Faithfulness

One of the attributes of God is faithfulness.  “God is faithful” is a thought explicitly found in Deuteronomy 7:9, 1 Corinthians 1:9, and 1 Corinthians 10:13.  It is, however, a thought that runs implicitly on every page of the Bible as God unfolds his plan for man’s salvation.  The faithfulness of God is more than His immutability (Malachi 3:6), though it is based upon it.  Something may be immutable, yet not be faithful.  Faithfulness implies a trust, which implies a personality, and a personal relationship with someone.  Faithfulness is a quality of personhood, and infinitely so in the person of God.

As an imitator of God (Ephesians 5:1), the Christian should strive to be faithful.  Faithfulness implies unwavering dedication irrespective the trials that may come our way.  Faithfulness entails a level of commitment that stays true to the course notwithstanding the obstacles in one’s path.  Faithfulness means that one consistently practices that which he knows to be true.  The Christians at Ephesus, in the face of coming persecution, were urged, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee the crown of life” (Revelation 2:10).

The apostle Paul wrote, “Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful” (1 Corinthians 4:2).  The Greek word for steward here is OIKONOMOS, a house ruler.  Such stewards in Paul’s time were often slaves.  One could not rise to such a position of prominence in the home of one’s master through fickleness and irresponsibility.  Faithfulness was required!  So also “in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15) – faithfulness is required!

The Psalmist wrote, “LORD, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?” (Psalm 15:1).  Among the various characteristics of such a one a statement found in verse 4, “He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.”  This is faithfulness.  It is emulating the very character of God Himself, who also keeps His promises regardless the amount of suffering that He, as God, must endure.  Of course, the ultimate manifestation of God’s suffering is presented to us in the person of Jesus who was faithful unto the death of the cross (Philippians 2:8).

The apostle Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 2:11-13 ring true here: “Faithful is the saying: For if we died with him, we shall also live with him:  if we endure, we shall also reign with him: if we shall deny him, he also will deny us: if we are faithless, he abideth faithful; for he cannot deny himself.”  Because we are sinful, we can never be wholly faithful to him until the day that we cease from sin.  The possibility of apostasy is always present.  “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Corinthians 10:12).  This statement was not written in vain, under the delusion of “once-saved, always-saved” dogma.  It acknowledges the real opportunity for individual Christians to so sin as to be eternally lost.  How important, then, the doctrine of faithfulness!

In the past year, every other issue of the Christian Worker has focused upon the steps to salvation: hear, believe, repent, confess, and be baptized.  To make the series complete, this issue discusses the final step: living faithfully until death.  The scope of this step is so broad, that one could extend the series indefinitely.  In trying not to do that, this issue seeks to address some of the key areas in which the Christian must live faithfully.  In reading this issue, one ought to keep in focus the need for faithfulness regardless the area of life in which one is presently involved.  Faithfulness transcends each arena of life, providing the foundation for consistent Christian living.  This issue does not touch upon all areas exhaustively, but exhorts the reader to put into practice Colossians 3:17, “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.”  Only with such an attitude may the Christian find himself at home with his Lord.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , | Comments Off on Faithfulness

Spontaneously Out of Nothing? Seriously?

“For every house is builded by someone; but he that built all things is God” (Hebrews 3:4).

In Stephen Hawking’s most recent book, The Grand Design, he suggests that the Universe was created spontaneously out of nothing.  The reason for this, he says, is that the Universe began before time existed.  Armed with this “insight” he writes: “[The theory] removes the age-old objection to the universe having a beginning, but also means that the beginning of the universe was governed by the laws of science and doesn’t need to be set in motion by some god.”  He then goes on to try to explain what the non-beginning of the Universe was like and how it happened.  The apparent contradictions in Hawking’s work seem obvious.

Hawking ties the dismissal of the Universe’s having a beginning with the notion that God (or a god) is needed to set it in motion.  He then explains how the Universe, nonetheless, still adheres to the notion of cause and effect, suggesting that the laws of science are the adequate cause of the Universe.  One certainly ought not to confuse the notion of having a beginning with having a cause.  To dismiss the idea that the Universe had a beginning, is not to dismiss the idea that the Universe had a cause, and the Universe must still have a sufficient cause.  Hawking has not refuted the Cosmological Argument, because it is still true that for every effect there must be an adequate cause.

