Randal Rauser's Blog, page 78

Coming to Terms with the Problem of Evil

A tricycle after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.

If you want a simple and effective way to identify a Christian apologist worth listening to, ask them to share their thoughts on the problem of evil. If they keep their discussion of the problem in the abstract and if they suggest that it is a problem easily solved, you should keep looking. But if they instead take the time to describe the agonizing depth and breadth of the problem, and if they recognize that the problem is such that some people reasonably find their way to non-belief, then that is likely an apologist worth heeding in other matters.

This past week, I taught a one-week seminary course in apologetics. Not surprisingly, we devoted several hours of class time digging into the problem of evil, beginning with the moral problem and then turning to the natural problem. Before we began to look for answers, I pointed out to the students the importance of having a solid grasp of the problem. And that requires us to set aside a temptation to frame the problem abstractly as if the issue were merely how to explain the presence of “metaphysical disvalue or disorder”.

On the contrary, as I pointed out with two emotionally wrenching cases, evil always comes to us in heart-wrenching, concrete events. Evil is the problem of a young boy that was hanged on the gallows in a Nazi concentration camp while other prisoners were forced to watch. Evil is the problem of a four-year-old girl who finally succumbs to the cancer that has ravaged her body while her parents weep bedside. That is what we must explain. That is what we must reconcile with the existence of an all-powerful and all-good God.

And that is what it looks like to steelman the problem of evil and suffering in the world. You cannot begin to offer a meaningful solution to the problem until you have grappled with the agonizing depth of the problem. And unless an apologist is willing to face the challenge on this, the most daunting of questions, you have reason to doubt that they will do so elsewhere.

The post Coming to Terms with the Problem of Evil appeared first on Randal Rauser.

On keeping the ladies in the nursery: A response to Owen Strachan

This morning, I came across the following tweet from Baptist theologian Owen Strachan (courtesy of Matt Mikalatos):

"When I hear women & men challenging God’s order, saying…“Women should do more than just serve in the nursery or teach children.“ I wonder why they have such a low opinion of those babes in the nursery? Why such a low opinion of children?"

Best comment from last few days (AB). pic.twitter.com/a7vbyWx55M

— Owen Strachan (@ostrachan) May 11, 2019

My first response: “Hey Strachan, the 1950s called. They want their tweet back. (And I didn’t even know the 1950s had Twitter, but apparently so.)”

Here’s another more provocative way to respond courtesy of a slave owner in the 1850s: “When I hear abolitionists challenging God’s order, saying … ‘Blacks should do more than pick cotton,’ I wonder why they have such a low opinion of cotton in the fields? Why such a low opinion of cotton?”

Of course, the downside of that reply is that guys like Strachan would completely miss the point: “You’re comparing working in the nursery with precious infants and toddlers to slavery?! Arghh!”

Needless to say, that isn’t the point. The point, rather, is that the abolitionist has no problem with cotton-picking, per se; rather, they have a problem with the institution that forces one racial group to pick cotton. By the same token, there is nothing wrong with working with infants and toddlers in the nursery. Indeed, that is precious and important work. What is wrong, and that which the Strachan critic rejects, is the imposition of that specific job on those of the female gender.

Strachan is committing the fallacy of false dilemma in which he erroneously assumes there are only two options: either value children in virtue of restricting women to the nursery or disvalue children in virtue of not restricting women to the nursery. But of course, those are not the only options.

And so, we see one more danger of sexism: it can lead to bad reasoning.

The post On keeping the ladies in the nursery: A response to Owen Strachan appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Miracles, Resurrections, and Historical Explanation

This morning, I had an exchange with CounterApologist on Twitter regarding the question of whether the historical resurrection of Jesus is a datum open, in principle, to historical explanation. In this article, I’d like to expand a bit on one of the points I made in our exchange. I begin, however, with one of CounterApologist’s claims:

“Miracles could be admissible historical explanations, if god was kind enough to perform them for us regularly and verifiably in the present day as he supposedly did in biblical times. But he doesn’t do that, so they aren’t.” (source)

Interestingly, when CounterApologist posted that tweet, I had already responded to those claims. So I’ll summarize those points now.

First, I pointed out that one can discuss the resurrection question without invoking the concept of a “miracle”. All one needs is to look for evidence that a person was alive at T1, dead at T2, and then alive again at T3. If a person begins to live after having been dead, that is resurrection (at least in a minimal sense, if not the robust eschatological sense assumed in Christian theology). And one can look for evidence of that type of occurrence without ever considering whether it constitutes a “miracle” or whether it is, in some sense, “supernatural”.

