from peril. The hope of Christianity is that one day fallen man will experience that resurrection, if they choose to share in his life. God wrote the perfect story: the world was fallen and hopeless, God sent a hero, good triumphed evil, and now mankind has hope. Christ demanded, "Follow me," but many will choose a different path. What keeps men from the cross is not intelligence or reason, but pride; to come to the cross requires humility. A man can choose a different path, believing that he will somehow save himself. That path, however, will lead only to death; the path to the cross is the only road that leads to the resurrection. It is in the pursuit of Christ that men find life, and more of themselves than they ever thought possible. "Look for yourself, and you will find in the long run only hatred, loneliness, despair, rage, ruin, and decay. But look for Christ and you will find Him, and with Him everything else thrown in." Lewis didn't understand a religion; he understood the story, and became a part of it. The question now stands, "Will you?"
JDG
***This post was written by myself, but was taken from The Things Above by Tyler Taber.
C.S. Lewis explained Christianity's offer as this, "That we can, if we let God have His way, come to share in the life of Christ." Why would any man want to share in the life of Christ? There are two natures being discussed. Man's nature is sinful, fallen, and in opposition to God's nature; he is utterly dead. It is not simply the acts that are committed, but his very nature that is evil. Everything he does is affected by this truth. For example, he loves conditionally. He first thinks, consciously or unconsciously, "Is this person worthy of my love? Will I gain recognition for my choosing to love this person? Will they love me back? What's in it for me?" A man is obligated to act according to his nature, i.e., he cannot escape the very essence of who he is. God is also compelled to act according to his nature, though it is entirely opposite of man's. His nature is good, holy, right, perfect, and just; he is life. God loves unconditionally. He does not ask the questions that man asks, but loves regardless of condition; Jesus would have still gone to the cross, even if no man had chosen to accept the hope he was and is offering.
Some are convinced and would argue that they have seen men act in the likes of God. Their sight has not misled them, but it is only one type of human being that is capable of doing this. Two events take place simultaneously as a person enters into God's plan through the Christ, and this is now getting at what Lewis was referring to. When a man humbly chooses to submit to God's will in Christ, his entire evil being is laid to rest; he has now shared in Christ's death and awaits a future resurrection at the fulfillment of all things. The Christ-man has died to his old self and contains a new hope, but he still does not find himself to be in the freedom found in only the resurrection, i.e., his perfection is not complete. However, when the man chose to die to Christ, something else took place: the Spirit of truth and life entered into him, a deposit guaranteeing what is to come. The man is still weak in his flesh, which is sinful, but now has God's spirit dwelling within him; it is the Spirit that distinguishes the Christ-man from the lost chap living next door. This entire process is a supernatural event, and it causes men to act in the likeness of God. When a witness sees a man committing extraordinary, heavenly acts, then there is only one explanation: it is God himself bearing his likeness through the man. The witness is seeing first hand the result of a transformation, a being that is on his way from fallen man to perfect man, from death to life.
This result comes only through a supernatural story, which has split history in two and has echoed through the entire cosmos. It is the story that draws all men and that only God himself could have written. Within every human being there dwells a fixation, a longing to be a part of this story; to have life, to be in perfect harmony with God, and to dwell in his glory is what men were created for. Therefore, Lewis states, "If you want joy, power, peace, eternal life, you must get close to, or even into, the thing that has them...Once a man is united to God, how could he not live forever? Once a man is separated from God, what can he do but wither and die?" It is only in Christ that men find escape from their sinful nature, and it is only in Christ that men truly find what they were created for, i.e., they become what a man was intended to be. It is by the cross that mankind was forgiven, and by the resurrection that they were given a new hope in Christ. Paul writes, "[God] made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions."
The question, why would anyone want to share in the life of Christ, is the wrong question. It should be asked, "How could anyone not want to share in the life of Christ?" That small child within every human being longs for something more, longs for hope, and longs for God's story; Jesus the Christ is the true hero that has saved the world from peril. The hope of Christianity is that one day fallen man will experience that resurrection, if they choose to share in his life. God wrote the perfect story: the world was fallen and hopeless, God sent a hero, good triumphed evil, and now mankind has hope. Christ demanded, "Follow me," but many will choose a different path. What keeps men from the cross is not intelligence or reason, but pride; to come to the cross requires humility. A man can choose a different path, believing that he will somehow save himself. That path, however, will lead only to death; the path to the cross is the only road that leads to the resurrection. It is in the pursuit of Christ that men find life, and more of themselves than they ever thought possible. "Look for yourself, and you will find in the long run only hatred, loneliness, despair, rage, ruin, and decay. But look for Christ and you will find Him, and with Him everything else thrown in." Lewis didn't understand a religion; he understood the story, and became a part of it. The question now stands, "Will you?"