Hawking suggests that the sufficient cause for the existence of the Universe is the laws of science.  “Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing . . . .”  But who or what determines the laws?  That is to say, what is their sufficient cause?  Moreover, how can laws determine anything if nothing else exists?  A law is a wonderful thing to have, if it has something to govern.  However, it is meaningless if nothing exists to which to apply it.  For example, one may have a law that requires automobiles to have windshield wipers; without any automobiles, however, the windshield-wiper law is meaningless.  The laws of science (in and of themselves) cannot cause anything to happen if nothing else exists.  One has to wonder why such laws are even around to begin with?  Nevertheless, Hawking says that these laws are responsible for the creation of the Universe, and “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.  It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

The question in the mind of the theist, however, is this: Does the Universe have an adequate cause, and if so, what is it?  This brings the discussion outside of the realm of “beginnings” and “time” altogether and simply focuses upon the notion of cause and effect.  If the Universe cannot explain its own existence, and if laws, in and of themselves, cannot explain the existence of anything, then what is the adequate cause of everything?  The notion that something comes from absolutely nothing is an absurdity.  The notion that the cause of the Universe is something less than the Universe is also absurd because there cannot be more in the effect than there is in the cause; that is equivalent to affirming that something comes from nothing.

So long as science continues to persist in the notion that the Universe had a cause (and Hawking is not denying that), and that such a cause is something less than the Universe itself, then the explanation fails the test of the law of cause and effect.  It does not explain why that for every effect there must not necessarily be an adequate cause, but such is exactly what Hawking must explain!  In fact, if the Universe contains even one effect that does not have an adequate cause, science cannot reliably continue.  How would a scientist ever know that the effects he was studying truly had an adequate cause, and did not just irrationally come about as Hawking suggests the Universe came into existence?

It is still true that God is the only sufficient explanation for everything that exists.  Hawking’s Universe does not have the explanation for itself inside itself, because his explanation is no explanation.  The idea that something can come from nothing is irrational, patently false, obviously absurd, and must be rejected unless one wants to forfeit rationality altogether.  However, if one forfeits rationality, one has no assurances that any explanation (including Hawking’s) has any meaning whatsoever.  A good yell might be just as sufficient.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Spontaneously Out of Nothing? Seriously?

Footprints on the Sands of Time – W. N. “Bill” Jackson (1929-1991)

“I am almost shouting-happy to learn that you mean to give your life to preaching the gospel” reads a September 12th, 1944 letter from Gus Nichols to a just-turned fifteen year old “Billy” Jackson. (His birthday was September 5th.) The letter concerned brother Jackson’s request for a copy of the Nichols-Weaver debate, which brother Nichols said he would happily send to brother Jackson for one dollar and fifty cents. Evidently, this letter was special to brother Jackson; he preserved both it and the envelope in which it came.

Thirty-seven years later, I met brother Bill Jackson in Austin, Texas after he accepted the full-time preaching work at the Southwest church of Christ in June of 1981. I was only thirteen years old and had just become a Christian earlier that year. Not too long after this (April 1982), Bill had a heart attack. My father and I went to visit him in the hospital while he underwent further tests. I’ll never forget how strange “the preacher” looked in a hospital gown. We took him a western paperback novel by Louis L’amour. He expressed his fondness for this genre. I knew he was a pretty good fellow then.

Born on September 5th, 1929, Bill Jackson grew up in Sheffield, Alabama. He enlisted in the Marine reserves in the late 1940s and served in Korea in 1951. After his return, he married Jean Newton, also of Sheffield, on August 3rd, 1952. He began preaching while still in the military in 1953. However, after rising to the rank of Captain in the United States Marine Corp, Bill Jackson was honorably discharged and began preaching on a full time basis in 1956. He was educated at the University of Alabama, the Naval Law School (he had enough credits to become a lawyer), and obtained a degree from David Lipscomb College on May 30th, 1958. He majored in Bible and minored in speech. At graduation, he was given an award Bible and designated “the representative gospel preacher of the graduating class.”