Second, I pointed out that CounterApologist’s statement assumes that for X to be a legitimate explanation of a past event, X must be presently observable (i.e. “regularly and verifiably in the present day”). But this is clearly false: in principle, one can most certainly identify unique events in the past that do not occur in now in the present.

The post Miracles, Resurrections, and Historical Explanation appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Christianity Today and its Ironic Tribute to Rachel Held Evans

On May 6, Christianity Today published an essay by a fellow named John Stonestreet as a remembrance of Rachel Held Evans. Although it had only been two days since her death, in the essay, Stonestreet could not resist taking several jabs at Evans’ theology. Not surprisingly, the response from several quarters was very negative, so much so that Stonestreet requested that the essay be removed while CT‘s editor, Mark Galli, issued a qualified apology for its original publication. (Though the essay is no longer on CT‘s website, you can read it here.)

While it seems to me that the controversy has been somewhat overdone, it is also worth highlighting why the response to Stonestreet was so visceral, and it isn’t merely because Evans had been gone for but two days before he published his criticism. The fact is that Stonestreet’s essay illustrates the very problems that Evans often targeted within evangelicalism. But ironically, from that perspective, it also becomes something of an unintentional tribute.

Let’s begin by considering one of the critical passages from Stonestreet’s essay:

“I think Rachel was wrong, seriously so, about many things, including things of grave importance. In tribute, many have written how she helped expand the tent of evangelicalism and convinced many skeptics to stay at the faith table. I think, as a friend put it, she often ushered the vulnerable into her doubts and championed wrong ideas.”

Here’s how I’d like to reply: Yeah well, you know what, Mr. Stonestreet? I think you’re wrong about many things, including things of “grave importance”. In fact, we’re all wrong about many things, including things of “grave importance”.

So rather than suggest the “grave” errors of another Christian a mere two days after they’ve passed (was that choice of words intentional?), perhaps you might want to take this time to reflect on where your own “grave” errors may lie. Along the way, you might even learn something from Rachel Held Evans about what it means to be true Israel, that is, an individual who is not afraid to wrestle with God in their dogged pursuit of truth.

And this brings us to the ironic sense in which Mr. Stonestreet’s surprisingly critical essay serves as a sort of ironic tribute. No doubt without meaning to, Stonestreet illustrates why Rachel Held Evans was held in such high esteem by so many. Rachel Held Evans didn’t “usher the vulnerable into her doubts”. Rather, she gave them permission to be honest about the doubts they were already having. In a world where Christians like Mr. Stonestreet are ever ready to censure hard questions and honest doubts with the stentorian warning of “grave error”, Rachel Held Evans invited others to learn from her struggles so that they could work through their own.

To sum up, the fact that Mr. Stonestreet finds himself compelled to frame Rachel Held Evans’ legacy in a negative light mere hours after her death merely testifies to the power of her legacy as reflected in those who are threatened by it.

The post Christianity Today and its Ironic Tribute to Rachel Held Evans appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Tom Jump says it is not possible to know that God exists. And I reply.

Back in November 2018, I did an interview with atheist YouTuber Tom Jump. Today, we followed that up with a second interview/exchange/dialogue in which Tom presented his skeptical epistemology while I offered a reply. While Tom and I don’t agree on much in terms of epistemology, we do agree on the value of friendly exchanges across deep ideological divides. Check it out!

The post Tom Jump says it is not possible to know that God exists. And I reply. appeared first on Randal Rauser.

How to Have Good Apologetics Conversations

I recently did an interview with K. Albert Little of The Cordial Catholic Podcast. Our conversation focused on having productive apologetic dialogues with those of different opinion. You can listen to it here.

The post How to Have Good Apologetics Conversations appeared first on Randal Rauser.

My Dad’s Alzheimer’s in 46 Tweets

This article consists of a series of tweets which tell the story of my experience of my father’s Alzheimer’s Disease from right before his diagnosis in December 2017 to his death on April 3, 2019 and the hope of the resurrection that remains.

Interesting, after I added up all the tweets, I realized I had 46 of them. And that’s a significant number to me given that I am now 46, so you might say that even if these tweets cover a mere span of 17 months, they are also a tribute born out of an entire life.

November 29, 2017: My dad’s been driving since 1952. He always loved taking to the open road. Yesterday the doctor said he can’t drive anymore. Tomorrow we begin to adjust to the new reality. But for now, we grieve another loss.