JDG
***This post was written by myself, but was taken from The Things Above by Tyler Taber.
William Lane Craig: The Origins of the Universe
A friend recently posted this video to my facebook wall. It is a good piece from Dr. Craig. Fill free to watch it, and let me know what you think.
The Origins of the Universe
JDG
The Origins of the Universe
JDG
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
MAKING SENSE OF IT ALL: PASCAL AND THE MEANING OF LIFE
The yearning to make sense of it all appears evident throughout culture and time, but is there an objective light of truth waiting for every individual towards the end of the muddled, darkened tunnel of questioning? If there is a light, will it merely illuminate the conclusion that the meaning of life is subjective and relative to each individual? Thomas Morris, guided by thoughts from Pascal, in his book, Making Sense of It All, attempts to proclaim and reveal the meaning of life to be found only in Jesus the Christ, the light at the end of the tunnel. Are his attempts successful in persuading the reader towards his conclusion, or do they only make known another biased, subjective perspective on the meaning for humanity? The purpose of this review is not to answer whether or not there is an objective truth, but to rather show Morris’ successes and failures in presenting his argument for the ultimate truth being found only in the Christ. His case for Jesus is driven by philosophical insights from Pascal, along with a certain presupposition. It is this presupposition that must first be addressed.
Within the chapter, The Folly of Indifference, Morris asks the question if whether or not humanity’s activities involve any meaning, and then answers the question from a Judeo-Christian perspective; it this viewpoint that appears to be the driving force for the rest of the book, and is the eventual cause for his conclusion (27). Is the reasoning behind the answer, however, sufficient for all readers? The skeptic, who is addressed in chapter five, can easily refute the reply. For in the fifth chapter, Morris describes the belief-forming processes: “We form our beliefs about the world in many ways, directly from sense experience, from the testimony of others, from memory, and from various inferential processes of reasoning operating upon what has been given to us by sense experience, testimony, and memory” (78). Sense experience, testimony, and memory affect a key feature within the human mind, i.e. imagination. Morris uses both Pascal and Albert Einstein to explain how “’imagination is more important than knowledge;’ it has a great power for good, and, correspondingly, it has great power to deceive” (77). The imagination, effected by our everyday experiences, can be the cause of deception; can the trickery from imagination be the cause for the existence of religion (e.g. Christianity)? Morris does say that “much in life is up to us” (27). Is it possible that the existence of a religion like Christianity is up to mankind? A skeptic, much like an evolutionist who denies the existence of a purposeful cosmos, can and does construct an argument against Morris using Morris’ terminology: “Certain men are capable of containing chemical imbalances within their brain, which is further influenced by ‘sense experience and the testimony of others,’ and can cause a deceitful imagination; an imagination that leads them to construct false ideologies such as religion.” For the skeptic, Morris puts himself in a bind early on, by appearing to suppose that all his readers will accept Judeo-Christianity as a legitimate voice for asserting an objective truth on all humanity. The skeptic, if paying close attention, will pick up on this assertion, leading him/her to quietly place the book down, due to an unwillingness to accept such “mythological or irrational” thinking, before even reading the chapter on his/her own skepticism. 21st century society, especially within the United States, is highly cynical towards religion in general, leaving Morris’ book unappealing. Thus, with the establishment of Christianity rearing the argument throughout the rest of the book, the work of Morris will likely only attract those who already claim Christianity to be true or those who are at least willing to accept the voice of religion as a liable explanation to the meaning of it all. Therefore, the rest of this paper will be directed towards addressing whether or not Morris does well in satisfying these select listeners.
Morris includes a chapter, Marks of the Truth, on distinguishing Christianity from other religions, in order to affirm his conclusion that one being in Jesus the Christ can only know the true meaning of life. He did well in adding this chapter for two reasons: 1) so that those who claim, “Any religion can hold the meaning of life; i.e. whatever religion makes a person feel he/she has meaning is ‘okay,’” will see each religion claiming something entirely different than the next one, and 2) so that his readers will see Christianity as the true and superior religion among all others. Though Morris does well inserting this chapter, there are a few arguments that fail to sufficiently defend Christianity’s truth. First, however, it needs to be addressed how Morris does not distinguish the one thing that makes all religions different. He states, “Every religion involves a threefold conceptual structure: (1) a diagnosis of what is awry in human life, (2) a conception of ideal human existence, and (3) the specification of a path of salvation, a route from our current plight to that ideal state” (148); he later states, drawing from Pascal, “Religions are not all equals” (158). The general nature of all religions is the same, but their difference lies in the means by which salvation is obtained; Christianity is separated from all others through Jesus the Christ, the God of all the cosmos, who is the Christians’ means of salvation. Morris doesn’t specifically explain how all religions can have the same general structure, but also be completely different from each other due to the means by which salvation is obtained. Thus, he doesn’t adequately fulfill the first purpose of writing this chapter.