His preaching work took him to Florence, South Carolina; Fulton, Amory, and Columbus, Mississippi; Ipswich, England; and then to Austin, Texas. During these years, brother Jackson raised two boys, Larry and Barry, who continue to remember him for his discipline, sense of humor, and patience. It is a testament to brother Jackson’s faithfulness that his two children are productive members of society. Larry works for Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kansas, and Barry works for Texas A&M University in College Station, TX.

I remember brother Jackson best for his work in Austin, Texas where I was (and am) a member. Always gracious and gentlemanly, His inaugural bulletin article began: “In this, the first issue of the Southwesterner for which we write, we’d like to express appreciation for the wonderful welcome you have given to us.” In Austin, Brother Jackson continued his work with the Southwest congregation for just under ten years. In addition to his regular preaching duties, He taught classes in the Southwest School of Bible Studies, wrote bulletin articles, conducted the congregation’s radio program, appeared on a weekly television program, visited the sick on a regular basis, was always present on congregational work days, held six to ten gospel meetings per year, preached regularly on brotherhood lectureships, and penned numerous articles for various brotherhood periodicals. He exemplified Jesus’ command in Mark 16:15. Bill was also an avid book collector. His library in Austin, housed at the Southwest church of Christ, contains thousands of books on a variety of topics.

In 1981 brother Jackson announced the inauguration of the Annual Southwest Lectures, which is now in its 29th year. The first lectures were held April 15-18, 1982 and the theme was “Truth and Error in Conflict.” Regarding this first lectureship, he wrote: “Here is something that can be of the greatest benefit to each of us, as well as to the church throughout the area—and to the whole brotherhood, to the extent that they will accept our invitation to come.” Those were exciting times for a boy of 13+ years old, and I remember diligently preparing the building and grounds in anticipation for this great event. Some of my fondest childhood memories hark back to the various lectures presented by faithful brethren such as Thomas B. Warren, Guy N. Woods, Andrew Connally, Wendell Winkler, and Bert Thompson. Brother Jackson went on to direct the lectureship until the year of his death in 1991, and edited the volumes of lectureship books that those years produced.

As a writer, brother Jackson was prolific. He wrote at least one, many times two, and sometimes three articles for the weekly bulletin, The Southwesterner. His writing was prudent, pithy, and always Bible based. He had an uncanny knack for boiling down difficult topics to their essentials. His articles also appeared in various brotherhood periodicals such as Contending for the Faith, the Firm Foundation, and the Gospel Advocate. After the congregation acquired the Christian Worker, he became its co-editor along side of David P. Brown. His articles were a healthy mixture of positive exhortation, and reproof and rebuke (2 Timothy 4:2). He was not afraid to tackle the bellwether issues of the day including such topics as homosexuality, abortion, and marriage, divorce, and remarriage. His pen was a constant clarion call for truth, sound doctrine, and righteous living (Titus 2:1). He wrote several books including commentaries on First and Second Corinthians, a guide for new Christians titled That Ye May Grow, and a booklet on the elder and his work.

Brother Jackson’s work as a debater was remarkable. He held sixteen debates on a variety of topics. In his last few years, I was privileged to hear some of these discussions. His debate with John L. Edwards “On the Meaning of Adultery,” was conducted in Austin, Texas January 25th-26th, 1988. Don Tarbet published the proceedings as The Jackson-Edwards Debate later that year. Edwards affirmed and Jackson denied the following proposition: “RESOLVED, the action of adultery in Matthew 19:9 is the action of divorcing and remarriage, and the parties remarried do not continue in adultery as long as they are together.” Brother Jackson also debated Baptists, Pentecostals, skeptics, and Atheists. The last debate he held was with a Baptist by the name of Bob Ross. The debate was conducted in a local school building, and I was privileged to attend. Brother Jackson’s demeanor was unflappable while Ross and his moderator became more and more perturbed as the debate progressed. Nevertheless, while brother Jackson strongly disagreed with his opponents, he was always the commensurate gentleman. After his death, Bob Ross wrote to the congregation to express his sympathy. He praised brother Jackson for the fact that he was a man of integrity and character who could disagree with you without being disagreeable. We would do well to emulate such a balance of qualities today that we may stand for truth, yet earn the respect of our enemies (Proverbs 16:7).

Brother Jackson kept a cross-stiched poem, “The Clock of Life,” written by Robert H. Smith, which is currently on display in his library.

