Why I am a Christian: The Credibility of Christian Faith (Part One)
The decline of Christian faith in America and Europe is undeniable. Nevertheless, the Christian faith remains credible and the only hope of man. In this Logos Letter I begin making the case.
In our times of declining Christian faith, those who persevere sometimes feel obliged to set forth the grounds of their faith. I feel the duty keenly myself, although I confess that I am a rather poor example of what a Christian ought to be. The reason this duty presses itself upon me is threefold. First and foremost, I am a father, which means I am responsible for the faith of my children; second, I have seen so many friends and relatives abandon the faith; third, despite the rising tide of unbelief, I simply remain convinced that the truth of Christianity is evident and clear.
A Profession of Faith
Why am I a Christian? Very simply, I am a Christian because I believe that Christianity is reality. In saying this, I assume that I assert nothing more than what any ordinary, but intelligent Christian would profess across the ages.
The one and only Supreme Being created all of reality, and He continues to rule it to this day. As such, He is Lord, and we must serve Him with all our hearts, all our minds, and all our strength. We must obey the Ten Commandments, practice the beatitudes, love God more than self, and love others. But we have not done so. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. (Rom. 3.23) Having violated the law of the infinitely great God, we deserve the unending punishment of hell. But, thanks be to God, He sent His only son, Jesus Christ, true God and true man, to save us when we were yet sinners. Jesus kept the law in his life and paid the debt of punishment on the cross, and all of those united to Him by living faith are saved from the wrath of God; they are justified, adopted, sanctified, and glorified through God’s grace. This is the good news. This is the reason for my hope!
But, why I do profess this to be the true picture of reality? There are many, many reasons; in fact, I can give all of my life and all that I have learned in response. I know that God is real. I know that His grave moral law fearfully hangs over me. I know that I am a sinner. I know that I deserve to be punished. I know that God gratuitously loves me. And, as the Heidelberg Catechism states, I know “that I am not my own, but belong body and soul, in life and in death, to my faithful savior Jesus Christ.”[1]
In making these statements, I have probably delighted a few, confused others, and caused consternated disbelief in many — if not outright derision. I will try to explain.
As a Christian, I am bound to believe that even my own faith is a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit; it is a gracious gift that I do not deserve. At the same time, I am admonished by scripture (1 Pet. 3.15) and obligated by right reason to give a reason for the hope that is within me. And this is indeed possible, for the inner workings of grace, in no way exclude the persuasive force of evidence.
Living Principles
The human condition is pervaded by ideas, judgments, arguments, decisions, theories, evasions, etc. To be sure many beliefs and decisions are trivial or mundane, but this is not always so. Some decisions and beliefs are pivotal; such elements of life are life-changing and life-shaping; they give life character, meaning, and direction — beliefs and decisions about marriage, religion, political affiliation, lifestyle, long-term friendship, sexual habits, et cetera. Not all pivotal moments are so obvious; sometimes our defining decisions are made in the secret places of the heart — the private decision to stop looking for a better job or to distance yourself from something you once held dear (to quietly look for alternatives).
Christian faith belongs with the momentous elements of human life, and the same can be said of the many ordinary, quiet decisions and judgments that go towards perseverance in faith (or its loss). This is important because it indicates the range of relevant evidence. Christianity is not just one hypothesis or particular proposition among others that may be weighed and tested. Rather it is a foundational criterion that weighs and tests other things. Momentous judgments become a standard (or group of standards); not a thing judged by standards; such an element in man’s life becomes a living principle that simply cannot be proven or disproven by normal means. Here I use the phrase “living principle” advisedly.
The term “principle,” especially in its Latin original (principium) has a twofold meaning. First, it indicates a foundational standard or rule. Second, (and more obscurely) it means something like an origin, original starting point, or source. In this latter sense, it is a point of departure for much that follows after. Finally, I have added the term “living” to indicate that what I have in mind is a decision or belief that continues to have a significant and pervasive impact on the life of a man. It is the ethos that defines and animates his personality and character.
For me and many others, Christianity is a living principle. As such, it cannot be proven or disproven, supported or contested by ordinary means. Rather living principles are recommended and solidified or discredited and weakened by a process of converging evidential factors built up over a lifetime.
Sometimes adopting a belief or stance is imagined to be the culmination of a smooth logical process and surely logic and clarity are indispensable norms of the intellectual life. Nevertheless, the development of our beliefs, including the living principles that define our lives is surely a bit more complicated. Again, argument plays an important role, but it is rarely decisive in isolation. Usually our original principles developed organically out of our social and family environment — parents, schools, and other authorities pass their own principles on to the young. This is perfectly natural and unobjectionable taken on face value. Nevertheless, things rarely stay in place from childhood. We grow, take on new experiences, environments, and influences. Often we question what we have received and some are driven to revise their beliefs and principles, sometimes radically. In this rough and ready process our principles become stronger and fixed or weaken and deteriorate. I believe this sort of thing is what Socrates had in mind when he approved of self-examination, and although Socrates claimed to know nothing, he affirmed that some beliefs had stood up to the test of dialectic (logical argument). The process of examining our living principles is neither mathematic nor scientific (in the modern sense); at the same time, the examination of living principles is neither arbitrary nor groundless. Indeed some living principles are warranted and others are not.
Criteria and Credibility
A living principle is credible if and only if it is coherent, useful, rational, and verified.[2] Why this criteria and not others? Because these are the only possible grounds of justification; every version of evidence is reducible to one of these categories. I will not argue you into accepting these as the grounds of justification, for you already accept them in use. I will explain very briefly.
