The danger of sentimental theology

Gleboczek, Poland (photo from trekearth.com)

The danger of sentimental theology

I thought I would share some non-exhaustive ideas on a common approach to theology. Late Tuesday morning, I received a phone call from a good friend who explained that a fairly young, adult dear relative of his had passed away unexpectedly during the night. Even though I am still a young man with improving health, having had struggles with serious sleep apnea, allergies, and eye problems the last few years, I have thought more about death than previously. I am not obsessed with the subject, but part of my focus with the Christian faith, and Christian theology, within the problem of evil, is attempting to understand in some ways, what exists beyond death.

Scientifically and empirically (by use of the senses) it appears that human beings die and all that is left are physical remains. Some religions and religious persons believe in an existence of the human spirit that exists after death. In the media, and at funerals it is said sometimes that the person that has passed away has gone to a better place. This is speculative, assumed and hoped for, since the departed was usually a good person, humanly speaking. This appears to be sentimental theology, and by that I mean theology that is primarily driven by feelings, that is speculative and lacks a significant use of reason. Please note, I am not stating that all theological speculation is lacking the significant use of reason. The naturalist can dismiss this sentimental theology on empirical grounds. Simon Blackburn defines naturalism as generally a view that nothing resists explanation from methods of natural sciences. A naturalist will therefore be opposed to the concept of mind-body since it allows for the possible explanation of human mental capacity outside of science. Blackburn (1996: 255). Henry Clarence Thiessen explains that naturalists reject the idea of God and view nature as self-sufficient and self-explanatory. Thiessen (1956: 32).

A theist such as myself can reason that the person that has died was morally imperfect as we all are, was part of, and affected by, the problem of evil, did not receive direct communication from God normally, and likely not at any point, prior to death. From this there is not an obvious reason here to realistically, and reasonably assume that a person that has passed away goes to a better place within a speculative theistic model. Within a speculative theistic model, I would reason that if a person lives an earthly temporal life apart from direct communication with God, then it is reasonable to assume that if God does grant everlasting life, it will not be some type of heaven in God’s presence, and therefore not necessarily a better place.

Biblical Christianity is not dependent on sentimental theology. Millard J. Erickson writes that natural theology deduces that God can be understood objectively through nature, history, and human personality. Erickson (1994: 156). But, it should be stated that although natural theology can perhaps bring a person to a limited knowledge of God, it does not provide revealed information concerning salvation or everlasting life for human beings. I have written an article on this blog that supports a notion of a first cause for creation, but even if matter was created by a first cause it would not make this first cause personally knowable to human beings. I agree with Erickson when he deduces that a sound argument for first cause does not mean that the first cause is necessarily the Christian God. Erickson (1994: 161).

Erickson explains that Biblical revelation views God as taking the initiative to make himself known to followers. Erickson (1994: 198). This would be a more effective way than natural revelation as God reveals personal things about himself through his prophets, apostles, scribes, and of course Jesus Christ, who is both God and man. It can be reasoned that this revelation is documented in the Bible with persons that are historical and not mythological. Thiessen writes that God revealed himself in the history of ancient Israel. Thiessen (1956: 33). God is presented as personally appearing to chosen persons in the Hebrew Bible through dreams, visions and directly. Thiessen (1956: 34). Thiessen explains that miracles were also noted to occur within the Hebrew Bible, miracles being unusual events that were not a product of natural laws. Thiessen (1956: 35). The Hebrew Bible and New Testament present historical persons that experienced the supernatural God and supernatural occurrences. Some will accept the historicity of these persons, but deny the supernatural aspects of the Bible, but according to the New American Standard Bible presented by Charles Caldwell Ryrie and the Lockman Foundation, approximately 40 authors wrote the Biblical texts over a period of approximately 1600 years. Ryrie (1984: xv). Not all these persons knew each other and yet spoke of the same God that revealed himself progressively over time. The atoning work and resurrection of Christ was documented and discussed by several historical authors within the New Testament and through this work everlasting life is provided to followers of Christ. The book of Revelation describes the culminated Kingdom of God in Chapters 21-22.