The clock of life is wound but once,

And no man has the power.

To tell just when the hands will stop,

At late or early hour.

Now is the only time you own,

Live, love, toil with a will.

Place no faith in tomorrow for

The clock may then be still.

Bill Jackson’s mortal clock stopped on April 5th, 1991, due to his heart problems; he was driving home when he passed. He was sixty-one years old. Brothers David P. Brown, and Ira Y. Rice, Jr., conducted the memorial services for brother Jackson after his passing. He was later eulogized in the June, 1991 issue of the Christian Worker by: Garland Elkins, Guy N. Woods, his son Barry Jackson, David P Brown, his brother Lloyd Jackson, Robert R. Taylor, Jr., Dub McClish, Jerry Moffitt, Ira Y. Rice, Jr., Paul Sain, and his secretary for many years, Midge Siebert. I was privileged to have known him in my most formative years, from the time I was thirteen to the time I was twenty-three. His preaching, teaching, life, and work, made an enormous impact upon me. I am thankful to have known him, and grateful to the Lord for sending him my way. I look forward to seeing him again in eternity.

Kevin Cauley is a teacher for the Southwest School of Bible Studies in Austin, Texas. He is a 1989 graduate of the Southwest School of Bible Studies, a 1994 graduate of the University of Texas at Austin (B.A.), and 2010 graduate of St. Edwards University (M.L.A.). He is married and has four boys. He resides in Buda, Texas. He may be reached for comment at k.cauley@swsbs.edu.

Footprints on the Sands of Time – W. N. “Bill” Jackson (1929-1991)

“I am almost shouting-happy to learn that you mean to give your life to preaching the gospel” reads a September 12th, 1944 letter from Gus Nichols to a just-turned fifteen year old “Billy” Jackson. (His birthday was September 5th.) The letter concerned brother Jackson’s request for a copy of the Nichols-Weaver debate, which brother Nichols said he would happily send to brother Jackson for one dollar and fifty cents. Evidently, this letter was special to brother Jackson; he preserved both it and the envelope in which it came.

Thirty-seven years later, I met brother Bill Jackson in Austin, Texas after he accepted the full-time preaching work at the Southwest church of Christ in June of 1981. I was only thirteen years old and had just become a Christian earlier that year. Not too long after this (April 1982), Bill had a heart attack. My father and I went to visit him in the hospital while he underwent further tests. I’ll never forget how strange “the preacher” looked in a hospital gown. We took him a western paperback novel by Louis L’amour. He expressed his fondness for this genre. I knew he was a pretty good fellow then.

Born on September 5th, 1929, Bill Jackson grew up in Sheffield, Alabama. He enlisted in the Marine reserves in the late 1940s and served in Korea in 1951. After his return, he married Jean Newton, also of Sheffield, on August 3rd, 1952. He began preaching while still in the military in 1953. However, after rising to the rank of Captain in the United States Marine Corp, Bill Jackson was honorably discharged and began preaching on a full time basis in 1956. He was educated at the University of Alabama, the Naval Law School (he had enough credits to become a lawyer), and obtained a degree from David Lipscomb College on May 30th, 1958. He majored in Bible and minored in speech. At graduation, he was given an award Bible and designated “the representative gospel preacher of the graduating class.”

His preaching work took him to Florence, South Carolina; Fulton, Amory, and Columbus, Mississippi; Ipswich, England; and then to Austin, Texas. During these years, brother Jackson raised two boys, Larry and Barry, who continue to remember him for his discipline, sense of humor, and patience. It is a testament to brother Jackson’s faithfulness that his two children are productive members of society. Larry works for Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kansas, and Barry works for Texas A&M University in College Station, TX.

I remember brother Jackson best for his work in Austin, Texas where I was (and am) a member. Always gracious and gentlemanly, His inaugural bulletin article began: “In this, the first issue of the Southwesterner for which we write, we’d like to express appreciation for the wonderful welcome you have given to us.” In Austin, Brother Jackson continued his work with the Southwest congregation for just under ten years. In addition to his regular preaching duties, He taught classes in the Southwest School of Bible Studies, wrote bulletin articles, conducted the congregation’s radio program, appeared on a weekly television program, visited the sick on a regular basis, was always present on congregational work days, held six to ten gospel meetings per year, preached regularly on brotherhood lectureships, and penned numerous articles for various brotherhood periodicals. He exemplified Jesus’ command in Mark 16:15. Bill was also an avid book collector. His library in Austin, housed at the Southwest church of Christ, contains thousands of books on a variety of topics.

