Loading summary
Transcript37 lines
- [00:13]
A
You're listening to Amy hall and Greg Koukl. Thank you so much for joining us. All right, Greg, this first question comes from David.
- [00:21]
B
All right.
- [00:22]
A
Are you about to tell me, you know, the one and only perfectly true denomination on Earth?
- [00:28]
B
No, I didn't start it yet. The only way you can have that is if I started it. And everything about the denomination was my beliefs, because all the beliefs I hold, I think are true. Other words, I wouldn't believe them. Now, I could be mistaken. Okay. I'm not really sure what the significance of this question is. And part of the problem with it. Oh, I know where it's coming from. Atheists raise the issue of all the thousands and thousands, thousands of denominations. I think they way overstate that. First of all, I don't think that's the case, that there are all these thousands. But it's not. It's so what? It doesn't mean anything. The question is denominations of what? Well, there'd be denominations of Christianity, of course. Well, that means they have to have a core set of beliefs to even qualify as being within the room, so to speak, or in the hallway, as Lewis would put it, for mere Christianity. Then you decide on the individual doors. And, you know, he became an angler Tolkien, and his close friend Tolkien was a Roman Catholic, and he said, those are different rooms, so to speak. But you're all under the one house. All right. Our defense is of mere Christianity. Now, of course, we have particular views. I almost said peculiar, but I mean particular sometimes peculiar.
- [01:48]
A
Peculiar in the older sense of the word.
- [01:50]
B
Older sense of the word, where we have our individual takes on smaller issues that are still within the pale. Okay, but that's so what. And everybody. I made a statement about myself. You know, we're not starting the perfect denomination. I mean, I don't have that because I didn't start it. But I'm just making the point that everybody who believes anything thinks that their beliefs are true. To believe is to hold that a thing is. So that's the nature of a belief. If you can't believe something you think is false, if you think it's false, you're not believing it. Then it's just connected. Right? Now, there's a difference between believing something to be true and knowing it's true. That's a different category. But belief, everybody who believes something, they think it's correct. So the atheist here, I'm presuming it's an atheist who offers this. Maybe not. Maybe somebody posturing or offering the challenge of the atheist. That person, whatever it is. That belief set is that David holds. They are convinced it's true. How do I know that? Because they believe it. And if they didn't think it were true, whatever their beliefs are, they wouldn't believe them. And so this is something to keep in mind. Everyone who believes anything thinks their belief is true. So nobody can be faulted really legitimately for thinking his view is correct, because that's the nature of belief. Okay? Now, knowledge is a different category. It's a subset. It's justified true belief. So if you say you know this, you have to have. Your belief has to be accurate and you have to have good reasons to believe it. You don't just believe it by accident kind of thing, but everybody who believes anything thinks it's actually true. Our commitment is to a larger category of things. So the fact that there are all these denominations doesn't undermine Christianity at all. It just trades on an obvious feature of epistemology. Knowledge is that we don't always get things right and therefore we have differences of opinion. But when it comes to Christianity, there is a set standard of orthodox beliefs that are grounded in scripture and go straightforward all the way to now, which is what makes Christianity Christianity. Now, it turns out that, say, lds, for example, your Mormon friends, these aren't Christian, they're Mormons. That's a different religion. And you know that it's a different religion by looking at the content. In fact, Joseph Smith made this clear when he was here, even though many Mormons are posturing as Christian now. Or maybe put it this way, if Mormonism is real Christianity, then no other denominations our real Christianity, we're something else. The key is that this is a very different set of religious beliefs and they're incommensurable with classical Christianity. And this is exactly what educated Mormons will say. We reject Nicaea, which is the foundation of orthodox Christianity. And by the way, to say that they're not Christian isn't to say that they're nasty people. I'm using the term Christian in a theological sense. It isn't even to say that their views are false. I think they are, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying it's a different religion. Now, whether which religion is true, that's a different discussion. But the point I'm making is that even though there are variations within actual Christendom, you have Christendom as a specific thing. Mere Christianity, to use Lewis's characterization. That's what we defend. And the variations in House are not relevant to the core.
- [05:47]
A
And that's because those variations aren't what save us. What saves us is Christ's work on the cross and our belief in him. And he saves us by grace. If it were the case that we had to do certain things in order to be saved, then the specific denominations would matter a great deal because they would be telling you, you have to do this differently. You have to do this differently. But if Jesus is the one who saves us by his work, not by our work, then it depends on him, not on the specific denomination that we're in.
