Randal Rauser's Blog, page 136

Village Atheism and Appalachian Snake Handlers

By Russell Lee – This media is available in the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, cataloged under the ARC Identifier (National Archives Identifier) 541335. Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...

There are two billion Christians on earth. And in the wilds of Appalachia a handful of those Christians form a tiny Pentecostal sect known as the Appalachian Snake Handlers.

Given the minuscule size and fringe nature of the group, they don’t tend to come up in regular conversation. Indeed, the only time I ever hear about “Appalachian Snake Handlers” is when atheists want to talk about Christianity.

Needless to say, that tells you more about the atheist than it tells you about Christianity.

The post Village Atheism and Appalachian Snake Handlers appeared first on Randal Rauser.

The Shack on the Silver Screen

Some of my long time readers will know that my most successful book (by a country mile) was a companion to the phenomenally popular 2007 novel The Shack. William Paul Young’s novel told the unlikely story about a grieving father spending a weekend with the Trinity at the cabin where his beloved daughter was murdered. The book was rejected by more than twenty publishers before Young self-published. The book went on to sell more than twenty million copies.

In 2009 I published Finding God in The Shack, a theological guide to Young’s novel. While I didn’t sell twenty million copies, I did find surprising success with that book and I tell the story here. One update to that story: InterVarsity Press now owns the rights to Finding God in the Shack. And since they already have their own book titled Finding God in the Shack written by Roger Olson, it is no surprise that my book hasn’t been promoted over the last few years.

I’ve met Paul a couple times over the years and the first time he told me about his grand plans to make a Hollywood movie of the story. He was insistent that it wouldn’t be your standard “Christian” movie (i.e. the kind that would be filled with B actors, produced by Pure Flix, and marketed to a conservative Christian ghetto). Instead, he stated, if the movie would be made at all it would be done properly with a decent budget and good actors.

I admired Paul’s artistic convictions. He didn’t want his creative vision sold out to make a quick buck. But at the same time I was skeptical that such a film would ever be made.

Well, this is one case where I’m happy to be wrong. The Shack hits the silver screen on March 3, 2017. As for the big Hollywood actors, the protagonist, grieving father Mack, will be played by Sam Worthington of Avatar fame. And “Papa” (i.e. God the Father) will be brought to life by Octavia Spencer. This could definitely be interesting.

You can learn more about the film by visiting the website or the page on imdb.

The post The Shack on the Silver Screen appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Do average Christians believe in the God of classical theism?

In his review of An Atheist and a Christian Walk into a Bar John Loftus claimed that Justin Schieber and I are debating “a belief system no one holds”. Loftus is referring there to the alleged irrelevance of God as defined in classical theism to God as understood in Christian devotion. We can summarize Loftus’ claim with the following enthymeme:

(1) The entity described in classical theism is a wholly different being than the entity that is the object of Christian devotion.

(2) Therefore, the entity described in classical theism is irrelevant to Christian devotion.

The obvious problem here is that Loftus doesn’t defend (1) in his review. Instead, he simply assumes that the deity described in classical theism is not numerically identical with the deity that is the object of Christian devotion. Of course, he’s free to assume that if he likes, but given that Schieber and I do not accept that assumption, his objection founders. If he wants an actual objection, he first needs to defend (1).

Interestingly, the term “classical theism” is of relatively recent vintage as it was coined just a few decades ago by the process theologian Charles Hartshorne. But the term took hold and now is regularly used to refer to a philosophical approach to the doctrine of God which traces back to the early church. Given that classical theism is more a tradition of inquiry rather than a discrete model or system, it is always important to consider what individuals mean when they appeal to the tradition. In other words, not all versions of classical theism are the same. And while some versions do indeed make it easier to defend (1), others do not.

When Schieber and I appeal to the classical theistic tradition, we end up defining God as follows:

God (classical theism dfn): a necessarily existent non-physical agent who is omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good.

Thus, it is the existence of the being as described in this definition which is under debate in our book. Of course, this definition doesn’t say all that a Christian would say about God. There is no mention of Trinity, incarnation, processions or missions, for example. But the salient question is not whether this definition is comprehensive of Christian belief but rather whether it is consistent with Christian belief. And on this latter question the answer surely is yes.

