John Piper on Calvinism and Logic

John Piper recently addressed how Calvinism and logic relate. His article specifically addresses how he appreciates G.K. Chesterton’s writing in spite of some significant theological differences. One of those is an appreciation of Calvinism. See the excerpts below, but then go on and read the whole article at Desiring God Blog.

What About Logic?

It is a great irony to me that Calvinists are stereotyped as logic-driven. For forty years my experience has been the opposite. The Calvinists I have known (English Puritans, Edwards, Newton, Spurgeon, Packer, Sproul) are not logic driven, but Bible-driven. It’s the challengers who bring their logic to the Bible and nullify text after text. Branches are lopped off by “logic,” not exegesis.

Who are the great enjoyers of paradox today? Who are the pastors and theologians who grab both horns of every biblical dilemma and swear to the God-Man: I will never let go of either.

Not the Calvinism-critics that I meet. They read of divine love, and say that predestination cannot be. They read of human choice and say the divine rule of all our steps cannot be. They read of human resistance, and say that irresistible grace cannot be. Who is logic-driven?

For forty years Calvinism has been, for me, a vision of life that embraces mystery more than any vision I know. It is not logic-driven. It is driven by a vision of the ineffable, galactic vastness of God’s Word.

Let’s be clear: It does not embrace contradiction. Chesterton and I both agree that true logic is the law of “Elfland.” “If the Ugly Sisters are older than Cinderella, it is (in an iron and awful sense) necessary that Cinderella is younger than the Ugly Sisters.” Neither God nor his word is self-contradictory. But paradoxes? Yes.

We happy Calvinists don’t claim to get the heavens into our heads. We try to get our heads into the heavens. We don’t claim comprehensive answers to revealed paradoxes. We believe. We try to understand. And we break out into song and poetry again and again.

From Dilemma to Unicorn

We don’t adjust the brain-baffling categories of Scripture to fit human reason. We take it as one of our jobs to create categories in human minds that never existed in those minds before “” a job only God can do “” though he makes us agents. For example, we labor to create categories of thought like these:

God rules the world of bliss and suffering and sin, right down to the roll of the dice, and the fall of a bird, and the driving of the nail into the hand of his Son; yet, even though he wills that such sin and suffering be, he does not sin, but is perfectly holy.

God governs all the steps of all people, both good and bad, at all times and in all places; yet such that all are accountable before him and will bear the just consequences of his wrath if they do not believe in Christ.

All people are dead in their trespasses and sins, and are not morally able to come to Christ because of their rebellion; yet, they are responsible to come, and will be justly punished if they don’t.

Jesus Christ is one person with two natures, divine and human, such that he upheld the world by the word of his power while living in his mother’s womb.

Sin, though committed by a finite person and in the confines of finite time is nevertheless deserving of an infinitely long punishment because it is a sin against an infinitely worthy God.

The death of the one God-Man, Jesus Christ, so displayed and glorified the righteousness of God that God is not unrighteous to declare righteous ungodly people who simply believe in Christ.

These are some of the intertwining, paradoxical branches in the tree of Calvinism. They do not grow in the soil of fallen human logic. They grow in the Bible-saturated soil of “Elfland.” Those who live there believe that a Dilemma with two horns is probably metamorphosing into a Unicorn.

“God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design Is It Anyway?” by John C. Lennox

The new atheists, like Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking, are ever in the public spotlight these days, or so it seems. The idea that brilliant physicists and scientists can make sense of this world without a God appeals to many. Certainly the conclusions reached in books such as Hawking’s latest book, The Grand Design — that there is no God and no ultimate point to the universe — are conclusions many atheists and secularists are all too eager to affirm. Since everything does fit so nicely together, however, should we wonder if the case made is really as air tight as claimed? If the conclusions are made to order, we might have warrant to carefully scrutinize the claims of these New Atheist authors.

John Lennox, author of God’s Undertaker, and a Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford in his own right, takes on Stephen Hawking’s arguments in a forthcoming book published by Lion Books and distributed in the US by Kregel Publications (available July 15). In God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design Is It Anyway?, Lennox exposes the circular reasoning and non sequitors that abound in Hawking’s The Grand Design. Lennox begins by framing the scope of what science can really address as it attempts to examine metaphysical questions. He then points out both Hawking’s dismissal of philosophy and his misunderstanding of Christian theism. God is not merely a “god of the gaps”, an explanation for the world as we know it. The Christian understanding of God has Him outside the boundaries of creation as Lord over all of it, not some explanation for unknown phenomena. As for philosophy, after rejecting it as “dead”, Hawking jumps in and tries his own hand at several metaphysical questions that philosophy has long addressed. Hawking’s attempt at doing philosophy is all the poorer for his outright rejection of it.

Lennox then takes Hawking to task for claiming that the theory of gravity, or scientific laws in general, can operate as a “creator” in a sense, and be the ultimate cause for our universe. He clarifies what a law or rule of nature really “is”, and illustrates how Hawking makes more of such laws than can really be claimed. He then goes on to show how Hawking’s “M” theory of the “Multiverse” conveniently sidesteps objections by positing the existence of infinite universes. Still the question remains, why are there any universes instead of no universe? Lennox reveals that other major physicists have their own doubts as to the ability that M theory really has for being an explanation of everything.