The New Testament provides information about the historical Jesus Christ and his followers in historical setting and this gives much more credibility for theology concerning the concept of life after death in the presence of God, than does sentimental theology which denies or twists the concepts of Scripture in order to fit some type of speculative theistic hope for everlasting life which is devoid of the significant use of reason. This is a dangerous way to approach God and life, as there is not convincing evidence for believing that God shall save a departed person, outside of revelation from God explaining by what means he would bring a person that has passed away into his presence forever, and/or place them in a better place.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) ‘naturalism', in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, p. 255. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

RYRIE, CHARLES, CALDWELL (1984) The New American Standard Version Bible, Iowa Falls, Iowa, World Bible Publishers.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

An explanation: There is no feminist agenda

California

Thank you to all the church attendees and Christian leaders that have taken the time to assist me with the problem of evil questionnaire. I am nearing my goal of 200+ questionnaires completed, and am still looking for assistance. I really appreciate those that take the time in person to complete a survey, and those through email that take the time to scan my letter and questionnaire and then decide to assist me. Some are even nice enough to pass my questionnaire on to others, which is much appreciated! I have emailed hundreds of Christian churches concerning my problem of evil questionnaire and the purpose of the project is explained in the email letter and in the body of the questionnaire. Some leaders who represent churches culturally known as Christian, whether on the left or right theologically, have assumed that I somehow have a hidden agenda that is not primarily the problem of evil and theodicy. Besides in the email and questionnaire sent out, on this blog I have spelled out what my basic theological views are and what the purpose of my questionnaire is within my PhD project, and provide a link to my blog in the email letter. I can understand how a Christian leader may be annoyed by my email and perhaps view it as spam, but regardless, those who are publicly and culturally Christian leaders should scan my blog before rushing to false conclusions about my work and me personally which they then put in writing. Some ministers have simply stated that they are not interested in helping me and do not have the time, and that is a reasonable way to handle my email to them. One could of course simply delete my email and offer no reply.

There is no feminist agenda with my questionnaire or dissertation. Within the last three months a couple of ministers have mentioned by email that there may be a feminist agenda behind my work. As well, a good friend explained to me that a pastor and friend of his that issued the questionnaire on my behalf stated that some women who completed the questionnaire assumed that a woman must have written the document since it contained questions concerning women. I do not hold to feminist theology, personally. Feminism in the context of theology and Biblical studies is in a broad sense wanting to show both God’s feminine characteristics and, at the same time, present a case for what is interpreted to be male theological bias. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 51). Within my dissertation, and on my two theology related blogs, I am coming from a Reformed, conservative, Christian perspective. I am very much in favour of women as creatures made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27), but I do not hold to feminist theology!

My University department is not Reformed. It is secular and has required me to add some women related questions, as they originally wanted me to review a feminist theodicy. I informed them that as far as I could tell there was no such thing. I am required to meet certain academic standards, including presenting viewpoints that are not from my particular theological tradition. I am required to review three basic theoretical approaches to the problem of evil. These approaches are also known as theodicy. Robert M. Adams notes that the word theodicy is from the Greek, as theos is God and dike is justice. Theodicy is a defence of the justice of God in the face of objections arising from the problem of evil in the world. Adams (1996: 794). A good definition of theodicy is the explanation of how the infinite, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent God accomplishes his plans within his creation where the problem of evil exists. I hold to one of these views, sovereignty theodicy, and present two views that are contrary to my own, although there is not complete disagreement on every point. I then present questions from these different theodicy and place them in questionnaire form. I was also asked to place some women related questions in my questionnaire. When I compile my questionnaire results I will have an original form of empirical theology. Professor Leslie J. Francis and the Practical Theology Team of the University of Wales, Bangor, explain that an element of practical theology is the use of empirical data. Francis (2005: 1). I can examine the results to questions relating to each theodicy approach and the women related questions and then produce some original and unique empirical theology that relates to the philosophical theology already written. God willing, I will produce an original, very academic PhD dissertation, which presents some women related issues. But women's issues and feminism are not a primary or even major focus of my work.

ADAMS, ROBERT. M (1996) ‘Theodicy’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

FRANCIS, LESLIE J. and Practical Theology Team (2005) ‘Practical and Empirical Theology’, University of Wales, Bangor website, University of Wales, Bangor.
http://www.bangor.ac.uk/rs/pt/ptunit/definition.php.

GRENZ, STANLEY J. DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.


California

Future Rebellion?

Butchart Gardens, BC

Today, a pastor who had completed a problem of evil questionnaire mentioned to me through email, the theological issue of whether citizens of the Kingdom of God/heaven would be able to rebel against God. Here is my reply to the pastor with references added and slight changes for this blog article.