Not only is the definition consistent with Christian belief. In fact, it tracks closely with what lay Christians believe about God. Ask your average Christian: does God know everything? (Check, omniscience.) Is he all-powerful? (Check, omnipotence.) Is he perfectly good? (Check, perfect goodness.) Is he a spirit? (Check, non-physicality.) Is he personal? (Check, agency.) Granted, average folk will not have precise definitions of these attributes at their fingertips, but once the concepts are explained to them they will almost invariably agree with all the elements of the definition.

Conceptually speaking, the biggest challenge will likely come with the concept of necessary existence. The concept of different modal states of existence (necessarily existing; possibly existing; contingently existing) can be a bit challenging for some average folk to grasp. But the challenge is far from insurmountable. I’ve been teaching college students and seminarians for 15 years now and it really isn’t that difficult to help them grasp the difference between contingent and necessary existence. For example, is it possible that God cease existing? Is it possible that God would not have existed at all? Christians invariably say no to both questions. In other words, it is not possible that God could ever cease to exist. It is not possible that God would not have existed. But note that those answers entail a round-about affirmation of God’s necessary existence. 

In sum, the concept of God that Justin and I debate in our book is not merely an abstract construct of philosophy which is irrelevant to Christian conviction. Rather, it is a concept rooted deep in the soil of Christian piety and of immediate relevance to Christian faith.

The post Do average Christians believe in the God of classical theism? appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Responding to John Loftus’ attack on my co-author Justin Schieber

As I have already noted, John Loftus has posted the first two installments of what he is calling a “book review” of my new book An Atheist and a Christian Walk into a Bar co-authored with Justin Schieber. Loftus raised the fatuous objection that the topic of debate — God as defined in classical theism — is not the same concept of God that is accepted by people in the pews. This is equivalent to rejecting a high level debate on naturalism because the concepts at play are not accepted by the garden variety new atheist. And it is truly striking that somebody like Loftus could have spent years attempting to “debunk” Christianity and yet retain such base ignorance about the field.

As if fatuous objections were not bad enough, Loftus devoted the bulk of his critique to attacking Justin Schieber’s lack of formal education. Not only is this nasty and personal, but it is also completely irrelevant. Justin’s capability as a defender of atheism is established not in university degrees but in the quality of his arguments. All folks need to do is check out his work at his YouTube channel Real Atheology.

And if you want to see Justin’s philosophical chops on display in a public debate, consider our 2015 debate on the existence of God which I’ve included below. And please, if you have the time, compare Justin’s performance to some of Loftus’ public debates. The comparison speaks for itself:

Finally, what does Schieber himself have to say on all this? Yesterday he responded to Loftus’ personal attacks at Loftus’ blog. Loftus has yet to reply, but I’ve excerpted the most important portion of Schieber’s response below:

Despite routinely interacting with, absorbing the works of, and being sent early drafts of papers for commentary by professional philosophers regularly publishing in philosophy of religion, I lack a formal education on the topic. Despite being invited to represent – and being valued for – a thoughtful, academic literature-centered, philosophical atheism in many public debates and lectures all around the United States and Canada, I do still lack a formal academic education in philosophy of religion. You’re absolutely right on this point, John.

However, given that even you yourself admit to your readers that I have “a fair understanding of the material in this book”, I fear that your making my lack of formal credentials the titular centerpiece of your unorthodox book review will be justifiably viewed by readers as needlessly ‘poisoning the well’, awkwardly petty, and suggestive of an animus wholly at odds with a thoughtful and fair-minded book review.

The post Responding to John Loftus’ attack on my co-author Justin Schieber appeared first on Randal Rauser.

When will the millennials realize that Goodwill beats the mall?

I don’t like hanging out in shopping malls. I don’t like being in shopping malls. But I don’t mind driving by shopping malls, at high speed, with my windows rolled up.

In the last two weeks I’ve been in shopping malls twice. But not of my own free will.

Cassettes

On my first trip I learned that audio cassettes are now becoming “cool” among some younger millennials. Where did this modest cassette revival come from? I’m guessing it was that mix tape featured in Guardians of the Galaxy. But as I said, that’s just a guess.

So in this trendy clothing shop they sell not only records but old, used audio cassettes for between $3 and $15 a pop. Did anybody tell the kids that audio cassettes have none of the charm of old records? Did anybody tell them that some cassette players have a voracious appetite for magnetic tape and that it is no fun spending twenty minutes gently disentangling your cassette tape from the innards of “Jaws”? Did anybody tell them how cassettes wear out?

