“In fact, we must believe by virtue of the absurd.”

Kierkegaard made a number of quotes along these lines, all using the phrase, “by virtue of the absurd.” This is the kind of stuff that a few indignant atheists have a heyday with. But I think this deserves a closer look. Here are my thoughts on the matter.

People are scared of faith. Nobody will admit this. For this reason, many Christians spend their daydreaming on thinking up ways to conclusively prove God’s existence. We attempt to find logical proofs of Christian doctrine or scientific evidence of creation, and we look for miracles because we want undeniable proof of God working in the mortal realm. We even go as far as stretching the truth to create miracles where there aren’t any. The concept of faith scares people so much that we try to rationalize it and change it from belief in the unprovable to objective acceptance of observable facts.

If this sounds familiar, it might be because I had similar things to say about Existential freedom, meaning freedom of choice (and, ultimately, personal responsibility for that choice). This is pretty much the same concept. If we accept a fact, we can’t be held personally responsible for our choice; if we uphold a belief which can never be proven, we hold a lot more responsibility for that belief. So, just like many people try to give their freedom of choice and independent thought away, many Christians try to give their faith away in exchange for flimsy truths and smoke and mirrors.

This is really damaging to many Christians. If our beliefs in God are firmly supported on a table of perceived facts, so to speak, and one of the legs of that table gets kicked out from under us, we scramble to find new support for our belief. Sometimes, we find it; sometimes, we don’t; but sometimes, we replace those legs with other legs of shoddy workmanship, and we trust in that support as much as the old legs. That happens enough times, and eventually the entire table just collapses. When that happens—and there’s a good chance that it will eventually happen—we need faith to fall back on. With enough faith, we don’t need that table at all.

Now, I’m not saying that we should ignore logical fallacies and cease working out our own salvation with fear and trembling. I’m just saying that we need to realize that there are some aspects of faith that can be neither proven nor disproven. If we seek out false certainty as a crutch, it’ll carry us for a while—maybe even our whole lives—but we’re missing out on the deepest parts of faith.

“The fundamental fact of existence is that this trust in God, this faith, is the firm foundation under everything that makes life worth living. It’s our handle on what we can’t see. The act of faith is what distinguished our ancestors, set them above the crowd.”
- Hebrews 11:1-2 (The Message)

Who trusted God was love indeed
And love Creation’s final law
Tho’ Nature, red in tooth and claw
With ravine, shriek’d against his creed
- Alfred Lord Tennyson, In Memoriam A. H. H., Canto 56

With the debate raging about whether to teach intelligent design in the classroom, some in the science community have also suggested that stupid design be taught right alongside it. Why can’t all the nutrients needed for animals to live be found in pond water? Why does nature revolve around a cycle of killing?

Darwin wrote about the Ichneumon spider, who paralyzes its victims, keeps them alive, and lays eggs in them. The victim is still alive when the eggs hatch and the baby spiders eat the live flesh as their first meal. Many in the science community, such as Dawkins and Pinker, point to this as evidence that the natural world was not designed, or, at least, not by a loving God.

(more…)

It is so on the stage, as you know well enough, that someone sits and prompts by whispers; [he is hidden;] he is the inconspicuous one; he is and wishes to be overlooked. But then there is another, he strides out prominently, he draws every eye to himself. For that reason he has been given his name, that is: actor. He impersonates a distinct individual. In the skillful sense of this illusory art, each word becomes true when embodied in him, true through him—and yet he is told what he shall say by the hidden one that sits and whispers. No one is so foolish as to regard the prompter as more important than the actor.

Now forget this light talk of arts. Alas, in regard to things spiritual, the foolishness of many is this, that they in the secular sense look upon the speaker as an actor, and the listeners as theatergoers who are to pass judgment on the artist. But the speaker is not the actor—not in the remotest sense. No, the speaker is the prompter. There are no mere theatergoers present, for each listener will be looking into his own heart. The stage is eternity, and the listener, if he is the true listener (and if he is not, he is at fault) stands before God during the talk. The prompter whispers to the actor what he is to say, but the actor’s repetition of it is the main concern—is the solemn charm of the art. The speaker whispers the word to the listeners. But the main concern is earnestness: that the listeners by themselves, with themselves, and to themselves, in the silence before God, may speak with the help of this address.