In my view, since the lake of fire (Revelation, Chapter 20) appears to exist everlastingly, rebellion against God will continue from fallen angels and those outside of Christ. I speculate that the lake of fire, like Hades (Revelation, Chapter 20) and Paradise (2 Corinthians, 12: 4) are outside of our present material reality and are not part of God's material creation that he will restore for humanity, and perhaps animals and other living creatures. The lake of fire is likely physical but is intended for punishment. Robert H. Mounce explains that it is the place for all that is sinful and wicked in the world. Mounce (1990: 350). God merely will restore the fallen material creation within our reality and eliminate the problem of evil within it.

In my view the elect in the restored creation shall not fall since God will determine with the use of compatibilism/soft determinism that they shall not. This means he will determine, influence and guide thoughts and actions, but not force or coerce them. Louis P. Pojman writes that compatibilism or soft determinism states that an act can be entirely determined and yet be free in the sense that it was committed voluntarily and without external force or coercion. Pojman (1996: 596). Compatibilism shall occur through God's will and by perfecting the nature of followers, but it can be deduced that Satan had a perfect nature prior to his fall, as a sinful being would not exist in heaven (Luke 10: 18). Satan and the fallen angels are Biblically not provided any type of atonement. Adam and Eve prior to the fall in Genesis 3 had a perfect nature, but in my opinion had a spiritual immaturity that persons will not possess in heaven as resurrected followers that have experienced the problem of evil, sin, death, the atoning work and resurrection of Christ and their own resurrection will not disobey God in the immature fashion that Adam and Eve did. A problem with holding too strong of a view on free will, and perhaps free will theodicy, as opposed to sovereignty theodicy, is that it denies compatibilism and soft determinism and therefore rebellion against God by perfect beings would always be a reasonable possibility. I agree that it would be possible in the culminated Kingdom to rebel if citizens were merely left with perfect natures, although less likely than originally because of maturity, but rebellion becomes impossible as God indwells and guides persons to freely with a limited compatibilistic but significant free will, to follow him forever. I suppose one could state that persons cannot sin in heaven because God determines that persons cannot, but he does not use force or coercion since this would eliminate significant freedom. I do not believe that God uses hard determinism in saving persons or damning others. Pojman defines hard determinism as the theory that every event is caused and no one is responsible for his or her actions. Pojman (1996: 596). This is in contrast with soft determinism that would state that God would be the primary cause of all actions, while significantly free beings would be the secondary cause of their own actions. One could also state that persons could hypothetically rebel because beings with finite perfect natures could always fall, as did Satan, but persons will not sin because God determines that they shall not. So I think, hypothetically, rebellion could always happen but will not because of God's constant influence upon saved human persons that have experienced the problem of evil and do not want to go back to it. If God took his influence from citizens they could sin once again, even in heaven. So, those in Christ shall not sin in heaven due to a purified nature and God's use of soft determinism and not force or coercion.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

SPSS

Bali, Indonesia

 

I attempt to be more positive than negative on this blog, but occasionally a negative issue needs to be dealt with, and today is a day for it! I have 180 questionnaires completed and in my possession and I am receiving some pastoral assistance in getting to my goal of 200 plus questionnaires received. With my advisor’s approval I am compiling my statistics while still collecting surveys from respondents. My University has required that I use Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, also known as SPSS software in order to compile my questionnaire results and complete my statistics. Back in 2001 when I attended my previous University and was working on a MPhil dissertation, my advisor explained I needed SPSS and so I ordered a copy through the information technology department and received a discount since I was a student. I think I paid approximately 40 pounds. This seemed fair but the software never worked and would not load on my computer properly and I ended up having to use limited Microsoft Excel software to complete the statistics for my MPhil dissertation. 