And did anybody tell them that if you really want to relive the romance of the age of audio cassettes, you can pick up an expansive collection for 50 cents a pop at the local Goodwill? From Ace of Base to Anne Murray, Milli Vanilli to Michael Bolton, ZZ Top to Zamfir, Goodwill has a stellar selection of yesteryear. (If you’re really lucky, you might even find a copy of Hooked On Classics.)

Jeans

On my next visit I was pulled into a clothing store. Here’s where I really start to sound like an old fart. Back in my day, when we bought “new” jeans, they actually looked new. (Imagine that!) Consequently, the fades, creases, and tears were earned through life.

Apparently kids these days (“kids these days”, did I really just say that?) don’t have time to earn their fades, creases, and tears. Instead, they purchase “new” jeans that look like they have already weathered a rabid pitbull attack, a motorcycle crash, and an accident with battery acid. At this rate, clothing stores will soon be charging seventy bucks for a few frayed shards of denim.

Once again, Goodwill has you covered. Worn, old, torn, and faded jeans in all styles (acid wash, home made cutoffs…) and brands (Bugle Boy, Pepe, Jordache, Chip and Pepper, B.U.M. Equipment …) are all available at $5-10 per item. You’ll save so much money you’ll even have funds left over to buy that item of travel kitsch you’ve always wanted.

Say, anybody interested in an ash tray from Maui?

The post When will the millennials realize that Goodwill beats the mall? appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Two Early Reviews for An Atheist and a Christian Walk into a Bar

The reviews for An Atheist and a Christian Walk into a Bar are starting to come out.

Unfortunately Prometheus sent John Loftus a copy given that he is a Prometheus author. Not surprisingly, he is doing his typical polemical hack job. In the first two installments he largely focused on engaging in ad hominem attacks on Justin Schieber. And when Counter Apologist called him on it in the comment section of the second installment, Loftus responded by demanding to see Counter Apologist’s academic credentials. It’s unfortunate to see Loftus continue to diminish himself in this manner. Very sad.

On a more positive note, Mike D, aka The A-Unicornist is doing a multi-part review. His first two installments have just been posted. And in contrast to the vitriol and mean-spirited attacks of Loftus, Mike D uses the book as a springboard for thoughtful dialogue and reflection. I may disagree with Mike D on many things (including many things in these first two installments), but I respect him and I’m sure we could have a good debate over a few beers. And just to be clear, we wouldn’t be debating the beers. Rather, we’d be debating while we drank the beers.

A Child Dying of Cancer Should Change Us All

A few weeks ago grieving father Andy Whelan posted a photo of his beloved four year old daughter Jessica in the midst of agony from the cancer that would soon take her life. Whelan posted the photo so that the world could appreciate the horror of childhood cancer and be motivated anew to fight it.

Like countless people around the world, when I first saw this photo a few weeks ago, I wept.

Jessica died this week and I wept again. Here is what her father wrote on the Facebook page that chronicled Jessica’s fight with neuroblastoma:

I feel both sadness and relief in informing you all that Jessica finally found peace at seven o’clock this morning. No longer does she suffer, no longer does she feel the pain of the physical constraints of her body.

Now my princess has grown her angel wings and has gone up to play with her friends and loved ones. She will now watch down over her little brother and ourselves until one day we are reunited again.

Last night she finally allowed me to hold her in my arms and we had a big cuddle as I told her how much I loved her. I told her again that it was okay for her to close her eyes and go to sleep and I kissed her forehead and her lips numerous times. It seems like this is what she needed to finally allow her to find comfort in her passing as within eight hours of this cuddle she finally took her final breath. She was a daddy’s girl from the start and even right up to the end. I feel like a massive part of me has just been torn away but I am so glad that I could give her that comfort in her final hours. She passed peacefully and calmly with not even a murmur.

Thank you to everyone of you who has shared and has been a part of our journey. I ask now for privacy for us and our family as we mourn the loss of our beautiful princess.

From a heartbroken daddy of the most amazing and beautiful girl.

The photo of Jessica is the latest entry in a gallery of human horrors that includes the Vietnam-era “Napalm Girl” (a screaming naked Vietnamese girl covered in napalm) and “The Vulture and the Little Girl” (a starving child with a vulture lurking in the background). Viewing these images takes a human toll. And that’s why I’ve decided to put Jessica’s photo at the bottom of this article so that those who choose not to view it need not be confronted by it.

