A Parable

Let us begin with a parable. It is a parable developed from a tale told by John
Wisdom in his haunting and revelatory article ‘Gods’.’1 Once upon a time two
explorers came upon a clearing in the jungle. In the clearing were growing many
flowers and many weeds. One explorer says, ‘Some gardener must tend this plot’.
The other disagrees, ‘There is no gardener’. So they pitch their tents and set a
watch. No gardener is ever seen. ‘But perhaps he is an invisible gardener.’ So they
set up a barbed-wire fence. They electrify it. They patrol with bloodhounds. But no
shrieks ever suggest that some intruder has received a shock. No movements of the
wire ever betray an invisible climber. The bloodhounds never give cry. Yet still the
Believer is not convinced. ‘But there :is a gardener, invisible, intangible, insensible to
electric shocks, a gardener who has no scent and makes no sound, a gardener who
comes secretly to look after the garden which he loves.’ At last the Sceptic despairs,
‘But what remains of our original assertion? Just how does what you call an invisible,
intangible, eternally elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or even from
no gardener at all?’

Relationship between faith and reason

 Strong rationalism -- a type of reasoning which holds that in order for a

belief system to be properly and rationally accepted, it must be possible to
prove that the belief system is true. Understanding precedes faith.
Reason/Rationality is based on evidence (proof) and valid argument (logic).
 Basic logic tells us to demand three things: clear definitions of terms, true
premises (true data), and logical arguments (proofs). The rules of logic apply
everywhere, in every field.

 The rules of logic do not change when we insert religion into the content. If
you say that God can violate not just physical laws but logical laws, you have
not said anything that has any meaning.

Fideism -- a type of reasoning which holds that religious belief systems are
not ultimately subject to rational evaluation. Fideism affirms the priority of
faith (fides) over reason. Two types
 Faith against reason or contrary to reason. Faith is said to believe what
is “impossible” and “absurd”. It argues that has reason is limited in various
ways.

 Faith seeking understanding (Anselm: fides quaerens intellectum).

There are truths which are beyond human understanding. It holds that
religious belief systems can and must be rationally criticized and
evaluated, however conclusive/ultimate proof of such a system is
impossible.

Example:

1. Soren Kierkegaard, the 19th-century Danish Christian famous for

speaking of the “leap of faith” or commitment of faith, a risk taken—one
not resolvable through reason or sensation. Without risk, no faith; the
more risk, the more faith.
2. Faith is the contradiction between the infinite passion of inwardness and
objective uncertainty. In other words, if I apprehend God objectively, I do
not have faith; but because I cannot do this, I must have faith. If I want
 to keep myself in faith, I must continually see to it that I hold fast the
objective uncertainty.

3. For Kierkegaard there is no higher standpoint in life than in faith; this

sense of presence can only be reached by an often remade leap.

4. Absurdity is the expression of the passion of faith; e.g., consider

Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac as analyzed in
Kierkegaard's work Fear and Trembling.

 Soft fideism or Critical rationalism -- type of reasoning which holds that

religious belief systems can and must be rationally criticized and evaluated
although conclusive proof of such a system is impossible.

Example: William James

Faith is an act of the Will. It is volitional.
In The Will to Believe (1897), James applied Pragmatism to matters of religion.
A. Belief was not just an assent to a true proposition decided on rational grounds
but an active, willed appropriation of a belief that led to an action.
B. This act of will included other factors besides the rational mind; thus, one
needed to pay attention to the emotional component of believing (what James
termed the “passional” nature).
C. There were certain choices outside of the realm of pure facts that forced
humans to use non-rational methods of deciding. In such questions:
1. The choice had to be between two genuinely live options, meaning either
choice is something that one is willing to consider realistically.
2. The choice had to be momentous, not trivial.
3. The choice had to be forced; that is, one does not have the option of
forgoing the choice.

Blaise Pascal – The Wager or rational choice

Pascal considered God to be infinite in nature.
► So human beings were incapable of understanding or intellectually grasping
God—at least entirely.
► Pascal also thought that the human afterlife was infinite: either infinite bliss
with God in heaven or infinite torture in hell. His argument:
1. If you believe in God and He exists, then that’s infinitely good for you.
(You get to go to heaven and have a good afterlife.)
2. If you believe in God and He doesn’t exist, then there’s no real loss. (You
miss out on a bit of sinning, but you’ll probably get to go to some fun
church pot-lucks, so it’s about an even bargain.)
3. If you don’t believe in God and He does exist, then that’s infinitely bad for
you. (You end up in hell, suffering for all eternity.)
4. f you don’t believe in God and He doesn’t exist, then there’s no real loss.
(You miss out on the pot-lucks, but you get to do the sinning, so again it
probably comes out even.)
5. Given this range of possibilities it seems that belief in God is clearly the
best bet. You won’t lose anything and you may gain infinitely happiness.
Disbelief, on the other hand, is a fool’s wager. The best you can hope for
is breaking even, and you may end up with infinite suffering.
Classical theism: The Nature of God
Problems/Questions: What is God like?

1. All powerful, all knowing and all good- Aquinas argues that God can bring
any state of affairs into existence, if it is logically possible. Omnipotence
has brought many a puzzle— just the same way God’s foreknowledge
has vis-à-vis (in relation to) human freedom of will.
2. Sovereignty and human freedom-
3. Personal and Free Creator -
4. God eternal: timeless or everlasting? Is it timelessness— is God’s
existence outside of the realm of the time and change that we inhabit or is
God everlasting— meaning that God exists and acts in time, but a time
that neither has a beginning nor end.
5. Necessary and self-existent: The necessary being of God is an existence
with neither beginning nor end, in other words, an eternal being. God’s
existence is one that is in and of itself and not dependent on anything else
for his existence. In Latin, existence without any external cause is (a se
esse) being from itself; that God is not from nothing, but God is through
himself and from himself being whatever he is. Thus, God’s aseity makes
the divine exclusive of dependence on anything whatever. The opposite of
necessary is contingency. It is transiency or temporal finitude and by
contrast, non-contingency
6. Perfect and worthy of worship - is a "supremely perfect being" who holds
all perfections. God is absolutely perfect in the order of all things. God is
perfectly just, merciful, powerful, wise, and loving. He does not lack any
perfection found in the created order because he is the first efficient cause
and creates all perfection. God’s perfection is grounded in the fact that he
is synonymous with existence itself and thus encompasses all being. It
means God is the unsurpassable.