- [06:20]
B
Right. Here's another comparison that I think is very useful when you talk to people who raise these challenges. What about science? Science is absolutely thick with varying denominations. Just take Darwinism. You have the Darwinist fundamentalists like Dawkins who hold to the view of natural selection and mutation and no saltations, in other words, no jumps from one to the other. But it's all a very slow process. That's Darwinian fundamentalism. Okay. By the way, you have people who are Darwinian fundamentalists who are also social Darwinists. In other words, you should apply Darwinism to culture. The strong rule, the weak. Now, Dawkins totally rejects that, but there are people who accept it. And with good reason, it seems to me. In any event, on the other hand, under their view.
- [07:12]
A
Pardon me, with good reason. Under their view.
- [07:14]
B
Under their view, yes.
- [07:16]
A
Not that they have good reason.
- [07:17]
B
Thanks for the clarification. Right. If you follow Darwinism consistently, I don't know what genuine, meaningful or justifiable objection you could have to social Darwinism. The strong rule, the weak in culture, unless it's just personal preference, but that's relativism. And in contrast to Darwinian fundamentalists, you got people like the late Stephen Jay Gould from Harvard who advanced a view called punctuated equilibrium. And that is you have stasis for a long period of time, then you have very rapid change, and then you have long stasis. And that's because of what the fossil record shows. It seems to indicate that. And those are just two examples. You have all kinds of disagreement on these basic things. Physics and the quantum world and the big bang, cosmology and all steady state theory and all kinds of things that have huge ramifications for theological conclusions. They disagree all over the place, and they band together when they have a common enemy, the Christian. But when they're not fighting the Christians, Gould and Dawkins, they were at each other's throats. I mean, it was nasty. They. This is why they. They called Gould's View evolution by jerks because it's, you know, jerky movements. And a lot of people didn't like Gould and others that held the view. I thought that was kind of funny, but I think get a good rise out of you for that. But that's actually what they referred to it as because of that infighting. The point is, every discipline has varieties of views and beliefs within the discipline on everything. So I have a master's degree in philosophy. And it's one of the frustrating things because every time you deal with something, you gotta learn 10 different views with 10 different complicated names with really smart people who disagree with the rest of them. It's the nature of knowledge.
- [09:22]
A
Well, it's also the nature of truth. Truth is exclusive. So not only are they arguing that, you know, they're arguing for different views, but they're saying that their view is the true one because they're arguing for it. Yeah, they think it's actually accurate to reality. And this is why I think a lot of times statements like this go back to the idea that religion is not in the category of objective reality. And therefore you do not have the right to say that yours is correct because none of them are correct or all of them are correct. They could mean either one with that statement. But if the spiritual world is in the category of true or false, if it's part of reality, then of course there is a truth, and then there are untruths. Some things are true, some things are false. That's just the nature of it. And everyone is arguing for what they think is true, unless they're arguing that none of it is true and it's just whatever we want.
- [10:26]
B
Right, right. It's all relative there.
- [10:28]
A
But the nature of truth is that it is exclusive. It excludes the things that are fals. So if you're going to make a claim that what you believe is true, there's nothing unusual about that at all.
- [10:38]
B
Well, the intimation of this kind of challenge is two kind of undercurrents here. One is you're irrational. You alone have the true denomination. That's irrational. And we've just talked about that's not. I mean, this is the nature. If you think you're right, that's the nature of belief. And it's also the nature of various disciplines of knowledge that we think have merit, even though there's people who disagree. And the second thing is the implication is this is arrogant, you know, And I think that's kind of hidden there. You're the one who has the truth. Oh, lucky you. And I've actually had people say that to me even in, you know, I'm thinking of public appearances, television. You know, I can think of one time when I was on this show in Canada and this woman says some people here think they have a corner on the truth. So is she willing to admit that a whole bunch of things that she thinks and believes is actually false? No, of course, everything that she thinks is that she believes she thinks is true. But I could say she thinks she has the corner on the truth. But that's an uncharitable way of saying something very ordinary, and that is everyone thinks their beliefs are accurate.
- [11:53]
A
And just in case it's not clear, I wanna say something quickly about. Cause David might be talking about Christianity itself rather than just a denomination of Christianity. And I just wanna explain why Christians say that Jesus is the only way, because it's very, very simple. If it is true that God created us, that we have broken his law, and that we are out of relationship with him and we require a way to be. To be reconciled to him.
- [12:26]
B
Because we're guilty.