The address is not given for the speaker’s sake, in order that men may praise or blame him. The listener’s repetition of it is what is aimed at. If the speaker has the responsibility for what he whispers, then the listener has an equally great responsibility not to fall short in his task. In the theater, the play is staged before an audience who are called theatergoers; but at the devotional address, God himself is present. In the most earnest sense, God is the critical theatergoer, who looks on to see how the lines are spoken and how they are listened to; hence here the customary audience is wanting. The speaker is then the prompter, and the listener stands openly before God. The listener, if I may say so, is the actor, who in all truth acts before God.

- Soren Kierkegaard, Purity of Heart

(more…)

Though it’s not nearly as bad now as it was in, say, high school, I have historically had a lot of angst. I’m talking J.D. Salinger levels of angst, here. Not that I’m always gloomy or pissed off about something—far from it. It was just this vague disposition. (Remember, angst is, by definition, nonspecific.)

After a few solid years for this, I realized that I really had trouble relating to people who hadn’t had some sort of anguish (either external or internal) or Existential crisis. (I’m not quite that pretentious anymore. But if you knew me or read my journal while I was in college, you probably know what I’m talking about.) It seemed to me that people without that kind of life experience had a propensity for identifying and solving all the wrong problems (of problems dealing with anguish or personal crisis, anyway). I had enough trouble identifying those problems by myself, so I pretty much avoided anyone who “just wanted to cheer me up.”

You know that old saying, adversity breeds character? The opposite is also true. All of that really seemed to come together when I read this quote from Nicholas Berdyaev:

Not the worst but the best of mankind suffer the most. The intensity with which suffering is felt may be considered an index of a man’s depth. The more the intellect is developed and the soul refined … the more sensitive does one become to pain, not only the pains of the soul but physical pains as well. … But for pain and suffering, the animal in man would be victorious.

(more…)

Scientology: endorsed by Tyler Durden.

A recent conversation on the predestination of salvation got me started thinking about this. Well, more generally, about the whole Calvinism versus Armenianism debate. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, those are two schools of Christian thought, both of which came about in the 16th Century.

Just a warning: This isn’t really one of my fun posts. I’m doing some real soul-searching here, so you get bonus points if you stick with me.

Here’s a primer on each of them (taken from the Wikipedia articles):

Calvinism

• As a consequence of man’s fall into sin, every person is born enslaved to the service of sin.
• God’s choice from eternity of those whom he will bring to himself is not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people; rather, it is unconditionally grounded in God’s mercy alone.
• Jesus’ atonement of sin was definite and certain in its design and accomplishment. It would be unjust for God to pay the penalty for some people’s sins and then still condemn them for those sins, all those whose sins were atoned for must necessarily be saved. Moreover, since in this scheme God knows precisely who the elect are and since only the elect will be saved, there is no requirement that Christ atone for sins in general, only for those of the elect.
• The saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and, in God’s timing, overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. So if He wants you to be saved, you will be saved.
• Since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end. Those who apparently fall away either never had true faith to begin with or will return.

Armenianism

• Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation.
• Salvation is possible only by God’s grace, which cannot be merited.
• No works of human effort can cause or contribute to salvation.
• God’s election is conditional on faith in the sacrifice and Lordship of Jesus Christ.
• Christ’s atonement was made on behalf of all people.
• God allows his grace to be resisted by those who freely reject Christ.
• Believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace through persistent, unrepented-of sin.

I’ve considered myself an Armenian for my entire adult life, which I think actually led me to my interest in Existentialism. Armenianism seems a natural fit with Existentialism, with the focus on individual choice and the rejection of essence before existence. Also, Armenianism seems to mesh more with what I believe to be God’s character. So I know what I believe. But, if I’m going to call myself a Christian, I need to go back to the source documents (the Bible) and check my beliefs against that, which is something I haven’t done extensively in this manner.

It’s not that I reject Calvinism in its entirety. For instance, the concept of total depravity (the first bullet point under Calvinism above) has a very valid place in many Christian schools of thought. I think total depravity is a gateway drug into Calvinism, actually, but that’s a thought for another time. Anyway, I don’t think either school gets it entirely wrong (or, most likely, entirely right either).

I’m going to be making a few posts over the next few days examining each of these. I know I have some smart friends out there who have given this far more thought than I have, and I also know I have some very smart friends who may not have given it critical thought but still have opinions on it. I’d like to hear from all of you. I realize this is opening up my blog to the flame wars that have been ensuing since the 16th Century, but it’ll help me discern the truth here, so I welcome all of it.

