Special Thanks Special thanks to students of Purdue University and of the Great Lakes East and West Regions of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship USA who allowed me to field test teaching this material in the AFTHAM (Apologetics for the Heart and Mind) track at Cedar Campus the summers of 1995-1997. Joseph B Whitchurch 1998 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Acknowledgements Much of this information is from Dr. Paul Feinberg's "Cumulative Case", run through a layman's grid (mine) and adapted. This work is also influenced significantly by Dr. Peter Kreeft's cumulative case in his "Handbook of Christian Apologetics," and by Dr. James Sire's case in "The Universe Next Door" which contains a worldview perspective, along with one of his newer works "Why Should Anyone Believe Anything At All?" all of the last three being published by InterVarsity Press. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Introduction to the Value of a Cumulative Case The power of a cumulative case is that it takes seriously a wide scope of evidence/data, both internal and external to ones self and presents a cohesive worldview which is meaningful, one which a person can "live it out" practically, and one that is fruitful and helpful in ones life and community. When presented as a more comprehensive whole, the case needs to be responded to with a similar cumulative case that would attempt to make more sense of this kind of comprehensive data, in a worldview or system that is meaningful and fruitful. That case which is the more compelling would seem to be the one that is also the closest to getting at what is in fact true. Below is such a case. This case is adapted slightly from Dr. Paul Feinberg's case. A Cumulative Case The Witness of the Holy Spirit concerning the truthfulness of the Christian Faith. ______________/\________________ ____ / \____ / \ External Witness of the Holy Spirit Internal Witness ____|_______________________________ of the Holy Spirit | 4 5 6 | Theistic Moral Christian From Special | "proofs" Lawgiver Experience Revelation ______|___________ Evidences Case | In the Believer | | | | | _|__________________ | 11 12 | 1 2 3 | Assurance Illumin- | 1st Design Perfect Being | ation. | uncaused God concept | | Cause | In the _________________|________________ Unbeliever 6 7 8 9 10 | Bible Prophecy Jesus' Deity Miracles | phen. 1st & 2nd Cross of 13 Innate Coming and Christ knowledge empty 14 Conscience tomb. 15 Conviction Reminder of the nature and limitations of using a Cumulative Case Remember that the point is not the conclusive, air tight nature of any one of the points above, but more in legal terms, the weight of the evidence, or the case that is made. Surely one could say that the Design argument above (2) could "prove too much". For instance it need not "prove a Designer" but may "prove" multiple designers or deities. It takes teams of engineers to design a nuclear submarines' guidance system and yet the dolphin's system is more advanced, so why couldn't multiple deities be involved in the dolphin's design? This would lead one to polytheism, not christianity. Of course polytheists rarely if ever argue this way. Neither do naturalists argue this way, and folks for whom a serious discussion of truth is important, will seek an alternative understanding that accounts for design, which fits with their comprehensive worldview. It is easy to argue for absurdity for absurdity sake, but it is hard for it to be meaningful, helpful, fruitful, and cohesive. Likewise the 1st Uncaused Cause could hypothetically never have existed. There could have been an infinite number of "big bangs" from eternity past, and an eternal universe, eternal matter, eternal chance, etc. But scientists know to look for cause and effect, in short, for origins. Radical Marxist materialists argue for an eternal nature of matter. But most rational people look for orgins. The cause, source, or origin of this article, of that species, this storm path, that country, this civilization, this universe, that supernova, the next pay check, are all sought out. They had to come from somewhere. But again the 1st Uncaused Cause, is not the point in itself. The above cumulative case is consistent with a rational explanation of design and causation and that is all. If one argues for polytheism, materialism or chaos, how does one find this meaningful, fruitful, or just? And how does it make sense of the rest of the data of life in a cumulative case such as above? How does one who believes matter is all there is in a chance relationship over unfathomable eons of time, make sense of organic matter coming from inorganic matter, or of human rationality developing from a single cell organism given what science is telling us about the age of the universe, the source of our moral notions, or that haunting, apparently negative aspect of our "higher" evolution that we seem to be incurably religious, inbred with a God concept? What do we make of world religions, or more specific, what does one make of Jesus Christ, the Bible, or the human problem e.g. that education, money, politics, upbringing, etc haven't made us overcome basic greed and selfishness? How do we live out our frail solutions helpfully and teach them to our treasured present or future children? How does it affect the way I treat my love of spouse, view of romance, etc? Where are the Alternatives? Where is the compelling alternative cumulative case? I would be interested in viewing a compelling alternative, but have not found one. Further, I'm fairly content with this cumulative case above and do find it quite compelling. But I am always open to a serious consideration of new data. Does this negate the role of Scripture? The Scriptures while not doing classical apologetics per se, do in fact appeal to data that look amazingly consistent with many arguments from christian apologists. Where does one suppose many of these arguments came from after all! If there is a God, every truth, and reason itself is derived from God. And God inspired the Bible. Who for instance could doubt that Genesis 1 or John 1 or Romans 1:18 all believe and teach a 1st