- [12:27]
A
Because we're guilty. What Christians say is that Jesus paid the cost to reconcile us with God so that we could be forgiven and be with God forever. Jesus is the only one who made that sacrifice. Therefore, he is the only sacrifice. And trust in him is required in order to receive that forgiveness. So it's not that we're just saying you can only believe this and nothing else. There's actually a reason for this, Right?
- [12:57]
B
He's the only one who solved the problem.
- [12:58]
A
Yes. That is why we say he's the only way, because there is an objectively. We've done something objectively wrong, and we need an objective reconciliation to God. And Jesus has provided that, and no one else has provided that.
- [13:12]
B
A medical analog is really helpful here. You go to the doctor. Doctor says, you have cancer, you have a brain tumor, you will die in two weeks unless we operate now and remove the tumor. Okay? You have a threat and you have a solution to the threat. And it's a singular solution. Because singular problems often have singular solutions. And the medical metaphor is a fabulous one for making the point. It isn't because the doctor's arrogant. He may be arrogant, but it has nothing to do with his diagnosis. His diagnosis is based on facts. Now, if people think, oh, you're wrong, I want a second opinion, okay, you're fine to do that, but that doesn't change the reality. It may turn out to be that he's correct. And if somebody else Has a different diagnosis, that other person thinks their diagnosis is correct. No, you don't need surgery. You just need chemo, and that's what's going to save your life. But notice everybody is weighing in what they think is the correct answer. So. So go ahead.
- [14:19]
A
So what I said about Jesus, either it's true or it's false. If it's true, then the other options are excluded.
- [14:26]
B
Right.
- [14:27]
A
So this is just the nature of how truth works and how reasoning works.
- [14:32]
B
Exactly, exactly.
- [14:34]
A
So you just have to. It's not wrong to say it's true. You just have to make your case.
- [14:38]
B
Yeah.
- [14:39]
A
All right, let's go on to a question from Gary. How can a person know they are going to heaven?
- [14:46]
B
Well, that. In order to answer that. Pardon me. In order to answer that question, that depends on criteria. Okay, so heaven is a place you go to, and the question is, how do you get in? All right. Different religions are going to give different answers. Actually, not all religions believe in heaven. The monotheistic religions do. Hinduism, Buddhism, animism. I mean, these aren't features of their whole program. There is a kind of state of affairs, a final state of affairs, an eschatology of sorts for them, but it's not like heaven. So the question is, what is the requirement to get into heaven? Now, you've got to have somebody answer that question who is a reliable authority. You can just make a guess. All right, but that's not authoritative. Jesus came to communicate something about human beings, actually, that we already know about ourselves, that we are fallen and we are guilty. And I came to seek and to save those who are lost. I came to. How does he put it now? Give my life a ransom for sinners. It's only the sinners that need the rescue. The sick need the physician. Okay, so Jesus, antidote to the problem that he identifies, which we already know. We know something's wrong with us. We know something's wrong with the world. The thing that's wrong with us is something evil in us that we do. That's why we feel guilty. We feel guilty because we are guilty. Okay, now what? And then Jesus says, there is punishment for your guilt that I will take upon myself. Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for a friend. And even while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. So he is extending a hand of mercy. So how do we know we get into heaven if we receive the mercy that God provides through Jesus? I mean, it's so, in a certain sense, so simple. Now, obviously there's Massive complexity to the details, but the basics could be understanding. You want to be forgiven? Do you want to know God's mercy? It's available through Jesus. He who believes in me is not judged. He who does not believe in the wrath of God abides in him. That's Jesus in John 6. So Jesus makes it really clear. Now, why would we believe Jesus? Because he's authority that we can trust. How do we know that? Because of what he did, the way he lived his life, how he died, and he rose again from the dead. All of these things work together to indicate that Jesus is someone to be reckoned with on this issue. Because according to him, he will be the one that everybody stands before in the last day. He's the judge. And the books will be opened and there will be every bad thing you have ever done in your life. It's right there in those books. And that will not be a pretty picture because everybody judged by their deeds ends up getting punished forever. They can't make it on their own deeds. That's why grace and mercy are necessary. So basically, you can go one of two ways on this. One, A person. How do I know when I'm saved? Well, you can try to work your way to heaven. Then you're never going to know. Actually, what you're going to know deep down inside is you're not good enough. And there's the Psalm 134, 5 somewhere in there where it says, lord, if you should mark iniquity, if that's the way we're going to be judged, oh Lord, who could stand? Who could stand? Nobody could stand is the point of the psalmist. But there is forgiveness with you, that you will be praised. And so that's the alternative. So you can go on your own merits, and that's a. That's a failing enterprise. Forget about that. Or you can go on the merits of Christ, receive the mercy that God provides through the grace available through Jesus by putting your trust in Him. So the simple answer with all of that foundation laid is that if you are trusting in Jesus for your salvation, then you are going to be with Him. If you are trusting in your own works, well, you're going to be judged by your works. You're choosing the mechanism or the terms of the judgment, your own behavior. Okay, good luck. That's not going to work. Or Jesus merit Jesus mercy, grace of God, that works. And now there's some other things too. Obviously somebody who avails themselves of the grace of God based on the promise of God, that's going to have a transforming effect in their life. And there's going to be evidence of that. That's another indicator. There's a subjective element where you realize you belong to God now and our spirit bears witness with God's spirit, that we are children of God and our hearts cry out abba, Father. That's in Romans 8. So there's this subjective element, but the foundation is Jesus. If you trust Jesus, then Jesus saves you.