December 19, 2017: Today my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease. Some helpful things for the journey ahead:

A healthy theology of providence
A hope in the resurrection
Fruits of the Spirit
A heady dose of gallows humor

March 2, 2018: Alzheimer’s is one, long, crappy slog. Yesterday, my dad thought that Rachel Maddow was talking about him. That level of delusion is a new phenomenon. And it gets worse from here on out

March 12, 2018: Just concluded a 3-day visit with my parents. As I left, my dad pointed out a piece of lint on the floor and said accusingly, “That wasn’t here before you arrived.” Dementia has a way of narrowing one’s horizons. And yet, there’s an undeniable comic element to the “accusation”.

March 27, 2018: My dad’s dementia is progressing slowly but surely. Yesterday, he told my mom, “I think it’s time you all forget about me.”

April 16, 2018: Today I called my parents and my dad (who has dementia) answered the phone. “Oh, Randy! I thought you’d passed away,” he said. Alas, he sounded more surprised than happy to hear I was still among the living.

April 23, 2018: A quick update on my dad’s dementia: I learned last week that in the evening he is starting to forget that he has two sons. As we fade into the fog of forgotten memories, this seems like a good time to tweet my review of “Still Alice”.

May 12, 2018:  Each day my dad sinks further into the oblivion of dementia. Alzheimer’s is an especially cruel mistress. But I am filled with thanks for every day, not least because I recognize I already have enjoyed familial blessings that others have been denied.

May 24, 2018: This morning my dad was diagnosed with pneumonia, a further complement to his recent precipitous cognitive decline due to Alzheimer’s. I used to have little time for the phrase “It is what it is.” But these days I find myself oft embracing this stoic wisdom. Such as it is…

May 27, 2018: I’m back in my hometown Kelowna to see my dad in the hospital. Before the visit this morning I climbed Knox Mountain. First song on the way down: “Jump” by Van Halen. Great way to start the day!

May 27, 2018: My dad’s Alzheimer’s puts a new spin on this T.S. Eliot quote: “The end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.”

May 28, 2018: Today while visiting my dad in the hospital he asked why God doesn’t make a process of dying that can unfold over 15 years instead take 15 minutes. Fair question.

May 30, 2018: After spending a week visiting my dad in the hospital, I think even more highly of nurses and the work they do. I have already marked National Nurses Day (May 6) on my 2019 calendar. I won’t miss that day again!

June 4, 2018: My dad continues to descend into the fog of Alzheimer’s. The other day when I was visiting him in the hospital, he was worried about having the right papers to cross the border into Germany c. 1940. Mind and memory are extraordinary, their dissolution tragic.

June 19, 2018: Talking with my mom about my dad’s spiral into dementia. She observed, “Everyone has a shelf life.” Yes. Yes, they do.

August 4, 2018: The other day my older brother visited my dad (who has Alzheimer’s) at the care home. “Do you know who I am?” he asked. “Of course,” my dad replied with a twinkle. “My oldest brother!” Eh, close enough!

August 27, 2018: I just received an email from one of my (atheist) blog readers expressing condolences for my dad’s Alzheimer’s diagnosis. He wrote in part, “Here’s a place where atheism is lacking, because I can’t say that you’ll be in my prayers. But … you will be in my thoughts.” Amen!

September 17, 2018: One example of the cruelty of Alzheimer’s: nobody is happy with my dad’s recovery from pneumonia, for the strengthening body is paired with the deteriorating mind.

October 8, 2018: Going to visit my dad next week. His Alzheimer’s has now progressed to the point where he can’t remember my name, though he sometimes gets it after a few hints. Last night, I dreamt that his mind returned. Alas, it was but a dream.

October 10, 2018: A couple of days ago, my dad bopped a woman on the head at the care home where he now resides. What do you do as Alzheimer’s turns a self-possessed adult into a petulant toddler?

October 16, 2018: Here I am back home in Kelowna visiting my mom & dad. Dad now lives in a care home where he receives special care for his dementia. On the first day, he called me “Hugo” (his brother), but he used my name after that. In fleeting moments, things even seem normal.

October 16, 2018: I’m visiting my dad in the dementia ward today. There’s no good way to depart this world; only more-or-less bad ways.

October 19, 2018: Just got back from my family visit in my hometown of Kelowna, including time hanging out with my dad at his new care home. Along the way, I spent some time watching the sunset at Gyro Beach.

October 29, 2018: Ugh, my dad attempted to choke another resident in the care home today, so now he’s being transferred to a higher security facility. Such is the long and winding road of Alzheimer’s.

November 29, 2018: The best Beatles song to describe my dad’s Alzheimer’s? Hmm, I’m going with “The Long and Winding Road.”

December 14, 2018: Back in my hometown visiting family. Today, we went to visit my dad at the care home (he has Alzheimer’s). It was a good visit, except that he tried to eat his napkin with lunch. The slow spiral to oblivion continues.