For the PhD dissertation through my current University, I am expected to use SPSS once again and so in 2004 my advisor had me order the SPSS Student Version 11.0 for Windows which I believe cost me over $150.00 Canadian. I needed a letter from my academic department to prove that I was a student in order to purchase that version of SPSS. I loaded the software on to my computer and went through the tutorial a couple of times the last few years to familiarize myself with software, however, I was not ready to analyze the statistics at that time. Monday, I began compiling results and started with the very first questionnaire, and figured out the basics that day. However, once I arrived at line 51 depth wise, as in question 51 on the questionnaire, I was informed the following by the SPSS software: Maximum number of variables exceeded. A variable is an attribute on which cases vary. Cases can be for example, people and things. Bryman (2004: 29). I was simply attempting to place my other 16 questionnaire questions on the list and the software was prohibiting this from taking place. This was of course a negative event! I did some research in my related texts and on the net and could find no answers to my problem. I called SPSS in Chicago today and was informed that they offered no support for my old 2001 version and I would have to purchase a newer version. I then asked the person if someone could at least inform me on how I could get past line 50 and she stated that the Student Version would not go past line 50 and was not made for dissertation students! I was told that I needed to buy Graduate Version 14.00 that she thought would work for me, but could not verify this as fact and I eventually found Version 15.00 on the web from a retailer. The retail company representative I talked to on the phone could not verify with me that Graduate Version 15.00 would do the required job and treated me like I was an idiot for expecting someone from their company to know which product I should purchase from them. She suggested that I call SPSS to find out which version I should purchase. 

I ordered the product for over $300 Canadian this afternoon! What a wonderful discounted rate for a full-time PhD student without a full-time job, and my order is on hold for seven days until this retailer receives confirmation from my University that I am indeed a registered student. I am very unimpressed with the service from both SPSS and this retailer. I have twice previously purchased SPSS and both times the software has not done the job. The first time it would not even load properly on my computer and the second time it would not even allow a variable past 50. I think I have been ripped off here, and now I am faced with a large bill without technical verification from either the manufacturer or the retailer that the product will actually suffice for my work. This is very poor service! Russ 

BRYMAN, ALAN (2004) Social Research Methods, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Additional: A link concerning Madeleine McCann, the English girl missing in Portugal.

http://sverdades.blogspot.com/2007/05/suspenso-temporria.html

The eschatology of evil

The eschatology of evil

Matin, Serein, France (photo from trekearth.com)

Preface

This is work from my PhD research, prior to completion in 2010, which I published as a website article on May 11, 2007. This is revised with additions for a posting on academia.edu on December 9, 2023.

ἔσχᾰτον

An important and related term for the study of the problem of evil and theodicy is eschatology.

Derived from the Greek word eschaton (ἔσχᾰτον)  meaning last, it refers to the ultimate culmination of history where Jesus Christ returns to earth and fully establishes his rule and Kingdom. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 46). 

Bible Hub: ἔσχατον

Cited from Bible Hub

'ἔσχατον (eschaton) — 7 Occurrences' (The root word, my add)

'Concordance Entries 

Strong's Greek 2078 

53 Occurrences

ἔσχατα — 4 Occ. 

ἐσχάταις — 3 Occ. 

ἐσχάτας — 1 Occ.

ἐσχάτη — 11 Occ.

ἐσχάτῳ — 2 Occ.

ἐσχάτων — 3 Occ.

ἔσχατοι — 9 Occ. 

ἔσχατον — 7 Occ. 

ἔσχατος — 7 Occ. 

ἐσχάτου — 5 Occ.

ἐσχάτους — 1 Occ.'

Bible Hub: 2078. eschatos

Cited 

'Strong's Concordance 

eschatos: last, extreme 

Original Word: ἔσχατος, η, ον

Part of Speech: Adjective 

Transliteration: eschatos 

Phonetic Spelling: (es'-khat-os) 

Definition: last, extreme

Usage: last, at the last, finally, till the end. 

HELPS Word-studies 

2078 ésxatos (from esxaton, "end, last") – properly, last, final (the furthest, extreme-end). 2078/esxatos ("future things"), the root of "eschatology" is "the study of last things." This includes future Bible prophecy, the end-times, and life after death ("the after-life").'

---

The eschatology of evil

Eschatology is the theology that seeks to fully understand the direction and purpose of history and progressing events. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 46). Henry C. Thiessen writes that eschatology includes the concepts of the second coming of Christ, the resurrection, judgments, the millennium, and the final state. Thiessen (1956: 440). These are far too complex concepts to thoroughly discuss within a short, intentionally non-exhaustive, article, but these ideals would all be aspects of how the Biblical God delivers this current age that exists containing problems of evil, into an age where evil is a thing of the past. This present fallen creation, inhabited and influenced by sinful creatures would be transformed into a universe and earth empirically ruled by Christ as God. Also known as the Kingdom of God/Kingdom of Heaven

It should be noted here that the Kingdom of God will therefore not only include access to God in the heavenly non-physical realm, but also a physical creation restored to an original perfection ruled by God. The chosen elect (Ephesians 1-2, Romans 9 as keys) in Christ will be physically resurrected and not live everlastingly as spiritual beings alone, because God wants those in Christ to live forever in the restored Kingdom described in Revelation, Chapters 21-22. 