The human cost of being an observer to human suffering is vividly illustrated in the story of photojournalist Kevin Carter. While he won the Pulitzer Prize for “The Vulture and the Little Girl” his role as a chronicler of such egregious human suffering took such a toll that within a year he had committed suicide. As he wrote in his suicide note,

“The pain of life overrides the joy to the point that joy does not exist…I am depressed…without phone…money for rent…money for child support…money for debts…money!!!…I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings and corpses and anger and pain…of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners…”

But the emotional toll is not the only danger. Arguably a far greater danger is the cauterization of emotion. Gradually we become inured to the human suffering depicted until we can stroll through the gallery of horrors, shake our head in a brief display of pity, and then get on with our day as if nothing had changed.

The human suffering captured in images like Jessica’s pain, Napalm Girl, and the Vulture and the Little Girl should change us, and by extension the world in which we live. Viewing them imposes a moral obligation on the viewer to be changed. If we fail in this regard, then the image becomes our judge.

So how can we meet the moral obligations of viewing an image like Jessica’s suffering? How can we be faithful to her memory?

To begin with, we can resolve to redouble our efforts to reorient our priorities by reminding ourselves that life is not about any of the number of trivial pursuits that crowd our day. Rather, it is about cultivating meaningful relationships with our fellow human beings, beginning with our most intimate familial relations and extending out from there. (Of course, many of us believe it is also about cultivating a meaningful relationship with God. But let’s focus here on the ground of common agreement.)

Second, I believe we should meditate on genuine thankfulness for every opportunity we have to cultivate these relationships. Jacobean poet Ben Jonson (d. 1637) beautifully stated this sentiment when he wrote the poem “On My First Son” at the untimely passing of his beloved child:

Farewell, thou child of my right hand, and joy;
My sin was too much hope of thee, lov’d boy.
Seven years tho’ wert lent to me, and I thee pay,
Exacted by thy fate, on the just day.
O, could I lose all father now! For why
Will man lament the state he should envy?
To have so soon ‘scap’d world’s and flesh’s rage,
And if no other misery, yet age?
Rest in soft peace, and, ask’d, say, “Here doth lie
Ben Jonson his best piece of poetry.”
For whose sake henceforth all his vows be such,
As what he loves may never like too much.

 

Jonson’s profound words bring me back to the first point. Do I view my relationships with others as my “best piece of poetry”, or do I place my value and worth in projects and achievements that rust and fade?

Finally, we can commit ourselves to concrete efforts that minimize the suffering and evil endured by beloved children like Jessica. One of the most obvious points of departure would be a donation to a worthy charity. In my investigations I’ve found that one of the best is the National Pediatric Cancer Foundation which currently has a stellar four star and 100% rating on Charity Navigator. The NPCF spends 88% of funds raised on programs as opposed to administration and fundraising.

Donations are wonderful, but that is only one of a myriad of possibilities. The overarching demand from images like that of young Jessica is that we ensure they leave us and the world in which we live better than we were before we saw them.

In Memoriam, Jessica Whelan (d. 2016)

The post A Child Dying of Cancer Should Change Us All appeared first on Randal Rauser.

An Atheist and a Christian in a Commercial

Justin Schieber of the “Real Atheology” YouTube channel and my esteemed co-author just produced a fine commercial introducing our new book. The only thing it’s missing is some good background music to recreate the bar room effect. I think it’s a honky-tonk bar so some toe-tappin’ country rhythms would be good. Anyway, check it out:

 

The post An Atheist and a Christian in a Commercial appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Is the Atheist My Neighbor? reviewed in “The Humanist”

Humanist writer and activist Sincere Kirabo has reviewed my book Is the Atheist My Neighbor? at The Humanist. It’s a very fine and positive review. Here’s the final paragraph:

“This brief (only 97 pages) but thorough book is worth reading, dissecting, and recommending to others. I think it does a great job of presenting atheists as complex beings worth respect and capable of leading ethical lives despite placing no stock in the god hypothesis. By providing mindful, well-researched, and cogent deconstructions of typical Christian claims that negatively characterize nonbelievers, I would say Is the Atheist My Neighbor? is a must-read for both Christians and atheists alike, as we could all benefit from Rauser’s incisive, humanistic rethinking of Christian attitudes toward atheism.”

