The Most Objectionable Sort of God--Why I Believe in Him

I must begin with a confession. Too often, in the past, when offering an argument for the existence of God, I have approached the discussion as though I have some common knowledge with the hearer from which I may then build. I have assumed that reality is observed in more or less the same way, by believer and unbeliever alike. However, I have found that God is not merely something which one adds to his pile of knowledge, making it a more complete pile. Rather, God is that through which things are seen for what they are--we put him on as colored lenses which tint the entire world into hues we've never imagined (though perhaps it is more accurately the unbeliever who is wearing the impurely tinted glasses). Cornelius Van Til claimed, "I feel that the whole of history and civilization would be unintelligible to me if it were not for my belief in God. So true is this, that I propose to argue that unless God is back of everything, you cannot find meaning in anything." He even more specifically and outrageously claims that a believer and an unbeliever cannot even talk about "chickens and cows" and mean the same thing.

From here the objections begin to fly from the rationality-supreme/authoritative-science types. I remember seeing Henry Rollins telling his TV viewers that unless you have science, "You don't have game." He then defied God to come down and get into a laboratory test tube--as though that were the only acceptable means of confirming truth. I recall a protest group in Kansas, in response to the (supposedly silly and arbitrary) teaching of a creator God, forming the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which is now the gold standard for illustrating the silliness of Theism. In his book "Cosmos" Carl Sagan proclaimed, "The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be." He objected to belief in God, calling it "anti-intellectual."

And this is before we even begin discussing the Christian God. At this point, I must make an apology on behalf of too many in Christendom who are content with someone genuinely seeking God through their own means or own religion, rather than those already provided by the God and Father of our Lord, Jesus the Messiah. Here I should expect adherents to another god should tell me I'm wrong and "inclusivist christian" types to tell me I'm bigoted. 1 Timothy 2:5, "There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man, the Messiah, Jesus."

I will be told that I have narrowed myself too much--believe me, I've only begun!--and that I have a closed mind. I will be told that I only believe these things because I am conditioned to believe them, or that it's how I was raised. These accusations are not my primary concern. I find apologetics of the scientific and philosophical sorts to be great pursuits, and you will not find someone who likes them more, from the aspect of pure enjoyability. However, it is not my purpose to answer the critique of every nit-picking scoffer who won't accept the message I preach. My purpose is the message, the WHOLE message, and nothing but the message of Jesus the Messiah--which I've only begun to explore here. I will (sometimes reluctantly) respond to specific attacks against belief in God or the Bible, because I believe true religion will stand up to any scrutiny. If the scrutiny is based in falsehood (it generally is), truth will win out. If the scrutiny is based in truth, then let the truth win out.

But the reason I'm reluctant is that I have found such responses to attacks rarely, if ever, bring about satisfaction for the attacker. The reason for this is stated above--that talk about God will simply make no sense to a person without the right eyewear. When it comes down to it, the message is either accepted by the grace of God, or rejected. My message today, in a paraphrase of Francis Schaeffer, is that God is here and he is not silent.

Christopher M. Cuffman

Coram Deo

Living in the presence of, under the authority of, and to the honor and glory of God.