In 1981 brother Jackson announced the inauguration of the Annual Southwest Lectures, which is now in its 29th year. The first lectures were held April 15-18, 1982 and the theme was “Truth and Error in Conflict.” Regarding this first lectureship, he wrote: “Here is something that can be of the greatest benefit to each of us, as well as to the church throughout the area—and to the whole brotherhood, to the extent that they will accept our invitation to come.” Those were exciting times for a boy of 13+ years old, and I remember diligently preparing the building and grounds in anticipation for this great event. Some of my fondest childhood memories hark back to the various lectures presented by faithful brethren such as Thomas B. Warren, Guy N. Woods, Andrew Connally, Wendell Winkler, and Bert Thompson. Brother Jackson went on to direct the lectureship until the year of his death in 1991, and edited the volumes of lectureship books that those years produced.

As a writer, brother Jackson was prolific. He wrote at least one, many times two, and sometimes three articles for the weekly bulletin, The Southwesterner. His writing was prudent, pithy, and always Bible based. He had an uncanny knack for boiling down difficult topics to their essentials. His articles also appeared in various brotherhood periodicals such as Contending for the Faith, the Firm Foundation, and the Gospel Advocate. After the congregation acquired the Christian Worker, he became its co-editor along side of David P. Brown. His articles were a healthy mixture of positive exhortation, and reproof and rebuke (2 Timothy 4:2). He was not afraid to tackle the bellwether issues of the day including such topics as homosexuality, abortion, and marriage, divorce, and remarriage. His pen was a constant clarion call for truth, sound doctrine, and righteous living (Titus 2:1). He wrote several books including commentaries on First and Second Corinthians, a guide for new Christians titled That Ye May Grow, and a booklet on the elder and his work.

Brother Jackson’s work as a debater was remarkable. He held sixteen debates on a variety of topics. In his last few years, I was privileged to hear some of these discussions. His debate with John L. Edwards “On the Meaning of Adultery,” was conducted in Austin, Texas January 25th-26th, 1988. Don Tarbet published the proceedings as The Jackson-Edwards Debate later that year. Edwards affirmed and Jackson denied the following proposition: “RESOLVED, the action of adultery in Matthew 19:9 is the action of divorcing and remarriage, and the parties remarried do not continue in adultery as long as they are together.” Brother Jackson also debated Baptists, Pentecostals, skeptics, and Atheists. The last debate he held was with a Baptist by the name of Bob Ross. The debate was conducted in a local school building, and I was privileged to attend. Brother Jackson’s demeanor was unflappable while Ross and his moderator became more and more perturbed as the debate progressed. Nevertheless, while brother Jackson strongly disagreed with his opponents, he was always the commensurate gentleman. After his death, Bob Ross wrote to the congregation to express his sympathy. He praised brother Jackson for the fact that he was a man of integrity and character who could disagree with you without being disagreeable. We would do well to emulate such a balance of qualities today that we may stand for truth, yet earn the respect of our enemies (Proverbs 16:7).

Brother Jackson kept a cross-stiched poem, “The Clock of Life,” written by Robert H. Smith, which is currently on display in his library.

The clock of life is wound but once,

And no man has the power.

To tell just when the hands will stop,

At late or early hour.

Now is the only time you own,

Live, love, toil with a will.

Place no faith in tomorrow for

The clock may then be still.

Bill Jackson’s mortal clock stopped on April 5th, 1991, due to his heart problems; he was driving home when he passed. He was sixty-one years old. Brothers David P. Brown, and Ira Y. Rice, Jr., conducted the memorial services for brother Jackson after his passing. He was later eulogized in the June, 1991 issue of the Christian Worker by: Garland Elkins, Guy N. Woods, his son Barry Jackson, David P Brown, his brother Lloyd Jackson, Robert R. Taylor, Jr., Dub McClish, Jerry Moffitt, Ira Y. Rice, Jr., Paul Sain, and his secretary for many years, Midge Siebert. I was privileged to have known him in my most formative years, from the time I was thirteen to the time I was twenty-three. His preaching, teaching, life, and work, made an enormous impact upon me. I am thankful to have known him, and grateful to the Lord for sending him my way. I look forward to seeing him again in eternity.