Furthermore, there are two arguments used in this chapter which do not suitably present the truth of Christianity. The first one is the success argument. Pascal believed that, “Under persecution, the Christian faith indeed has often flourished and even, in the end, prevailed. Surely its success, in even the most difficult of conditions, is a solid mark of its truth” (150). Morris later expresses the statements of Pascal, saying, “Behold how the Savior’s doctrine is everywhere increasing, while all idolatry and everything opposed to the faith of Christ is daily dwindling and losing power, and falling” (151). Success is misleading, and Morris does well in advocating a necessary carefulness to be used when holding to this argument. 1 Corinthians tells readers of two types of wisdom: God’s wisdom and man’s wisdom. What is seen in the eyes of man as good may not be seen as good to God. Just because man finds an ideology, person, government, or thing appealing, which may lead to a success for the directed object or person, doesn’t mean this is good nor does is state the object of attention to be true. For example, though Hitler’s government was successful in Germany for a time, it does not lead to the conclusion that his government was true and good. Though Islam and Judaism have maintained themselves for centuries and centuries, their success of being able to withstand the test of time does not lead to their beliefs being true and good. The success argument is inadequate in providing strong proof for the truth of Christianity, and so is the qualitative version that Morris proposes. He states this: “The Christian religion is the only religion in human history that has appealed to significant numbers of people in every world culture, has succeeded in changing lives in all times and places, and has managed to have some degree of positive social as well as individual benefits where it has been sincerely embraced” (152). This also is insufficient to provide skeptical religious adherents to hold to Christianity being the ultimate truth. It could also be argued that masses of people have simply been deceived or led to “follow the crowd.” Also, soccer has appealed to significant numbers of people in every world culture, has changed lives, and has managed to have some degree of positive social as well as individual benefits where it has been sincerely embraced. Therefore, should soccer be considered not only a religion but the true religion, a religion that doesn’t even require a god? Should soccer be considered something a person needs to be a part of in order to have a purpose or meaning in life? Qualitative and success arguments appeal to the emotions as being strong explanations for those who already accept Christianity, but they fail to provide strong persuasion for those lingering on the fence.
Morris does provide a good insight to one of Christianity’s characteristics: Christianity is not unique. “If Christian teaching were utterly unique, it would be idiosyncratic rather than universal in appeal, and this would be out of step with its own portrayal of a God who loves and seeks to save all the lost” (157). Christianity does appeal to all cultures throughout time, as history and the present day show how the multitudes will flock to stories, movies, poems, or plays that portray a fallen world, an unusual hero with supernatural abilities and strengths, and the hero’s quest to saving the world from the state of peril. The gospel story is not unique, in that it is longed for an understood within every heart of humanity, though many fail to see and hear that it is the Christ who is the true and ultimate answer to their hearts’ longing. Morris, again with the direction of Pascal, also does well in addressing the issue of reason and its limitations. Christianity can withstand the claims of any one institution or person in apposition to it, because Christianity is the objective truth. However, one will not understand the truth of Christianity through human reason; one must first believe. Morris does well in pointing out Pascal’s claim to intellectual curiosity not being what life is all about. To put it more specifically, to try and figure out life’s meaning through intellectual reasoning alone will lead only to dissatisfaction. In order to understand the meaning of life which Christianity holds the answer to, then one must first believe; God must incline men’s hearts in order for them to believe (186-187). Coming to the realization of what life is all about can only be accomplished when a transformation of the heart has first taken place.