Robert H. Mounce points out that contrary to Greek dualism, God always intended for human beings to exist on a redeemed earth, not in a heavenly realm removed from physical existence. Mounce (1990: 368). This makes sense as a physical resurrected body naturally requires a physical realm to exist in, but Paul calls the resurrected body, spiritual, in 1 Corinthians 15: 44. Gordon Fee explains that the resurrection body is not immaterial but supernatural. It is a body adapted for eschatological existence under the domination of the spirit. Fee (1987: 786). Mounce notes that the concepts of new heaven and new earth in Revelation are described with varying degrees of literalness, but the new heaven and new earth provides the setting for the new and everlasting state. Mounce (1999: 369). The new heaven and new earth is not simply metaphor for a spiritual existence with God in his heavenly presence, but an actual physical place where human beings shall live and prosper with Christ. If Christians were intended to live merely a spiritual existence with God in the heavenly realm this would make the resurrection of the natural body, which becomes a spiritual body, as Paul describes it, unnecessary. If God did not intend to restore the physical universe and human body, then saved human beings, after death, could simply remain in Paradise (Luke 23: 43, 2 Corinthians 12: 4) as post-mortem disembodied spirits/souls.

BRUCE, F.F., (1963)(1996) Romans, Grand Rapids, IVP/Eerdmans.

CLINES, DAVID, J. A. (1986) 2 Corinthians, The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

DUNNETT, WALTER M. (2001) Exploring the New Testament, Wheaton, Crossway Books. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

FEE, GORDON (1987) The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

FINKBEINER, DOUGLASE (2004) Interpreting Luke 16: Abraham, Lazarus, and the Rich Man-Parable or History?, Lansdale, PA , Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary.

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press.

GRENZ, STANLEY J. DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

HUGHES, PHILIP, EDGCUMBE (1990) A Commentary On The Epistle To The Hebrews, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

KENT H. A. (1996) ‘Paradise', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

MARSH, PAUL W. in Bruce, F.F. (ed.), (1986), First Corinthians, The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

PORTER, LAURENCE.E. (1986) ‘Luke’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

STRONG, J. (1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

A philosophy of linking

York Minster

1. I have 166 completed questionnaires in my possession. Thanks to all respondents! My goal is obtain 200 plus surveys, although my advisor has given me permission to begin analyzing the questionnaire data. I am still collecting questionnaires and will be for several weeks and so I would really appreciate any assistance with this project. I am not sure what the analysis will include in its entirety, as I will have to receive this information from my advisor at a later date. My sample group is those that attend Christian churches, and for the context of this research, Christian is not only those that have Biblically based, conservative views like I do, but those that fall within a broad definition of cultural Christianity. My advisor has not exhaustively defined this, but I know I must include not only persons within my Reformed, conservative perspective, but also those from mainline churches. I have also sampled persons within the Orthodox Church and non-denominational churches. Alan Bryman in his text Social Research Methods explains that a sample is a segment of the population that is selected for research. It is a subset of the population. Bryman (2004: 543). My subset for this PhD research is those that attend Christian churches. I am willing to send out a copy of the survey to persons that do not attend a Christian church whatsoever, but I cannot include the data in the analysis.

2. Having not received any blogger traffic from publishing and correcting/republishing articles on both my blogs this week, I have thought much about the importance of links. My traffic is now entirely coming from links and web searches. I really appreciate all of you that link with one or both of my theology related blogs. I realize that some persons only like one of the blogs enough to link and that is understandable. As far as blogs are concerned, I may link a blog on thekingpin68 or satire and theology that links my blog in return, or at least links something important relating to my blog. I believe in mutual support.

3. I initially thought I would only link with Christian blogs where there was strong theological agreement, but have come to the conclusion that I can witness to others through linking, and need to support if possible, those who support me. I therefore may link to certain others even though there are some philosophical/theological disagreements. I realize that none of us will agree on every point! I have placed disclaimers on both my blogs in the About Me section. The disclaimer for this site reads, In regard to my links, only satire and theology necessarily demonstrates my personal views. I should make it clear that if I link with you, I greatly appreciate your help and basically think your blog is good.

The power of positive linking?

BRYMAN, ALAN (2004) Social Research Methods, Oxford, University Press.