- [20:14]
A
I think about Acts 16 where it says, trembling with fear, he fell down before Paul and Silas and after he brought them out he said, sirs, what must I do to be saved? They said, believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household.
- [20:31]
B
There you go. That's the Philippine jailer. Yeah.
- [20:34]
A
So it's unclear to me if this question is an inquiry or an accusation. And the answer is slightly different. So is it an inquiry saying what are you, what do you say saves us? And this goes to your answer here, or is it an accusation of some sort of pride, like how can a person know he's going to be in heaven? And the answer is somewhat the same and it has to do with the Gospel. It's not prideful for me to say that Jesus is going to save me because I'm trusting in him. I think people think this is a prideful thing to say because they assume it's about being good enough. So if I say I know I'm going to heaven, then they hear, I know I've done enough good things and I've followed all the requirements and I've met the requirements. But actually what we mean is we know we will be saved because it depends on Jesus, not on us. And this goes to your whole explanation there, Greg.
- [21:32]
B
I remember being on a show, this is in the 80s, it was Dennis Prager's show actually in the LA and the KBC, the ABC affiliate here in LA, religion on the line. And there was Dennis as the host who, you know, I've known since the 80s and I'm still friends with, you know. So even in spite of the accident he had a couple year before last, but there was a Roman Catholic priest and a rabbi and then me. So they have four of us there, right. And I remember saying to Dennis, because we were talking about the issue of salvation, he is very committed to a works based salvation as a, as an observant Jew. Good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell is basically his summation of that. And I said Dennis and it was very genuine. But I said, Dennis, I think you're a better man than I'll ever be, but. And I have a lot of admiration for him, but I will get into heaven before you will. And then everybody in the panel, all three of them, accused me of being self righteous. And my response was, you know what's really odd about that accusation is I am the only person on this panel that's saying my righteousness is not going to get me into heaven, yet I am being accused of being self righteous. Now, of course, I think what was going on is just what you said. They understand salvation based on works. And if I say I'm getting into heaven before any of the other people on the panel, then, or Dennis in particular had in mind there, then I'm saying I'm more righteous than Dennis. But that wasn't the message at all. And it was very clear in my conversation. But nevertheless, that's the way they read it.
- [23:12]
A
What's so interesting is I've seen this happen over and over where I will explain the gospel and people literally cannot hear what I'm saying. Atheists do the same thing in a different way. They'll continue to say, oh, you're just afraid. Or they say all sorts of things where they do not hear the gospel. They think we're living in fear of God because they miss the whole gospel where God is reconciling us to himself. So you can see this blindness in people in all sorts of ways that they literally cannot hear what we're saying. And sometimes it takes a long time to try and get that across to someone. And so don't give up and be aware that they're going to hear you differently from what you're actually saying.
- [24:01]
B
Let me close with this verse from First John 5, which is in light of knowing you're going to be saved and the reason that we have the confidence. Here's what John writes, verse 11 and following and the testimony is this, that God has given us. That's past tense, right? Has given us eternal life. And this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has the life. He who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. Finally, verse 13. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. So that you may know that you have eternal life. Our knowledge and confidence in our eternal life is based on having Jesus and not having anything else.
- [24:54]
A
Well, thank you David and Gary, and we'd love to hear from you on X with the hashtag strask or through our website at str. Org. Thank you so much for listening. This is Amy hall and Greg Kochl for Stand to Reason.