December 16, 2018: People often ask me how my dad is doing. Once a person has been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, there is only one answer: “Worse than before.”

December 16, 2018: Since my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s last year, I find that I am carefully noting every one of my memory lapses with the sober prospect of what may lie in my future.

January 14, 2019: After my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease in 2017, he quietly observed, “I’m going to forget you.” “You may forget us,” I replied, “But we’ll never forget you.”

February 1, 2019: My wife & daughter are visiting my mom. Yesterday, they drove out to see my dad at the dementia ward. Like a little kid, he was excited to show them his room and how he could climb into bed all by himself. Alzheimer’s occasions moments both sweet and bitter, noble and tragic.

March 4, 2019: Today, my mom will celebrate her 52 wedding anniversary by visiting my dad in the dementia ward.

March 27, 2019: I flew home to visit my dad in the dementia ward last week. They are starting him on palliative care and he’s becoming non-responsive so this will likely be the last visit. When he suddenly reached out to grab my face, of course, I needed to snap a selfie.

March 28, 2019: My father is in rapid decline with Alzheimer’s. Here’s my account of The Last Visit with Dad

April 3, 2019: Christian Post published my article on my dad’s impending death due to Alzheimer’s. The article got a comment from someone peddling herbal supplements to “cure” the disease. Exploiting the pain and misbegotten hope of the suffering? Wow, that’s cold.

April 3, 2019: My dad’s now on morphine and no longer eating. Estimates are that he has days to live, so I need to start writing a eulogy. How does one summarize the life and impact of a parent in 10 minutes? A daunting task, indeed.

April 3, 2019: Well, my dad passed away a few minutes ago. This would be a good time to quote the dedication to my book “What on Earth Do We Know About Heaven?”: “For my dad, who taught me to live life in the light of eternity.”

April 4, 2019: Yesterday morning, my father passed away from Alzheimer’s. In the afternoon, I spoke at Fort Saskatchewan Christian School. The young people asked questions about many great topics, including heaven. I was delighted to talk about the general resurrection while thinking of Dad.

April 4, 2019: My dad’s obituary

April 6, 2019: I just finished the eulogy/sermonette for my dad’s memorial service next weekend. It clocks in at 13 minutes and 30 seconds. It’s good to have that done.

April 8, 2019: Random Thoughts on the Death of My Father

April 13, 2019: Just arrived at a coffee shop. A barista greets me with “How’s it going?” I could reply, “Well, I’m speaking at my dad’s memorial service in a couple of hours, so there’s that.” Instead, I reply, “Fine, I’ll have a dark roast…” Life goes on, right?

April 13, 2019: Just came from my dad’s memorial service back to the same coffee shop I was in this morning. The barista looked at us, puzzled, and observed, “Hey, you were here this morning!” I nodded and ordered a gusto dark roast. Rest in peace, dad, this coffee’s for you.

April 13, 2019: Today, we celebrated the life of my late father. The day ended with a walk in a city park as the cool spring rain began to fall. As we ambled down the darkening trail, the street lamp offered a warming glow against the ominous storm clouds overhead.

April 16, 2019:

April 18, 2019: My dad died on April 3. The first time I cried was right before his official Alzheimer’s diagnosis in December 2017. The second time was two days ago when I was out for a motorbike ride. Suddenly, I had trouble seeing the road as tears welled up. Dang, grief is unpredictable.

April 23, 2019: My Dad’s Ashes: A Resurrection Reflection

The post My Dad’s Alzheimer’s in 46 Tweets appeared first on Randal Rauser.

How to Respond to the Rachel Held Evans Haters

As many of you know, beloved progressive Christian Rachel Held Evans passed away this morning at the age of 37, leaving behind her husband Dan and two small children. It didn’t take long for the Calvinistic website Pulpit & Pen to publish a nauseating screed titled “How Do we Respond to the Death of an Apostate? The Untimely passing of Rachel Held Evans“.

There was a time when I would have responded to that nasty little essay with a detailed refutation. But to what end? It is not worth your time to read. And we’re not going to convince a single person who already thinks this kind of response to a tragedy is a valid expression of Christian commitment.

These are master trolls who perversely think that the more people are disgusted with them, the more “faithful” they are: “You will be hated by everyone because of me” (Matthew 10:22). Don’t confirm their bizarre reading of the Bible. Don’t give them the attention they crave. Don’t feed their inverted search for validation through cruelty and alienation. Instead, remember that “Haters gonna hate” and then leave these sad people to their duly self-imposed exile from the humane public square.

And with that, we are free to lament the death and celebrate the life and legacy of Rachel Held Evans.