Kevin Cauley is a teacher for the Southwest School of Bible Studies in Austin, Texas. He is a 1989 graduate of the Southwest School of Bible Studies, a 1994 graduate of the University of Texas at Austin (B.A.), and 2010 graduate of St. Edwards University (M.L.A.). He is married and has four boys. He resides in Buda, Texas. He may be reached for comment at k.cauley@swsbs.edu.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Footprints on the Sands of Time – W. N. “Bill” Jackson (1929-1991)

Hearing the Still Small Voice

After Elijah’s contest with the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel, Jezebel threatened to kill him on sight (1 Kings 19:2).  So Elijah high tailed it out of Israel, ran down to Mt. Sinai, and camped out in a cave.  There God said to Elijah, “What are you doing here?”  Elijah replied that Jezebel was trying to kill him and so he thought it best to get out of Dodge.  God responded with three demonstrations of power.  First God sent a wind so great that it tore the rocks off the side of the mountain.  Second, God caused an earthquake to come and shake the mountain.  Finally, God made a fire.  Each of these items contained great power and fury.  However, the text says: “The LORD was not in the wind.” “The LORD was not in the earthquake.”  “The LORD was not in the fire.”  There was, however, a fourth phenomena after the fire, “a still small voice.”

There are some who would turn this passage into some kind of mystical text and suggest that we must listen for some kind of supernatural “still small voice” of God during meditation or prayer.  Those who seek to understand it in that way simply reveal their subjective predispositions toward Bible interpretation.  In contrast, what God is teaching Elijah is that God’s power is not in some great event such a wind, earthquake, or fire, but in the simple spoken word, the still small voice.

Elijah’s efforts at preaching and teaching God’s message to the largely apostate nation of Israel were feeble compared with the great power wielded by King Ahab and Queen Jezebel.  But Elijah had something that they did not have: the truth of God’s word.  That truth is more powerful than any physical phenomena because it has the capability to change the hearts and lives of men.  It isn’t in the great manifestations of power that God does his greatest work, but in the small but free movements of the human heart that is taught His truth.

When seeing natural disasters and calamities that occur around us, many today will be quick to point out “God’s judgment.”  It certainly is not beyond God’s power to so judge and God has executed justice in these ways upon some wicked people.  There is no proof, however, that God so judges today, though many seem to desire such a display from Him.  Such desires are misguided.  They are misguided because they focus on the outward and physical instead of the inward and spiritual.  They are misguided because they lend to characterizing God as a capricious, malevolent, and punitive dictator.  Such desires are also inconsistent with the nature and message of God’s greatest revelation, His Son, Jesus (John 1:18).

In the message of the cross, we do not find a vengeful and vindictive God, but One who is forgiving, compassionate and loving toward those who so act as His enemies.  You won’t find this message proclaimed with boisterous and noisy phenomena of magnificent proportions, but with the still small voice of God’s people as they seek to live that message in their lives on a daily basis.  It is also proclaimed in the still small voice of those who lift up His message in the pulpits and classrooms across our nation.  It may be a still small voice, but it is the voice that God has chosen for His message to be spread today (Matthew 28:19).

God’s greatest accomplishments come when individual people hear that still small voice – His word – and change accordingly.  That is not the boisterous and radical change that is fomented upon us by the change agents in the world today who would create political unrest, societal upheaval, and economic instability in order to foster their version of “the gospel.”  Those individuals substitute the wisdom of men for the power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18).  What is that power?  It is the gospel (Romans 1:16-17) and it provides for us all of the righteousness we need – in its own still small way—as individuals to transform the world.

“For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (1 Corinthians 1:21).

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Hearing the Still Small Voice

“The Fool Hath Said in his Heart there is No God.”