Overall, Morris accomplishes his goal of showing the meaning of life, if several declarations are accepted: 1) that there is an objective truth within the grand scheme of things, 2) that religion holds the answer to the meaning of it all, and 3) that Christianity is the true religion, and thus is the one that holds the right answer to the meaning of life. An argument that states the meaning of life is relative to each individual within different societies is widely accepted by many in the 21st century. Therefore, Morris would do well in placing the word “true” in front of the title; it would be more appropriate to phrase the title as: “Making Sense of it All: Pascal and the True Meaning of Life.” Also, stronger arguments for the existence of God and why Christianity is the true religion, would appeal to a larger audience of skeptics. The entire work seems only to draw those who already accept the statements Morris and Pascal make to the book, and thus leads only to a reaffirmation for them who already know the meaning of life; i.e. to know and be in Jesus the Christ. If it is a book designed to be used for apologetics against skeptics, then it fails in several areas; if it is a book designed for Christians to reaffirm their belief in the Christ being the ultimate answer and meaning to life, then it succeeds in many areas. For the latter, Morris does well in showing an objective truth at the end of the tunnel: Jesus the Christ.
JDG
Morris, V. Thomas. Making Sense of It All: Pascal and the Meaning of Life. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992. 212 p.
Within the chapter, The Folly of Indifference, Morris asks the question if whether or not humanity’s activities involve any meaning, and then answers the question from a Judeo-Christian perspective; it this viewpoint that appears to be the driving force for the rest of the book, and is the eventual cause for his conclusion (27). Is the reasoning behind the answer, however, sufficient for all readers? The skeptic, who is addressed in chapter five, can easily refute the reply. For in the fifth chapter, Morris describes the belief-forming processes: “We form our beliefs about the world in many ways, directly from sense experience, from the testimony of others, from memory, and from various inferential processes of reasoning operating upon what has been given to us by sense experience, testimony, and memory” (78). Sense experience, testimony, and memory affect a key feature within the human mind, i.e. imagination. Morris uses both Pascal and Albert Einstein to explain how “’imagination is more important than knowledge;’ it has a great power for good, and, correspondingly, it has great power to deceive” (77). The imagination, effected by our everyday experiences, can be the cause of deception; can the trickery from imagination be the cause for the existence of religion (e.g. Christianity)? Morris does say that “much in life is up to us” (27). Is it possible that the existence of a religion like Christianity is up to mankind? A skeptic, much like an evolutionist who denies the existence of a purposeful cosmos, can and does construct an argument against Morris using Morris’ terminology: “Certain men are capable of containing chemical imbalances within their brain, which is further influenced by ‘sense experience and the testimony of others,’ and can cause a deceitful imagination; an imagination that leads them to construct false ideologies such as religion.” For the skeptic, Morris puts himself in a bind early on, by appearing to suppose that all his readers will accept Judeo-Christianity as a legitimate voice for asserting an objective truth on all humanity. The skeptic, if paying close attention, will pick up on this assertion, leading him/her to quietly place the book down, due to an unwillingness to accept such “mythological or irrational” thinking, before even reading the chapter on his/her own skepticism. 21st century society, especially within the United States, is highly cynical towards religion in general, leaving Morris’ book unappealing. Thus, with the establishment of Christianity rearing the argument throughout the rest of the book, the work of Morris will likely only attract those who already claim Christianity to be true or those who are at least willing to accept the voice of religion as a liable explanation to the meaning of it all. Therefore, the rest of this paper will be directed towards addressing whether or not Morris does well in satisfying these select listeners.
Morris includes a chapter, Marks of the Truth, on distinguishing Christianity from other religions, in order to affirm his conclusion that one being in Jesus the Christ can only know the true meaning of life. He did well in adding this chapter for two reasons: 1) so that those who claim, “Any religion can hold the meaning of life; i.e. whatever religion makes a person feel he/she has meaning is ‘okay,’” will see each religion claiming something entirely different than the next one, and 2) so that his readers will see Christianity as the true and superior religion among all others. Though Morris does well inserting this chapter, there are a few arguments that fail to sufficiently defend Christianity’s truth. First, however, it needs to be addressed how Morris does not distinguish the one thing that makes all religions different. He states, “Every religion involves a threefold conceptual structure: (1) a diagnosis of what is awry in human life, (2) a conception of ideal human existence, and (3) the specification of a path of salvation, a route from our current plight to that ideal state” (148); he later states, drawing from Pascal, “Religions are not all equals” (158). The general nature of all religions is the same, but their difference lies in the means by which salvation is obtained; Christianity is separated from all others through Jesus the Christ, the God of all the cosmos, who is the Christians’ means of salvation. Morris doesn’t specifically explain how all religions can have the same general structure, but also be completely different from each other due to the means by which salvation is obtained. Thus, he doesn’t adequately fulfill the first purpose of writing this chapter.