The post How to Respond to the Rachel Held Evans Haters appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Rebuttals: From Worst to Best

Haw haw haw.
That’s simply absurd.
Nobody believes that anymore.
Unfortunately, your second premise is false or at least highly questionable. You seem to have an unstated premise that is in need of defense. And your entire position leads to a reductio ad absurdum. Allow me to explain…

It’s amazing how many rebuttals, especially within the realm of social media, are in the space of 1-3. Laughs, guffaws, and other insults are the worst (tier 1).

Categorical undefended assertions that the other person’s view is false, indefensible, or absurd (tier 2) are only slightly better: at least one has communicated in sentences and clearly expressed one’s personal incredulity.

Assertions that the position is indefensible by way of a force majeure (tier 3) is not, as you might think, always based on the fallacious argumentum ad populum. After all, there are legitimate cases in which the consensus of a relevant field of individuals can be significant prima facie evidence. Thus, for example, pointing out the scientific consensus on human-induced climate change or the effectiveness of vaccines is indeed relevant in adjudicating which position is most likely true. So tier 3 does potentially constitute an objection with at least some veridical force. But until more is said to fill in the blanks on the alleged consensus, it remains very weak.

And this brings us, finally, to tier 4 in which you analyze the person’s argument, perhaps even drawing out implicit premises, and demonstrating where there is a lack of required supporting evidence or vulnerability to rebuttal.

The lesson? If you want to join the elites on tier 4, you’ll need to table the snickers and focus on analysis and critique.

The post Rebuttals: From Worst to Best appeared first on Randal Rauser.

Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? And what does that mean, anyways?

As many of you know, in 2013 I published an apologetics debate book with atheist John Loftus titled God or Godless. I thought Loftus did a good job in that book because he can handle short, pithy debates. (And a mere $7 for a paperback is a great deal!) However, when it comes to his blog, I have long found Loftus’ analysis to be — how should I put this? — subpar. Yes, that’s it: subpar. For that reason, I stopped interacting with him online a long time ago. Loftus’ writing is highly polemical and deeply confused and he attracts readers who share and echo his ignorant hostilities.

That said, I decided to deviate from my general principle this morning and offer a brief response to the opening paragraph of his most recent article: “Do Muslims and Christians Worship the Same God?” Loftus begins:

“I wish Christian apologists would get their stories straight on this question. Apologists who seek to soften the problem of religious diversity, and who want to explain why a diverse number of religious believers have their prayers answered, will say Yahweh and Allah are the same god by different names. So say Paul Moser, David Marshall, Victor Reppert, Randal Rauser and many others.”

Loftus wishes Christians would “get their stories straight” on the question of whether Muslims and Christians worship the same God? Yeah, well, I wish atheists would “get their stories straight” on what atheism means. Some self-described atheists say they believe God doesn’t exist. Others say they believe nothing “supernatural” or “magical” exists. Still others say they are merely without belief in God. And so on.

Next, ask atheists whether objective morality exists. Some are moral relativists. Others are emotivists. Still others are bold Platonists. From there, you can ask them their views on naturalism. And so on.

Gee, I wish those folks would “get their stories straight”!

Just kidding. I actually wish that Loftus would grow up, acquire a modicum of self-reflection, and come to realize that any complex and diverse doxastic community features debates on various questions among adherents to the community.

Next, Loftus says I take the position that Muslims worship the same God as Christians because I am trying to “soften the problem of religious diversity” and “explain why a diverse number of religious believers have their prayers answered”.

Um, no.

On the upside, that comment does illumine how misinformed and unreliable Loftus is as a commentator.

The question is ultimately one of linguistic reference. When a Muslim refers to God, are they referring to the same being that a Christian refers to when they refer to God? If they are, then it follows that they worship the same God. It does not follow, however, that they are in a salvific relationship with God or that their statements, prayers, and actions are soteriologically significant. Those are completely separate questions and ones that I do not address.

As for the matter of linguistic reference, it is clear that Muslims and Christians share a common conceptual core understanding of deity with Jews. Together, these western monotheisms identify one God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, who created and sustains all things, and who revealed himself in history to Abraham, Moses, King David, and the people of Israel. That is sufficient shared content and history to secure shared reference.

That’s it. Nothing about “softening religious diversity” or attempting to explain why “religious believers have their prayers answered.”

For further discussion of these topics, I have written the following articles:

Podcast: “Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? A conversation with Andy Bannister”

“Muslims, Christians, and Worship of the Same God: A quick response to the Unbelievable debate”

“Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God? A Question Explored Through Sheep and Goats“

The post Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? And what does that mean, anyways? appeared first on Randal Rauser.