"The technique of examining all of the evidence before conclusions are drawn is required by the proper use of inductive research methodology. Accordingly, such an approach is utilized not only in physics, but in such varied disciplines as law, medical science, criminal justice, and journalism. Historians also investigate the known facts to find whether an event actually happened or not."
"It solves nothing to state one's views to be correct, regardless how vociferously the claim is made. However helpful it may be to report the conclusions of other scholars, neither does this solve the issue unless one also provides reasons why their views are correct. Additionally, to reject rival positions in an a priori manner is likewise illegitimate. Both believers and unbelievers could respond in this way, revealing why these detrimental attempts need to be avoided. Such approaches are inadequate precisely because they fail to address the data. There is no substitute for a careful investigation of the possibilities."
"Conclusions that are drawn before and against the facts are both non-historical and non-scientific. To rule out the possibility of miracles a priori is not a valid procedure. We must investigate the evidence and then draw our conclusions."
"History, like all inductive disciplines, is based on weighing the evidence derived from the sources before a decision is made. Historians must examine their data to ask whether an event actually occurred, in spite of the doubts that might be raised."
"Since it is claimed that miracles have happened in space-time history, they can be investigated as such."
"Scholars ought not reject the possibility of an event before an investigation. Such a priori dismissals constitute improper historical methodology, even if we dislike the conclusion indicated by the data."
The very origin and existence of gratitude provide evidence of the truth of Christianity.
Introduction
Is it possible that gratitude points to the true worldview? I believe so; in fact, I believe that gratitude's origin, practice, and acceptance as true all help to eliminate certain worldviews and is strongly supported by another one. Everything from the origin of gratitude to its practice in everyday life points to the truth of the Christian worldview. Allow me to explain.
Origins and Survival of Gratitude
It is quite a challenge for gratitude to take hold in a culture of organisms that are fighting for the existential survival of the fittest among the individuals. Gratitude may be shown to another party in multiple ways, usually involving the giving of some resource, to the disadvantage of the grateful party. If the other party does not see value in the gratitude, they may respond by further reducing the grateful party's resources to the point of elimination of that party. Given simple survival-of-the-fittest naturalism, gratitude did not stand a chance to survive as a characteristic of the "fittest" of organisms.
Gratitude, from a naturalistic evolutionary psychological point of view, does not have a chance to originate, must less survive. The fact that gratitude has survived and is commonly extended and accepted by parties today indicates that there were more than just naturalistic mechanisms involved in its origin and survival. If more than naturalism is required for gratitude, then naturalism (atheism) has been eliminated as a viable explanation for the world that we see and experience every day. I go into more detail on this in my post "Thanksgiving, Evolution, and Design."
Gratitude Requires Agency
In that post, I explain that gratitude requires two subjects: the one communicating gratitude and the one the gratitude is communicated to. Both of these subjects must be free agents capable of choosing to (or not to) extend and accept the gratitude. Naturalism does not have the resources for agents to truly exist- all "agents" in naturalism are ultimately just different configurations of deterministically controlled (no free choice at all) matter, thus all gratitude (extended or accepted) is robotic and not true or authentic. Ultimately, if naturalism is true, not only is the environment antagonistic for gratitude's origin (and survival), gratitude is not truly extended or accepted anyway.
The fact that we all know that we have a free choice to authentically extend gratitude and a free choice to authentically accept gratitude tells us that agents exist and that naturalism is, therefore, false. In his book "Agents Under Fire," philosopher of mind Dr. Angus Menuge goes into great detail about the current state of the debate over the existence of actual agents in reality and naturalists' attempts to explain their existence. See my review of the book here: Book Review: Agents Under Fire. Ultimately, naturalism only has room for imitations (no matter how sophisticated) of free will and thus it only has room for imitations (no matter how sophisticated) of gratitude.
The Morality of Gratitude
Most people would grant that it is better to be grateful than to not be grateful. This "better" judgement is not merely understood to be a judgement of practicality; it is understood to be a judgement of morality. There is a clear distinction between practicality and morality that people generally recognize, and gratitude (independent of a practicality judgement) is understood to have a "good" moral judgement. And this judgement is not just a subjective opinion about morality but an objective claim that is independent of how many people do claim or do believe it or do not claim or do not believe it.
If naturalism is true, then all morality reduces to practicality, and practicality and morality ultimately are not independent of or even distinct from one another. On naturalism, the "moral" status of a specific instance of offering gratitude is necessarily dependent upon its practical implications. Which means that if showing gratitude could result in negative effects on the one showing the gratitude (such as in gratitude's natural origins), then it is judged to be immoral. But most people understand that showing gratitude is never immoral. And since naturalism does not allow for such a judgement, naturalism is defeated on this third count.
But That's Not All!