Kevin Cauley

Atheism, as the name implies, is primarily a negative philosophy; it is first and foremost a denial of the existence of God and of all things supernatural.  Strict atheists claim to know that God does not exist.  Many atheists have now seen the folly in making such a claim and no longer so argue.  Nevertheless, they can be classified as practical atheists in the sense that while they claim technical ignorance of God’s existence, they live their lives consistently with their disavowal of God.  These are the most common atheists today and fall under the definition of atheist as offered by Baron d’Holbach:

An atheist is someone who destroys human chimeras in order to call people back to nature, experience and reason.  He is a thinker who, having meditated on matter, its properties and ways of behaving, has no reason to imagine ideal forces, imaginary intelligences or rational beings in order to explain the phenomena of the universe or the operations of nature – which, far from making us know nature better, merely make it capricious, inexplicable and unknowable, useless for human happiness.[1]

So while they plead technical ignorance regarding the question of the existence of God, they see the concept of the existence of God itself as useless so far as making any real contributions to the betterment of society.

In large part, most atheists hold that belief in God has brought more harm upon the world than good.  Atheists may distinguish between the major religions, but beyond that, they do not draw distinctions between religious groups.  They react largely against Calvinism as the predominant Christian belief and paint most religious beliefs with this broad brush.  Such arguments can be truly classified as straw men since the majority of those who profess to be Christians do not adhere to Calvinistic theology.  Nevertheless, atheism presses forward and continues to press for freedom from religion in all aspects of society.

D’Holbach’s statement truly fits the statement of the “fool” in Psalm 14:1.  Perhaps the best thing that can be done in regard to atheism is to point out its true implications.  What does it mean to say, “There is no God?”  What does this imply?  In this article we will look at three basic implications of atheism as pointed out by atheists themselves and in so doing will see how Psalm 14:1 is truly vindicated.

It is foolish to say there is no God because that implies no purpose of life.

To say God does not exist implies that there is no ultimate purpose of life.  The name of this philosophy of purposelessness is called “Nihilism” and it was championed specifically by the 19th century atheistic philosopher Frederick Nietzsche who rightly realized that if God did not exist, then one could not claim any objective absolute purpose of life.  “The end of the moral interpretation of the world, which no longer has any sanction after it hast tried to escape into some beyond, leads to nihilism.  ‘All lacks meaning.’” [2]

Some atheists have tried to get around this by claiming that there are purposes in life.  This is simply a rouse.  To say that there are purposes in life reduces the purpose of life to one’s creating his own purposes in life, a self-contradiction.  Jean Paul Sartre wrote:

If man as existentialists conceive of him cannot be defined, it is because to begin with he is nothing.  He will not be anything until later, and then he will be what he makes of himself.  Thus, there is no human nature since there is no God to conceive of it.  Man is not only that which he conceives himself to be, but that which he wills himself to be, and since he conceives of himself only after he exists, just as he wills himself to be after being thrown into existence, man is nothing other than what he makes of himself. [3]

Richard Dawkins has weighed in on this matter in his book River Out of Eden.  He writes,

In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, and other people are going to get lucky; and you won’t find any rhyme or reason to it, nor any justice.  The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is at the bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good.  Nothing but blind pitiless indifference. [4]

One cannot consistently uphold the notion that there is no purpose in life without adopting a self-destructive nihilistic attitude.  Such was the attitude of the atheist Ernest Hemingway who after realizing that he could not escape his purposelessness decided to end his life with his favorite hunting rifle.  Such is the utter folly of those who, along with Sartre, say “even if God were to exist, it would make no difference.” [5]

It is foolish to say there is no God because that implies no absolute values in life.

To say that there are no absolute values means that each person may create his own values as he sees fit.  This was the situation in the period of the Judges when “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25).  If there are no absolute values, then all actions become morally equal and everything is permitted.  The atheist Sartre accepted this when he wrote: “Dostoyevsky once wrote ‘If God does not exist, everything is permissible.’ This is the starting point of existentialism.  Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist, and man is consequently abandoned.” [6] He then wrote: “If, however, God does not exist, we will encounter no values or orders that can legitimize our conduct.” [7] In another one of Sartre’s works he wrote: “… nothing, absolutely nothing, justifies me in adopting this or that particular value, this or that particular scale of values.  As a being by whom values exist, I am unjustifiable.” [8] Nothing justifies the atheist in adopting any value or any particular scale of values.  The wholesale abandonment of absolute values is utter foolishness.  It implies that there is no absolute obligation to do what is right in any given circumstance.

