Just a Thought.....

I pointed out in the Sunday school class (and the recent posts) that the atheist and agnostic both operate from a basic presupposition. The presupposition is, "In order for belief in God to be rational, there must be clear, convincing evidence and proof." Flowing from this is another thought. The thought is simply that the most immoral act one is capable of committing is believing in something that he cannot prove.

We cannot exactly prove the Gospel, at least not in the same way that we can prove other things, right? The Gospel cannot be reduced to empirical, observable processes, right? This, to me, appears to be what Paul says in I Cor. 2. John's Gospel tells us that Jesus told His disciples that the world will know that they are His disciples when we demonstrate love one for another (John 13:34-35). However, Jesus did not say that this was proof of God's existence, or the validity of the Gospel as something worthy to believe. He simply said demonstrating love was proof that we follow Jesus. Think for a moment about the religious leaders and crowds of Jesus' day. They all witnessed miracle after miracle, healing after healing, and amazing authoritative preaching, yet they refused to believe. And they ultimately put our Lord of glory to death.

My point is simply that "evidence" or "proof" for God and the truth of the Gospel is not persuasive in the final analysis- at least not for the world who depends on the wisdom of the world. To them the Gospel is foolish (I Cor. 2:1-15). In 2 Cor. 4, Paul tells us that Satan has aided in the process of blinding us from seeing God. Even those during Christ's day who saw miracles and healings were not convinced of the evidence and refused to love Jesus and trust Him. Even those who experienced His healings and miracles firsthand and personally did not all appreciate Him in the "Gospel sense".

With all that in mind here is my thought. Remember, it is just a thought: The most immoral act one can commit does not consist in beleiving in something without being able to prove it beyond dispute. Rather, the most immoral act a person can commit is to reject the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ."

If Calvin was right when he said that to deny the existence of God is to break a law of creation, then does it not stand to reason that rejecting the Gospel is breaking the supreme law of God? In other words, God created us to know Him. Our father Adam and our mother Eve did know Him. Sin separated us from God, however. That is the point of the Gospel- to bring us back to God. And only Jesus can do this. Its the message of the Gospel, when received and believed, that brings us back to know God the way that God intended us to. Therefore, when we deny God's existence because of a lack of "convincing" proof, or we deny Jesus as the Christ because of a lack of "convincing" evidence, we commit the greatest sin of all. So, I say again, the greatest act of immorality does not consist in believing something that cannot be proven entirely, for that would exclude belief in the Gospel in which the Spirit of God alone can convince and prove the worthiness of Christ. Rather, the greatest act of immorality is to reject the King of King and Lord of Lords. It is to reject God's way of bringing us back to God. It is to view the Gospel as foolish and depend on the wisdom, rationality, and logic of the world.

Just a Thought,

Andy

p.s. Your thoughts are welcomed. You can respond by clicking on the comment icon if you wish.