Bad theology

The Cynical Theologian

Solva, Pembrokeshire, Wales (photo from trekearth.com)

The Cynical Theologian

I currently have 161 completed questionnaires in my possession and thank you very much to all of you through email, mail, and in person that have filled out and returned the document. I will likely be collecting questionnaires for a couple more months and so please assist me if you can.

On Sunday after church, I was having a discussion concerning the problem of evil with my pastor and a newer Christian. My pastor stated with a smile that he and I were cynical, unlike the newer Christian. I took this as a compliment. Related to the context of our discussion, The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines a cynic as a person who has little faith in human sincerity and integrity, and cynical as one being incredulous of human sincerity or integrity. Thompson (1995: 335).

Harry A. Ide describes cynics as a classical Greek philosophical school, which featured asceticism and the need for virtue in order to obtain happiness. Also emphasized were the importance of bold speech, and action without any shame. Ide (1996: 174). Ide writes that Socrates was a major influences on cynics. Ide (1996: 174). Simon Blackburn explains that the term cynics comes from the Greek kynikos meaning dog like. Blackburn (1996: 91). Blackburn speculates that the related term dog philosophers comes from Diogenes of Sinope a prominent member and founder. In the ancient world dogs were symbols of lack of shame. Blackburn (1996: 91). For those within the school, the good life consisted of avoiding shame and having mastery over desires and needs. Happiness demanded that a person lacked nothing. Blackburn (1996: 91).

For the purposes of this article, I am not claiming in any way to be associated with classical Greek cynics, but I provide that information for historical background. Back in 1999 to 2001 when I lived in Manchester, England, I split my time between a non-denominational charismatic church where many of my friends attended, and an Anglican church where another friend attended. Both churches, in my view, were Biblically based, gospel orientated churches where Christian love was shown. One night on a Sunday evening service a pastor on stage at the charismatic church looked over at me, perhaps unintentionally and perhaps not, and stated that we should not be cynical as Christians, and I believe the pastor was commenting in regard to God and the miraculous. I had previously discussed this issue with another pastor on staff. I was not and am not a cessationist. I do not reject the idea of God issuing the gifts of the Holy Spirit today. Erickson (1994: 878). My issue is that at a certain point in a service, the pastor assumes that the congregation shall likely hear from the Lord and miraculously someone has a prophetic word. Am I being cynical because I do not think that the sovereign God, in a fallen creation, in light of the problem of evil, will always perform a miraculous sign when a congregation thinks it is time? I do not doubt the sincerity of many persons involved in the charismatic church, and I do not doubt the integrity and consistency of belief of many persons involved. Perhaps in the case of my former church, I am actually sceptical of their claims as opposed to cynical concerning them. The Oxford Dictionary defines sceptical as one inclined to question the truth or soundness of accepted ideas, and facts. Thompson (1995: 1234). This definition appears to fit my approach better.

I firmly believe that only the infinite God can completely and properly judge finite persons, however, in regard to certain televangelists and some others within the cultural Christian community, my opinion of them and their works may move beyond scepticism and into cynicism. Those within the Church who are basically theologically astute will be aware that many persons distort the faith and do not follow the Bible correctly at many points and do not have a proper Biblical theology at many points. I am not stating that any person or organization has perfect theology, but excellent theology by God’s guidance through his Holy Spirit and his Scripture should be the goal. Jesus Christ warned in Matthew 24:24 that many false Christ’s and false prophets would arise. Has this not happened? Is it not happening this very moment? The Apostle Paul spoke against false teaching in Galatians 1:6-9 and mentioned the concept of contrary gospel. The Apostle John in 1 John 2:2:19 mentions persons that were in the church but not really of the church. John goes on to state in verses 22-23 that those who deny that Jesus is the Christ at the same time deny the Father.

There is room to be sceptical of those within religion and cultural Christianity, and error can take place in both legitimate and non-legitimate Christian churches. There is also room within the fallen creation, plagued with the problem of evil, when faced with non-Biblical teaching to at least cautiously question the sincerity and integrity of some, but as Christians we must always be open minded and realize that only God can fully and properly judge religious leaders and movements in regard to motives. I am therefore not primarily a cynical theologian, but cannot deny that a cautious cynical approach is correct at times.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) ‘Cynics’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, p. 91. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

IDE, HARRY A. (1996) ‘Cynics’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY (1995) ‘Cynic’ and ‘Cynical’, Della Thompson (ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press.

THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY (1995) ‘Sceptical’, Della Thompson (ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press.