Such was the position taken by atheist Dan Barker when he said “If we choose, and you don’t have to, I don’t think there is a moral imperative, but if we do choose to be moral, then those of us who intend to act in ways that minimize harm are the ones that can be called moral or ethical people.” [9] Morality is just a choice we make like deciding whether to have Combo #1 or Combo #2 at McDonalds.  Lack of moral imperative means that anyone may decide to act in any way he or she chooses at any given moment.  Now, is that foolishness or what?

Nietzsche agrees.  “Finally, at the highest stage of morality until now, he acts according to his standard of things and men; he himself determines for himself and others what is honorable, what is profitable.” [10] Sartre also agrees.  “….we remind man that there is no legislator but himself; that he himself, thus abandoned, must decide for himself….” [11] What utter foolishness, yet this is atheism.

It is foolish to say there is no God because one cuts oneself off from faith, hope, and love.

There can be no doubt that atheism seeks to undermine and destroy religion, the basis of faith, hope, and love.  As Karl Marx wrote: “Atheism is humanism mediated with itself through the supersession of religion….” [12] For the atheist, there is no God in whom to believe, there is no ultimate destiny for which to hope, and there is no objective basis upon which to love one’s fellow man.  Atheism produces nothing but doubt, despair, and selfishness.  Sartre opines: “There is no other universe except the human universe, the universe of human subjectivity.” [13] When faith, hope, and love are removed, one cannot help but agree with Sartre’s conclusion in his play “No Exit,” “Hell is other people.”  What a pessimistic view of life and horrendous attitude to have toward one’s fellow.  Such a view is borne out of one’s doubts, despairs, fears, and contempt of one’s fellow man.  What a foolish attitude!  How much greater is the Apostle Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 13:12-13 “And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.”  Atheism cannot admit of any pure altruism because the doctrine of organic evolution implies personal and selfish adaptative advantage in every individual behavior.  What a truly foolish world that would be.

Atheism is a foolish philosophy because it implies that there is no purpose of life, that there are no values above our own creation, and that there is no reason to have faith, hope, or love in one’s life.  Madeline Bunting summed up what atheism has offered over the past century when she said:

There’s an underlying anxiety that atheist humanism has failed.  Over the 20th century, atheist political regimes racked up an appalling (and unmatched) record for violence.  Atheist humanism hasn’t generated a compelling popular narrative and ethic of what it is to be human and our place in the cosmos; where religion has retreated, the gap has been filled with consumerism, football, Strictly Come Dancing and a mindless absorption in passing desires. [14]

“A mindless absorption in passing desires” – utter foolishness!

[1] Paul Heinrich Dietrich d’Holbach as quoted in Alister McGrath. The Twilight of Atheism. Double Day: New York, 2004. p.30.

[2] Frederick Nietzsche as quoted in Walter Kaufmann. Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. Meridian: New York, 1975.  p.131.

[3] Jean Paul Sartre. Existentialism Is a Humanism. Yale: New Haven, 2007. p.22.

[4] Richard Dawkins. River Out of Eden. Basic Books: New York, 1995. p.133.

[5] Ibid.n.3. p.53.

[6] Ibid. n.3. p.29.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Jean Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness. Washington Square Press: New York, 1956. p.76.

[9] Dan Barker. Oral Speech. University of Minnesota, October 19th, 2006.

[10] Friedrich Nietzsche. Human, All Too Human: a Book for Free Spirits trans. by Marion Faber, Stephen Lehmann. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1996. p.65.

[11] Jean Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism trans. Philip Mairet (Brooklyn: Haskell House Publishers Ltd., 1977), 23-56.

[12] Karl Marx, The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, trans. Gregor Benton (Paris, 1844).  Accessed online at <http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/epm/3rd.htm> 29 May 2009.

[13] Jean Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism trans. Philip Mairet (Brooklyn: Haskell House Publishers Ltd., 1977), pp. 23-56.

[14] Madeleine Bunting. “No Wonder Atheists Are Angry: They Seem Ready to Believe Anything,” Guardian, January 7, 2006, a review of The Root of All Evil? (UK TV Channel 4).  Accessed 9 June 2009. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/jan/07/raceandreligion.comment>

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on “The Fool Hath Said in his Heart there is No God.”