I can guarantee you that you have never - even in your imagination - visited a world where there are square circles or married bachelors. While one could conceive of a world in which dragons existed, since there is nothing in our world indicating that these creatures are logically impossible, we cannot imagine a world where square circles exist. Each, by definition, excludes the other. Philosophers love thinking about impossible worlds, though they can never enter them. This is because impossible worlds are an extremely useful tool we can use to test out the viability of an idea. Running an idea through this test doesn't prove the idea is true, only that it could be true. However, if an idea fails this test, we can remove it from the realm of possibilities and learn important information from it. So let's explore some worlds together by addressing a question I had recently: Is there a possible world where fallen humanity exists, but Jesus does not die for them?
We all live in the real world, but at some point in time, we venture into possible worlds. Maybe you're a lover whose excursion into the alternate universe takes you to a place where you ended up getting married to your high school sweetheart instead of breaking up. Or maybe you're an adventurer who ponders the possible future where you journey to a faraway, remote, undiscovered planet. Or maybe you like to throw off all semblance of realism and you place yourself in a world where dragons or wizards exist. I don't know which world you love to enter, as there are an infinite amount to choose from. But I know I can tell you a world in which you will never, nor can ever enter, even in your imagination - the impossible world.
I can guarantee you that you have never - even in your imagination - visited a world where there are square circles or married bachelors. While one could conceive of a world in which dragons existed, since there is nothing in our world indicating that these creatures are logically impossible, we cannot imagine a world where square circles exist. Each, by definition, excludes the other. Philosophers love thinking about impossible worlds, though they can never enter them. This is because impossible worlds are an extremely useful tool we can use to test out the viability of an idea. Running an idea through this test doesn't prove the idea is true, only that it could be true. However, if an idea fails this test, we can remove it from the realm of possibilities and learn important information from it. So let's explore some worlds together by addressing a question I had recently: Is there a possible world where fallen humanity exists, but Jesus does not die for them?
0 Comments
The secular world often refers to Christianity as a religion, probably because it is. But many Christians don't seem to like being pigeonholed that way. Since Christianity is an exclusive religion, Christians feel the need to set themselves apart from "religion." I often hear Christians respond to such phrasing with disdain. "Christianity isn't a religion," they say. "It's a relationship." The response is a well meaning quip intended to rebut the modern notion that religion is merely a personal, mental and emotional system intended to help one make their way through life. There are hundreds of religions to choose from, and Christianity is just another. But Christians feel that Christianity is so much more than that and they want the world to know it. As I think about the popular Christian response to Christianity as religion, I am finding that it becomes more unappealing to me. Much of my dislike for the response probably lies in the way some Christians make the remark. The response is often accompanied by a self-righteous tone, and is frequently directed towards "sinners" and unbelievers in what seems to be more of a smug retort by the Christian who is upset at being stereotyped. Rather than the response being a theological or apologetic rationale for why one should be a Christian, it's just a pointed response. When used with such a demeaning tone, I find the quip absolutely unappealing. Even when used appropriately, however, I'm finding that I just don't like the way Christians respond. It's not because saying that Christianity is a relationship is inaccurate, but rather that it's not precise. It conveys a true idea, but it often fails to take the unbeliever or the Christian to the proper conclusion, and may actually do more harm than good.
Self-deprication, however, does nothing to make a globally minded American any different than one who doesn't care to look beyond themselves and their immediate community. It doesn't fix the problems Americans have with geographical ignorance, ingrained biases, or financial inequality. Self-deprication simply acknowledges some sort of deficiency, while it says nothing about whether or not that deficiency is being fixed. It's like a fat comedian making fat jokes while drinking a 60 oz. soda and eating donuts and pizza, or like a chain smoker laughing at their impending lung cancer while smoking a cigarette.
There is a similar trend of self-deprication within Christianity. We Christians are often very quick to judge "religion" and "Pharisees," yet so slow to do anything about these faults in our communities and in ourselves. In the past few years, I have thought more and more about this, because there are some pretty huge implications. If the fat comedian talks about how bad being fat is and how good being skinny would be, yet does nothing about it - he's not really skinny, nor will he ever be. If the chain smoker talks about how good quitting would be, and how bad smoking is, yet does nothing about it - he's not really clean, nor will he ever be. And if the Christian talks about how "religion" isn't really Christianity, and how they need to embrace Christ rather than simple tradition and rules, yet doesn't truly follow Christ - it seems to me that logic would say they're not really a Christian. |
*The views and ideas on this site are in no way affiliated with any organization, business, or individuals we are a part of or work with. They're also not theological certainties. They're simply thinking out loud, on issues and difficulties as I process things.
Categories
All
|