Naturalism is not the only worldview defeated by these three tests of reality. Any worldview that denies the existence of free will and/or agents is defeated (this would include worldviews like atheism, Buddhism, deism, and some forms of theism that deny free will). Any worldview that does not allow for the distinction between practicality and morality is also defeated (this would include atheism, pantheism, panentheism, new age and other occultic worldviews). And the most sweeping test of the three: Any worldview that posits a naturalistic origin of human psychology is defeated (this would be all non-theistic worldviews). When taken together, every atheistic, pantheistic, deistic, and deterministic worldview is removed from the table of possibility by the existence of gratitude.
What Is Left?
Ultimately, Christianity is the only worldview that escapes all three of these severe tests. But it is not always enough to merely exercise the use of the process of elimination to arrive at the final answer. We need to positively identify Christianity as the correct worldview to explain the existence of true, authentic gratitude.
First, let's examine where we left off: the distinction between practicality and morality. Practicality is a judgement based upon something's ability to bring a purpose or goal closer to fruition. Something is said to be "good" if it brings the goal closer, and it is said to be "bad" or "evil" if it moves the goal further away. An example would be a "good" move in the game of Chess would bring the player closer to check-mating his or her opponent. The philosophical term for these is "teleology;" it is a judgement based upon a purpose. Morality (that is the philosophical term, by the way), on the other hand is a judgement of intrinsic right and wrong that is independent of teleological implications. For instance, it is morally good (right) to run into a burning house to save the life of a stranger's child even if it would result in the (practical) loss of our own life. Self-sacrifice is morally good despite its teleological wrongness.
However, without some objective standard by which to judge right and wrong, there is only subjective or relative opinion, which ultimately would lead to "might makes right." With Christianity, God is the standard by which moral judgments are made. This standard is independent of how many of whoever believes whichever way. If one society believes that murder is good and another believes that it is evil, the objective standard of God's nature allows us to know which society is right and which is wrong. This video from Reasonable Faith helps to explain morality:
Last year I came across an article about a study that empirically demonstrates seven benefits of gratitude. The problem for the atheist (or agnostic or skeptic) is that unless Christianity is true, gratitude is nothing more than a generally "useful fiction"- evolution has preserved those who embrace falsehood in order to survive not those who embrace truth. If your intellectual goal is to go beyond what simply works to what is true, then Christianity is the only worldview that makes sense of all the evidence, including the ability to make sense of evidence (philosopher Alvin Plantinga goes into great detail on this implication in his book "Where the Conflict Really Lies"). I like how Os Guiness explains the reality that we experience and how it relates to the truth of Christianity:
Conclusion
Christianity is not true because gratitude works; gratitude works because Christianity is true. Gratitude merely reflects this reality. If you understand the value of gratitude, it is time to take your understanding of it beyond mere pragmatism to discover its foundation and why it works. As we move into the Christmas season it is the most appropriate time to investigate the evidence for the truth of Christianity. Start with investigating the linchpin of Christianity: the claim of the historical resurrection of Jesus Christ. Here is a post that provides an overview of the evidence: Did the Historical Jesus Really Rise From The Dead? I encourage you to also follow the links contained in the post to dig deeper into the details of the evidence.
"You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."- John 8:32
"America's tragedy today is that while that motto adorns the university walls, for many people it no longer animates the mind."- Os Guinness
"Far from being a naïve and reactionary notion, truth is one of the simplest, most precious gifts without which we would not be able to handle reality or negotiate life."
"Our challenge today is not to lament, protest, or simply talk about the crisis of truth in one of a hundred ways. Rather, it is to do something about it by becoming people of truth and learning to live free."
"Postmodernism, in fact, is the mirror image of modernism and is born of its deficiencies. It is therefore equally confused and equally confusing, but in a reverse way."
"If truth is truth, then differences make a difference — not just between truth and lies but between intimacy and alienation in relationships, between harmony and conflict in neighborhoods, between efficiency and incompetence in business, between reliability and fraud in science and journalism, between trust and suspicion in leadership, between freedom and tyranny in government, and even between life and death."
"When nothing can be judged except judgment itself— 'judgmentalism'—the barriers between the unthinkable, acceptable, and doable collapse entirely. And then, since life goes on and the sky doesn't fall, people draw the conclusion that the original concern was unfounded. Lighten up, the newly amoral say as they skip forward blithely, complicit in their own corruption."
Has Dr. Sean Carroll escaped the theistic implications of the Big Bang?
Does The Universe Have A Cause?
One of the most popular arguments for God's existence is the argument from the beginning of the universe. It goes like this:
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe has a beginning
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
That conclusion serves as a springboard to identify that the cause of the universe must be timeless, spaceless, and possess immense causal power. When combined with other scientific observations of the universe, it is implied that this cause additionally is both intelligent and personal. The argument from the beginning of the universe provides powerful evidence that God is the Cause of the universe.
Because this argument's reasoning is valid and its conclusion strongly implies theism, atheists commonly attack the argument by denying one of its premises: namely, the second one, that the universe had a beginning. Dr. Sean Carroll is one such atheist. He attempts to escape the theistic implications of the beginning of the universe without denying the (appearance of a) beginning of the universe. A friend presented to me this slideshow from Dr. Carroll not too long ago:
Can an all-loving and all-powerful God possibly have reasons for allowing all the evil, pain, and suffering in this world?