Furthermore, there are two arguments used in this chapter which do not suitably present the truth of Christianity. The first one is the success argument. Pascal believed that, “Under persecution, the Christian faith indeed has often flourished and even, in the end, prevailed. Surely its success, in even the most difficult of conditions, is a solid mark of its truth” (150). Morris later expresses the statements of Pascal, saying, “Behold how the Savior’s doctrine is everywhere increasing, while all idolatry and everything opposed to the faith of Christ is daily dwindling and losing power, and falling” (151). Success is misleading, and Morris does well in advocating a necessary carefulness to be used when holding to this argument. 1 Corinthians tells readers of two types of wisdom: God’s wisdom and man’s wisdom. What is seen in the eyes of man as good may not be seen as good to God. Just because man finds an ideology, person, government, or thing appealing, which may lead to a success for the directed object or person, doesn’t mean this is good nor does is state the object of attention to be true. For example, though Hitler’s government was successful in Germany for a time, it does not lead to the conclusion that his government was true and good. Though Islam and Judaism have maintained themselves for centuries and centuries, their success of being able to withstand the test of time does not lead to their beliefs being true and good. The success argument is inadequate in providing strong proof for the truth of Christianity, and so is the qualitative version that Morris proposes. He states this: “The Christian religion is the only religion in human history that has appealed to significant numbers of people in every world culture, has succeeded in changing lives in all times and places, and has managed to have some degree of positive social as well as individual benefits where it has been sincerely embraced” (152). This also is insufficient to provide skeptical religious adherents to hold to Christianity being the ultimate truth. It could also be argued that masses of people have simply been deceived or led to “follow the crowd.” Also, soccer has appealed to significant numbers of people in every world culture, has changed lives, and has managed to have some degree of positive social as well as individual benefits where it has been sincerely embraced. Therefore, should soccer be considered not only a religion but the true religion, a religion that doesn’t even require a god? Should soccer be considered something a person needs to be a part of in order to have a purpose or meaning in life? Qualitative and success arguments appeal to the emotions as being strong explanations for those who already accept Christianity, but they fail to provide strong persuasion for those lingering on the fence.
Morris does provide a good insight to one of Christianity’s characteristics: Christianity is not unique. “If Christian teaching were utterly unique, it would be idiosyncratic rather than universal in appeal, and this would be out of step with its own portrayal of a God who loves and seeks to save all the lost” (157). Christianity does appeal to all cultures throughout time, as history and the present day show how the multitudes will flock to stories, movies, poems, or plays that portray a fallen world, an unusual hero with supernatural abilities and strengths, and the hero’s quest to saving the world from the state of peril. The gospel story is not unique, in that it is longed for an understood within every heart of humanity, though many fail to see and hear that it is the Christ who is the true and ultimate answer to their hearts’ longing. Morris, again with the direction of Pascal, also does well in addressing the issue of reason and its limitations. Christianity can withstand the claims of any one institution or person in apposition to it, because Christianity is the objective truth. However, one will not understand the truth of Christianity through human reason; one must first believe. Morris does well in pointing out Pascal’s claim to intellectual curiosity not being what life is all about. To put it more specifically, to try and figure out life’s meaning through intellectual reasoning alone will lead only to dissatisfaction. In order to understand the meaning of life which Christianity holds the answer to, then one must first believe; God must incline men’s hearts in order for them to believe (186-187). Coming to the realization of what life is all about can only be accomplished when a transformation of the heart has first taken place.
Overall, Morris accomplishes his goal of showing the meaning of life, if several declarations are accepted: 1) that there is an objective truth within the grand scheme of things, 2) that religion holds the answer to the meaning of it all, and 3) that Christianity is the true religion, and thus is the one that holds the right answer to the meaning of life. An argument that states the meaning of life is relative to each individual within different societies is widely accepted by many in the 21st century. Therefore, Morris would do well in placing the word “true” in front of the title; it would be more appropriate to phrase the title as: “Making Sense of it All: Pascal and the True Meaning of Life.” Also, stronger arguments for the existence of God and why Christianity is the true religion, would appeal to a larger audience of skeptics. The entire work seems only to draw those who already accept the statements Morris and Pascal make to the book, and thus leads only to a reaffirmation for them who already know the meaning of life; i.e. to know and be in Jesus the Christ. If it is a book designed to be used for apologetics against skeptics, then it fails in several areas; if it is a book designed for Christians to reaffirm their belief in the Christ being the ultimate answer and meaning to life, then it succeeds in many areas. For the latter, Morris does well in showing an objective truth at the end of the tunnel: Jesus the Christ.
JDG
Morris, V. Thomas. Making Sense of It All: Pascal and the Meaning of Life. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992. 212 p.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)