First, a few words from my personal hero, Soren Kierkegaard; then, some thoughts on worship leadership.

When a man turns his back upon someone and walks away, it is so easy to see that he walks away, but when a man hits upon a method of turning his face towards the one he is walking away from, hits upon a method of walking backwards while with appearance and glance and salutations he greets the person, giving assurances again and again that he is coming immediately, or incessantly saying, “Here I am”—although he gets farther and farther away by walking backwards—then it is not so easy to become aware. And so it is with the one who, rich in good intentions and quick to promise, retreats backwards farther and farther from the good. With the help of intentions and promises he maintains an orientation towards the good, he is turned towards the good, and with this orientation towards the good he moves backwards farther and farther away from it. With ever renewed intention and promise it seems as if he takes a step forward, and yet he not only remains standing still but really takes a step backward. The intention taken in vain, the unfulfilled promise leaves a residue of despondency, dejection, which perhaps soon again leave behind only greater languor. As a drunkard constantly requires stronger and stronger stimulation—in order to become intoxicated, likewise the one who has fallen into intentions and promises constantly requires more and more stimulation—in order to walk backward.

- Soren Kierkegaard, Works of Love

So what does this have to do with worship leadership? Let’s take a look back at an unorthodox, although very Biblical, definition of worship.

(more…)

At Truepenny’s request, I’m going to write a bit about my teenagedom with Jesus. This isn’t quite as entertaining as yesterday’s post, I’m afraid, but it’s not really dull or depressing either. It’s a happy middle ground.

(more…)

I just posted a Facebook note about this, but I wanted to go into a little more detail here.

For those who don’t know, I adopted the cause of the abolition of human trafficking a few years back. Basically, it’s the buying and selling of humans on the black market. Love146 is an organization dedicated to helping to stop this, so we organized a benefit concert for them last year and we’re approaching our second one (coming January 17).

Here are some quick facts from the Love146 website:

• 1 child is sold into slavery every 30 seconds
• Approximately 1.2 million children are sold annually
• $32 billion is brought in annually from human trafficking
• $28 billion is brought in annually from commercial sexual exploitation
• Humans are the second biggest trade on the black market, beating out weapons and trailing behind only drugs

The concert’s website is here. (Notice the striking similarity to this site. You’ll never guess who designed it.) If you live in the KC area and you feel compelled to help with this cause, please help promote this concert. If you have a blog, blog about it; if you go to church, tell them about it; talk to people at work or in bars.

The goal isn’t just to have a successful concert, but to start a movement in the Kansas City area. Already, we have a strong student group forming. (It’s a national group based out of the KC area.) Last year, we had some people talk to local publications about refusing to advertise unlicensed massage parlors (a common front for slave prostitution). Just a few years back, they shut down one of these massage parlors in Overland Park that was filled with trafficked humans.The movement is starting. We need members.

If you’re not in the KC area, check out Love146, which focuses on abduction prevention and aftercare, and International Justice Mission, which works on a macro level with governments and law enforcement agencies to make trafficking harder for traffickers. There’s lots you can do.

The point is that people have to know about this. It can’t be kept America’s dirty little secret any more. Trafficked women are pimped out in the Adult Services section of Craigslist every day in hundreds of cities across the nation, and hundreds of these “massage parlors” are in operation and are advertised in our daily newspapers, all because people don’t know not to stand for it. Most of the clothes we buy, even some clothes that advertise “Made in the U.S.A.,” are made by trafficked children in sweat shops.

I do not want any of you to come away after reading this and feel guilty about not helping. I also don’t want anyone to feel guilty if they choose another cause over this one. This is my cause, but I realize that there are other ones as well. The point is to do what you do well to do good.

Feel free to contact me with any questions you have on this. I’m pretty passionate about it, and I have some additional resources on-hand if you want any.

Let me preface this by saying that I am by no means an expert in any of the subject I’m about to discuss. If I get something wrong, feel free to gently remind me.

I’ve been fascinated as of late with the Greek word Logos, which literally means “word,” or, with some interpretation, logic or reasoning. It’s where we get the -ology suffix in the English language (words like biology, idiology, and theology). Even though it means “word,” though, it doesn’t refer to the grammatical object—there’s another word for that. Logos had a deeper meaning.

(more…)