The Purpose Driven Life (hardback, Kindle, audio book) by Rick Warren is a book that I have meant to review for quite some time now. I had heard about it when it first came out in the early 2000s and had heard both raving reviews and scathing critiques. It was not until my pastor at the time did a sermon series on it that it really caught my attention. Over the years I have referred to it here and there in my blog posts, and I believe that the time has come for me to give it a full chapter-by-chapter review from the perspective of a defender of the Christian faith.
Some people have wondered why I decided to review The Purpose Driven Life considering it is not a book that is focused on the defense of the Christian faith. My reason is quite simple: Rick Warren makes the claim in this book that God has multiple reasons for allowing evil, pain, and suffering in our lives. This claim, if demonstrated to be correct, directly addresses one of the most common and emotionally powerful challenges to God's goodness, His power, and even His existence: the problem of evil, pain, and suffering.
Initially, I had separated this review into multiple posts to keep the individual posts shorter, but it has been requested of me that I publish the whole review as a single post. This review will consist of my usual chapter-by-chapter summary format with my recommendation at the end; however, I have added additional thoughts for each part of the book between the summaries of those respective parts. I will include some of my initial impressions from years ago and reflections on the book's content that have bounced around in my mind from the last several years (including some of the theological critiques).
Atheists sound the alarm: Removing God from culture is dangerous!
Warnings To A Godless Society
Earlier this year I highlighted the warnings of rejecting God, coming from the mouth of an atheist. Richard Dawkins saw the moral degradation of world society and couldn't help to understand that the world's rejection of God's existence (that he, no doubt, helped catalyze) has led us here. He warned that it would continue, and in recent months, America has certainly seen Dawkins' warnings come true.
With the rejection of God comes the rejection of two important concepts that keep civilized society together: the existence of objective moral obligations and duties, and the existence of intrinsic human value that is grounded in our being created in the Image of God.
With the rejection of the first, there is no objective "right" or "wrong," all thoughts, actions, and behaviors just are- they have no moral value whatsoever, and none can be correctly judged as "evil" or "good." Every evil act, from the "eugenics" promoted by Planned Parenthood's founder Margaret Sanger to domestic and international child sex trafficking, have become common in our world. Politicians, the media, and even everyday citizens often turn a blind eye to these acts because "who is to say that these acts are 'evil'?"
With the rejection of the second, there is no reason to think that humans have intrinsic value and should not be used however we wish towards our goals. A human's value is wholly constituted in their ability to contribute to an arbitrary purpose set by someone in power over them. In the event that a person has a goal of achieving career development or sexual pleasure, that means that if a child must be murdered or raped in order to achieve that goal, the rape and murder are not wrong because that child possesses no intrinsic value and, of course, the rape and murder are not evil because there is no objective "right" or "wrong," "good" or "evil" by which to properly categorize the rape or murder (or torture, or theft, etc.).
A few weeks ago I began my chapter-by-chapter review of Rick Warren's popular book The Purpose Driven Life (hardback, Kindle, audio book). Rick Warren presents a theology of suffering in this book that caught my attention as a defender of the Christian worldview because of its applicability in addressing the problem of evil and suffering. Because the book has forty chapters, I decided to break up the review into multiple parts that coincide with the parts of Warren's book. For easy navigation of this review, here are the links to all the previous parts. Please check them out to learn more about the value of this book:
A few weeks ago I began my chapter-by-chapter review of Rick Warren's popular book The Purpose Driven Life (hardback, Kindle, audio book). Rick Warren presents a theology of suffering in this book that caught my attention as a defender of the Christian worldview because of its applicability in addressing the problem of evil and suffering. Because the book has forty chapters, I decided to break up the review into multiple parts that coincide with the parts of Warren's book. For easy navigation of this review, here are the parts with links that will be updated as they publish:
A few weeks ago I began my chapter-by-chapter review of Rick Warren's popular book The Purpose Driven Life (hardback, Kindle, audio book). Rick Warren presents a theology of suffering in this book that caught my attention as a defender of the Christian worldview because of its applicability in addressing the problem of evil and suffering. Because the book has forty chapters, I decided to break up the review into multiple parts that coincide with the parts of Warren's book. For easy navigation of this review, here are the parts with links that will be updated as they publish:
![Quote from Rick Warren's "The Purpose Driven Life": "What [God] cares about most is the redemption of the people he made...Nothing matters more to God; the Cross proves that."](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimPpQMHTe4mKooS_mF0dpIf8zT0kf0i5mbuwRqTOBCR0CdLJaK9oZ0VwkI2ePnS7pJlt8pSxvkRx95hyNa0tf4HalqnxlbhxldNyf8Z8pg2AO5Zf6vNPe_1-ysiGeMRTbZ6pppwHVtLzI/s1600/Slide6.JPG "Quote from Rick Warren's \"The Purpose Driven Life\": \"What [God] cares about most is the redemption of the people he made...Nothing matters more to God; the Cross proves that.\"")