Uncaused Cause who is in fact the Creator God, Yahweh? Jesus appeals to how even Solomon with all his wealth and designers, could not design the beauty that Jesus' heavenly Father had designed into common lillies. Again, Solomon, developing perhaps his understanding of humans being created in the image of God, speaks of a kind of unfilled "eternity in our (finite) hearts" in his writings. We could continue so forth right on through the list below. The point of such a list is simply to show that speaking of such data is not contrary to Scripture but affirming of Scripture. And Scripture is not just true for Believers but it is true for everyone and should be proclaimed everywhere. I believe the wise apologist will begin with a clear and honest acknowledgement of a presupposed Christian worldview. And begin with the parts of the case that speak from special revelation. However, God is sovereign over all data. Here is a brief example or listing of the kinds of Scriptural support of apologetical notions that I have been mentioning. Notice how the list below is numbered and the numbers correspond with the numbers in various parts of the cumulative case illustration given earlier. Example List 1. Gen. 1, John 1, Rom. 1:18f ... 2. Mt. 10:28-30, Ps. 8:3-9 ... 3. Gen. 1:26-7, Ecc. 3:11-15 ... \ 4. Rom. 2:14, Jn.8:46 ... | 5. Acts 4:13f, Paul to Agrippa, Felix... | 6. Similarity thru 66 books... | 7. Isa.53, Ps. 22, Mt. 24 ... | 8. Jn.20:27-8, Mt.28 ... |__Ways Scripture 9. Jn.1:1-4, Jn.8, Rev.1, Heb.1, Col.1... | uses the lines 10. Jn.14:11, examples in four gospels | of thought 11. 1Jn.3:18f, all 1Jn., John 10 ... | above. 12. 1Cor.2:9f ... | 13. Rom. 1:19 ... | 14. Rom 2:13-15 ... / 15. John 16:9f ... Tests for Truth or claims to Truth. Value and Danger. I make reference to some reality tests for those who speak of their truth claims. Just as we are wary of salespeople who tell us of their super product, we are rightfully wise to apply some tests to the claims of truth that are offered to us. If we do not then we too could become the victims of dangerous cults and sects, some of whom have resulted in child molestation, mass suicides, and appear to have been based more on the apparent sincerity of a powerful personality who controlled the scope of investigation and questioning that was allowed by the sect. It can be dangerous to not scrutinize a truth claim. Some common and useful tests for a truth claim would include the following: A. Accuracy (e.g. non-contradiction AND best fit for the facts). We generally don't accept what appears to be contradictory, self contradictory or full of fallacies. B. Draws from the widest possible scope of reliable evidence. Some of this would include human psychology, human history, the nature of the universe, the nature of religious writings and expressions, the developmental fruit or humanitarian aspects of various viewpoints in a healthcare or educational or other more sociological contexts, etc. C. Live-a-bility (can it actually be lived out practically). Matter may be considered by some to be an illusion, but do you therefore feel free to walk in front of a speeding bus or take a blow torch to your armpit? Morality may be entirely, soley, and always a matter of private opinion only, with all views no matter how bizzaar requiring equal respect and considered equally true, but do you discipline your children, or get upset with an "unfair" grade on a test, or with a "rude" truck driver in busy traffic? Do you value love and learning, commitment and service, health and compassion, freedom and intimacy? Can you live out your case and live it out well? Can you live it such a way that you can live with yourself? This bridges a bit into the next catagory or test which is called fruitfulness. D. Fruitfulness/Real Quality of Life. Does its fruit empower and impute dignity, or enslave and de-humanize the advocate and others? What is the track record and current status of your cumulative case historically? Take a look at your favorite religion, or look at nihilism, Marxism, Lenninism, Maoism, hedonism, fill in your favorite world religion including secularism, agnosticism, atheism. What's it look like here? E. Possible other tests for truth, might include conservation and simplicity. How convuluted does one have to become in order to appreciate the cumulative case you offer? Can a sage be as happy with it as an innocent child could be? Or does it only work for elitists, ivory tower theorists, etc? I would consider these in descending order of priority. As a Christian, the example of Jesus is supreme. But in discussions with those outside the faith, I would appeal to these tests as well, and I believe Jesus is consistent with them as well as he is the creator of rationality. Worldview and the Hard Questions Other aspects of a combinationalist apologetic might include hard questions like the meaning of the "image of God" or a sanctity of life ethic contrasted with the ethic of "choice" or a "privacy ethic". Another example could be a christian response to the problem of evil v. karma, chance, survival of fittest, etc. These are not simple questions and would involve various aspects of the above case in unique combinations. But such an effort would contrast various truth claims and philosophies of life in the light of real life trials. Miracles (in the above case) could include power encounters, and spiritual gifts. The phenomenon of prophecy could include apparent supernatural predictions of the second coming of Christ, as well as those of the 1st coming of Christ. For the Believer a test of truth could also include things like; Do the Scriptures affirm it, Does Jesus address it, Do I have a "peace" about it, an experience based internal witness of the Holy Spirit. These would need to harmonize with the above contexts and coupled with mature counsel from godly resources both contemporary and scholars of antiquity lead us well into an exciting, dynamic, and growing place of understanding, proclaiming, and living God's truth. I commend to you this cumulative case and invite responses. Joseph B. Whitchurch jbw@insightbb.com Use the back arrow to return to apologetics.