The post Is the Atheist My Neighbor? reviewed in “The Humanist” appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Should Christians be afraid of Islam?

In my review for God’s not Dead 2 I pointed out that the religion currently under greatest threat in the United States is not Christianity. Rather, it is Islam.

That claim received a response from readers both in the discussion thread and via email who argued that Islam is a threat. When the concern was initially raised by Walter I replied as follows:

“Islam, like any religion, is subject to multiple interpretations of the relationship between the religious community and the state. The kind of Islam you describe as a concern has its Christian equivalent in contemporary Christian dominionism as well as in many historic forms of Christendom.”

Another reader, VicqRuiz, countered my response as follows:

“If the segment of Islam which believes in a theocratic state under shari’a was as small relative to all of Islam as the dominionist movement is relative to all of Christianity, I would agree that Islam is something which we have no need to beware.”

I then offered this reply:

“It is true that the relative size and strength of the theocratic wing of Islam is currently greater than the theocratic wing of Christianity. But it simply doesn’t follow that fear of the theocratic wing of Islam should thereby transfer to fear of Islam simpliciter. That’s a non sequitur.”

But VicqRuiz was undaunted as he then replied:

“What argues against your response, Randal, is the dearth of majority Islamic countries in which the theocratic wing of Islam is not firmly entrenched in power.”

In fact, that doesn’t argue against my response. On the contrary, it is another non sequitur. So here is my explanation of why folks shouldn’t be afraid of Islam or believe that Islam per se represents an essential threat to western society.

Muslim majority countries today very much parallel pre-Enlightenment Christian majority countries in the West. I am using the term “Enlightenment” here to refer to a set of cultural, scientific, philosophical, political, and economic forces in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries which gave rise to the hallmarks of western capitalist, democratic, and religiously tolerant pluralist society.

Let’s begin with this observation: in key respects religious life in England in 1610 was much closer to religious life in contemporary Saudi Arabia than contemporary England. For example, if you lived in England in 1610 you could be jailed for being a non-conformist (i.e. for refusing to conform to the Church of England’s form of worship). And if you failed to attend church for an extended period, you could be called before the civil magistrate where you could be fined, imprisoned or worse. (Just consider what happened to Thomas Helwys who had the temerity to write King James I at this time to request religious toleration for his fellow Baptists.)

But over the next two centuries, western Christendom began to break down as a result of many forces including the continued fracturing of religious consensus and the growth of religious, political and economic conflict (e.g. Thirty Years War); the continued growth of the significance of the secular sphere in natural science (e.g. Galileo, Newton, Darwin) and economics (e.g. Adam Smith), the rise of philosophical skepticism (e.g. Hume, Kant), the democratizing force of politics (the French and American revolutions) and popular revivalist religion (in Britain and North America especially).

All these forces amounted to an extended assault of cannon fire on the edifice of western Christendom. But Christianity didn’t die as a result. Indeed, many commentators would argue that it was freed from the constraints of Christendom as it adapted to the new reality of pluralism, free market capitalism, democracy, science, and the ongoing forces of secularization.

Most Muslim-majority countries have not yet grappled directly with these same forces of Enlightenment. Consequently, many of the values now taken for granted in the West like religious tolerance, free markets, and democracy are not embraced in large parts of the Muslim-majority world. And in the countries where the influence of the West is most present (e.g. Turkey, Iran, Egypt) one can also see the most visible conflicts.

So here’s the lesson to draw: it is simply wrong to think that this current clash of civilizations is a clash with Islam simpliciter just like it is wrong to think that the earlier clash with Christendom was a clash with Christianity simpliciter. Consequently, instead of encouraging non-Muslims to fear Islam we should be encouraging Muslims to engage with the same forces (pluralism, capitalism, democracy, etc.) that wrought change in Christendom.

And one more thing. One should not assume that the Enlightenment forces which wrought these radical changes in Christendom were and are all secular. On the contrary, as several scholars have argued, many of these forces are in fact sourced ultimately within the Judeo-Christian tradition. (See for example, Nicholas Wolterstorff’s account of justice and human rights.) Likewise, the most effective reform of Islam will be that which engages not only in a dialogue with external factors, but also in a careful and creative ressourcement of the Muslim tradition itself.

The post Should Christians be afraid of Islam? appeared first on Randal Rauser.