Lennox also addresses head on the claim that miracles cannot happen because the laws of science would be invalidated. He pries open the layers from this question and shows the irrationality of claiming that science strictly forbids the existence of exceptions or miracles.

By the end of this short book (it’s only 100 pages long), Lennox has made a convincing case for theism and demonstrated that reasonable scientists continue to affirm the divine. Lennox’s book is accessible and clear, even as it interacts with quite complicated elements from Hawking’s writing. The book doesn’t own the six-day, young earth Creationist view, but it doesn’t rule it out either. Lennox argues that often the new atheists assume that to believe in God is to believe in a young earth view, and he shows this is not true. Lennox marshals arguments from science (the very idea of the big bang supports the Bible’s claim that the world has a beginning – something science has only admitted in the last hundred years), philosophy, history and the realm of human experience. The resulting case is convincing and should serve to bolster the faith of any troubled by the new atheism. At the least, it offers avenues of further exploration available in grappling with these issues.

Before closing my review, I should excerpt a small section from this book which captures some of Lennox’s craft in action. This excerpt will illustrate his style and the way he can cut to the heart of an issue with incisive logic.

Suppose, to make matters clearer, we replace the universe by a jet engine and then are asked to explain it. Shall we account for it by mentioning the personal agency of its inventor, Sir Frank Whittle? Or shall we follow Hawking: dismiss personal agency, and explain the jet engine by saying that it arose naturally from physical law…. It is not a question of either/or. It is self-evident that we need both levels of explanation in order to give a complete description. It is also obvious that the scientific explanation neither conflicts nor competes with the agent explanation: they complement one another. It is the same with explanations of the universe: god does not conflict or compete with the laws of physics as an explanation. God is actually the ground of all explanation, in the sense that he is the cause in the first place of there being a world for the laws of physics to describe.

To this I add my “amen”. I encourage you to pick up this little book as it offers an excellent primer on how to deal with the claims of the new atheism. Even if you differ with Lennox on a point or two, his clear style and succinct arguments will equip you in thinking through these issues on your own.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

You can purchase a copy of this book from any of these fine retailers: Christianbook.com, Amazon.com or direct from Kregel.

“Smart Faith: Loving Your God with All Your Mind” by J.P. Moreland & Mark Matlock

Today’s Church is facing a growing epidemic. Our young people are leaving Christianity by the droves. They survive through high school, but often hit the eject button at some point during their college years. What’s wrong?

J.P. Moreland and Mark Matlock think they have an answer to this crisis. In their recent book Smart Faith: Loving Your God with All Your Mind published by NavPress, they expose part of the problem: “We now live in a Christian culture so deeply committed to a nonintellectual way of understanding the Christian faith that this perspective is now embedded within us at a subconscious level.” They continue: “Faith is now understood as a blind act of the will — a decision to believe something independent of reason…” The gospel we share has been reduced to “primarily… a means of addressing felt needs.” “We give testimonies of our changed life and tell people that Christ is the answer to troubles.” But this lacks true transforming power. “Religion has… become personal, private, and too often simply a matter of how we feel about things.” (pg. 24-26). In sharp contrast stands the rest of life which demands the use of our intellect in today’s ever-secular world.

The 58 percent of church-attending teenagers which Barna researchers tell us “won’t be attending church by their thirtieth birthday”, were likely “missing the intellectual aspects of faith.” (pg. 25). Moreland and Matlock aim to cultivate a robust, Christian intellect through their book. Along the way, they hope to fortify their readers against the siren call of our world’s increasingly anti-Christian culture.

The book describes the problem and how we got here. It explores faith and knowledge, and aims to elevate the importance of the mind. It then goes on to apply Christian intellect to evangelism and apologetical persuasion, personal devotion and study, worship, and more. The book provides case studies of complex real world scenarios that young people face that could present a problem. In the end, these case studies are fleshed out with an intellectually honest and faithful approach to integrating our Christianity with all of life.

The authors are irenic and patient, not to mention painfully honest. Slowly and surely the attentive reader is prodded and nudged in the right direction. The book is not a heady read. It’s written in a light and straight-forward manner, and at 175 pages, it isn’t too long. Still, it covers some important ground. More important, the authors achieve their goal: they offer a book which will ground the faith of young people and encourage a deep-rooted faith in Christ.

This book would make a great gift for a high school graduate. Youth ministers will want a copy of this book both for their own benefit and to recommend to others. Smart Faith earns a high recommendation.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by NavPress. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

You can purchase a copy of this book from any of these fine retailers: Christianbook.com, Amazon.com or direct from NavPress.

Reasons for Christmas

Today during the Sunday sermon, I was reminded of some of the explicit reasons given for Christmas in 1 John. Christmas is when we celebrate Jesus’ birth. So reasons given for Jesus coming into the world, are reasons for Christmas.

As we all celebrate Christmas, and I hope you really celebrate Jesus this Christmas. The reasons given below for Jesus’ incarnation (his taking on human flesh and being born in the manger), should help us reflect on the wonder that Jesus did come. And they should help us to prize the Cross and Resurrection as we rejoice over the babe in the manger.

…[Jesus] appeared to take away sins… (1 John 3:5)

…The Reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. (3:8)

In this the love of God was made manifest among us that God sent his only Son into the world so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (4:9-10)

…the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. (4:14)

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true… (5:20)