I will be going to a secular discussion group entitled “IS
LIFE FAIR? If Not, What Should We Do About That?” I am wondering about how I
should approach this discussion. The answer depends on my goals. My primary
goal is to bring the discussion around to the Gospel to demonstrate that the
Gospel has solid answers to life’s questions, while secularism remains
speechless.
Let me try to demonstrate. What does it mean to ask if life
is fair? We certainly wouldn’t ask this of life in terms of its biology or
chemistry. Why not? Fairness is a property of intelligent and willful beings,
not of blood, salt, or tissue. If the question was merely, “Are others fair?”
there wouldn’t be any discussion, because it is clear that many aren’t. Instead,
we are asking a question about the Creator and His reign over life. “Is God
fair?”
This illustrates the fact that we cannot get away from God.
Our thinking is infused with thoughts about divine purpose, even if we are atheists
and refuse to believe in a Creator.
And it doesn’t stop there. What does “fair” signify? That
certain actions are fair or just and other things are not. However, when we
talk about someone who treated us unfairly, we are not merely saying that it felt unfair or my feeling is no more
than an evolving social convention. No! If someone rapes your daughter, you are
not going to say, “Well this deeply troubles me, but I can’t impose my values
on someone else.” Instead, we know in our heart that a great injustice has been
committed. But what makes an act unfair or unjust? We cannot rest our answer on
an evolving social convention, because tomorrow rape might be deemed
acceptable. Even now, in some societies rape is acceptable under certain
conditions.
Instead, when we become angry over injustice, we try to justify
our anger. However, we understand that we can’t prove that rape is unjust based
upon a passing fad. But on what can be base our claim that rape is absolutely
wrong? It must be based on a universal and unchanging moral law, but only the
existence of a righteous God could be the basis for such law.
Again, there is no escaping from God. Even the last question
stumbles over His presence: “What Should We Do About That?” “Should” implies
that there is a moral requirement to which we must conform. From where does
such a moral requirement come? Certainly not from us or our changing society! Instead,
a “should” requires an absolute moral Authority.
We might deny God, but we run into Him in our safe-zones. And why should we expect otherwise, if this
is His world? I just have to connect the dots.
No comments:
Post a Comment