Principles must be consist and coherent because contradictions cannot be true. This is one of the most powerful ways of testing for the truth of a belief. If a belief leads to a contradiction, it must be eliminated. A belief is useful if it is explains clearly or regulates effectively. Theories that do not explain clearly are rightly rejected because they do not get to the causes of things; they do not advance understanding. Regulatory principles — morals — make it possible to make rational and praiseworthy decisions. Every warranted principle should be supported by some rational argument, otherwise there is no reason to believe it. Finally, principles are tested against the actualities given in experience; to do otherwise is delusional and false. A principle that finds no basis in experience is likely empty theory.
The reader may confirm claims about criteria and credibility by reference to his own experience of evidence. If we reject these categories of evidence, then we will have given up the possibility of argument altogether. I do not offer any argument for these criteria for the simple reason that are no other criteria available. Indeed, any argument brought against these criteria will be presuppose or employ the very criteria in question.
If Christian faith is a living principle, its credibility is tested by the same criteria used in similar cases: coherence, usefulness, rationality, and verifiability. For my own part, I believe that Christianity more than satisfies the standards of credibility. This brief essay is not the place for an extended and detailed demonstration of my thesis. Nevertheless, in what follow here and in the next Logos Letter, I will outline in broad terms the evidence for Christianity that has emerged in my own life and work.
The Credibility of Christian Faith
Christian faith is eminently rational. I know this because of the great Thomas Aquinas, a model of faith and reason. To be sure, Thomas is far from perfect and like all thinkers, he is limited by the horizons of his own experience. Nevertheless, after many years of studying his works, I remain convinced of his genius.
Regarding the relationship between faith and reason, Thomas distinguishes between two aspects of revelation: the preambles of faith and the mysteries of faith. Both are contained in the Bible, but differ in this: the preambles are demonstrable by reason, whereas the mysteries are not. Now the mysteries are not irrational, that is, when properly understood they are not contrary to reason, but they do go beyond the scope of reason to judge because they touch directly and exclusively on supernatural realities. From the perspective of natural reason, they are possibly true, but beyond the scope of rational demonstration. By contrast, the preambles of faith are knowable by reason (although they may also be believed). These truths include the following: (a) the existence and attributes of God (immutability, goodness, etc.); (b) the reality of providence; (c) the existence and scope of the natural law (at least the basics); (d) the moral guilt of man; and (e) God’s just wrath and retribution.
The basic case for the preambles runs something like this: the world around us, including humanity, cannot fully be explained on its own terms. Rather it can only be explained by an intelligent, eternal, necessarily being who is the first cause of all things. Once this is granted, everything else follows. For the details, I refer you to Aquinas (or Anselm or Augustine). And as an aside, I find this utterly true at a personal level. Apart from God, I cannot ultimately understand myself or my experience. (I will return to this in the next Logos Letter).
Now it would be a fallacy to deduce that since some of the parts of Christianity are rational that the whole of it is rational and true. However, I am not seeking a deductive demonstration of the truth of all of Christianity — that is not how living principles are shown to be credible.
As already indicated, the overall case for a living principle is inductive, probabilistic, and cumulative. In this case we are testing credibility, which is more like coming to trust a witness or a map, than performing a strict deduction. If a witness has shown himself to be both truthful and rational on many occasions, then it is reasonable to think that the rest of his testimony is probably true. Such a witness has credibility; he enjoys the ring of truth. Given that so much of Christian doctrine is open to rational support, it is reasonable to trust the message as a whole. Again, lest I be misunderstood, I am talking about a reasonable trust — a reasonable faith. The preambles of faith do not entail the necessary truth of the whole of Christian doctrine. Rather the case I have made evinces the credibility of the message contained in the Bible — it is reasonable to trust in the whole of Christian doctrine. In this sense, I am certain that Christian faith, as a living principle, is rational.
Moreover, if I am correct about the preambles of faith (natural theology or classical theism), then we know that many opponents and competitors to Christianity are false: atheism, agnosticism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. In this perspective, some version of classical theism is the only viable option. To put it another way, the truth of classical theism is consistent with Christianity, but inconsistent with many competing accounts of reality.
Of course, there is much, much more to say, and in the next Logos Letter I will set out more of the evidence that supports Christian faith. But this is I hope a good beginning and sufficient food for thought. I am confident that Christian faith more than satisfies the criteria of credibility, and, as such, it is neither irrational nor unbelievable. I am a Christian by the grace and gift of God, and I am confirmed and strengthened in my faith, day to day, by logic, reason, understanding, and experience. Without a doubt, I have a reason for the hope that is within me.
[1] I am not part of this tradition myself, but I take this formula to express my sentiments and experience with precision. Of course, I believe much more than these simple lines set out, but this is sufficient for my purpose.
[2] The development of this section is indebted to Alvin Plantinga and to a lesser extent William James.
Benjamin, I very much like the idea of logos letter but not sure I can follow here. I also like the concept of path as living principle. But I would apply this for the "Supreme Being," too. Doesn't "He" or "Him" fall too short in describing such creative power? I like Hildegard of Bingen's description of "fiery life-force", "viriditas" etc. much more and her images seem to be able to speak more into our century and to religious skeptics than overly masculine God attributes do. Her summas still wait to be read by philosophers of religion :-) . Here is my humble attempt to introduce her to philosophy of religion: https://www.academia.edu/41587369/Hildegard_of_Bingen
What is your take on prayer?
I have four different family situations going on especially sickness and
Suffering of family members and I don’t see any power in praying as a Christian.
There seems like there is no power present against the forces of the world. Thanx