In response to Tuesday’s blog post, which I shared on Facebook, I had an interesting exchange with Cory Markum, an atheist blogger and podcaster whom I first heard on Justin Brierley’s Unbelievable? radio show. I blogged about that episode last year, and he “friended” me on Facebook.
He began with the following reply:
That’s great, but if [God] exists, he should have stopped the shooting instead of sitting idly by. If anyone else knew that something like that was going to happen and had the capacity to stop it, but didn’t, then we would all conclude that they are culpable for failing to act. I see no good reason to give God a pass, so the fact that God didn’t do anything to stop it, in my eyes, constitutes strong evidence that such a being doesn’t exist.
To which I wrote the following:
I see no reason to give God a pass, either, Cory. But I trust that God knows better than we do the myriad consequences of his intervening to stop what one of his free creatures chooses to do. Obviously, if God were in the business of intervening every time one of his creatures chooses to do something harmful, we would no longer be free, nor would we live in a universe governed by predictable laws. And God knows it wouldn’t be good for us to never suffer consequences of free choices.
But if you read my post, you know that we Christians believe in heaven. This is not pie in the sky to us; this is an essential part of how God balances the scales of justice and redeems suffering. Whatever happens in this world is a “light momentary affliction,” as the apostle says, in comparison to eternity. I know you don’t believe that, but I wish you did.
He replied:
I wish I did too, man. I’m extremely envious of those who are able to.
I’m curious…do you believe that we (or more accurately, you) will have freedom of this sort in heaven? If so, and if heaven is a place free of evil, doesn’t this show that it is possible for there to be free creatures and yet, no evil? And if such a state of affairs is possible, doesn’t it follow that a perfectly good being would opt for that world, rather than the one we have?
Notice here that Markum raises precisely the objection that Christian apologist Clay Jones discusses in his recent book Why Does God Allow Evil?: If heaven is a world in which free will and sinless perfection coexist, why couldn’t God have created this world to begin with—and spare us the pain and suffering? Markum continued:
Another thing… Maybe God couldn’t intervene *every single time* to thwart evil without rendering our freedom inchoate, but it doesn’t follow from this that he couldn’t stop *some* of the horrible stuff, *some* of the time. Take the Holocaust, for example. In my view, a world where the Holocaust never happened is a better world. Furthermore, a world in which the Holocaust never occurred is not a world where suddenly free will is nonexistent. So, therefore, I see no reason whatsoever to conclude that God had no choice but to allow the Holocaust to happen, apart from simply presupposing that God exists and that, therefore, there must be a reason that he allowed it to happen.
Makes more sense (leaving aside the other arguments for and against theism) given that the Holocaust did happen, to think that God doesn’t exist.
I then wrote the following:
As to your first point, yes, we will be free in heaven. But we will also have everything we desire. We will not be under the influence of Satan and rebellious human beings. Our faith, which is very imperfect on this side of heaven, will become “sight”: God will be as apparent to us as the laptop on which I’m typing this. We will know everything we need to know. We will have the hindsight of having lived in a fallen world, having suffered from the consequences of sin, and having experienced Final Judgment (and participating in it, according to scripture), which will teach us the folly of sin. In other words, we Christians are learning now (and we will continue to learn) how to live with freedom, yet not sin. As someone else has said, sin will be as avoidable in heaven as picking up this pen on my desk and jabbing it in my eye.
As for the Holocaust, Godwin’s law so soon?… But that’s fine. I get it. We have to deal with the greatest evil we can think of. Except I would say the greatest evil the world has ever known was the cross of God’s Son Jesus, which God transformed into the greatest good the world has ever known. I trust that he is doing the same with the Holocaust—using it for his purposes. In the end it will be clear that that he has governed our world justly and to his glory. Until then, we need to have epistemic humility: We can’t imagine a world in which the Holocaust didn’t happen. Would something worse than the Holocaust have emerged? Who knows? Humanity is very resourceful when it comes to doing evil.
Besides, you and I probably wouldn’t be here without WWII. Our parents would likely have never met. Or even if they had met and reproduced, we would be drastically different people if our parents and ourselves hadn’t been shaped by the events of that time. Just think: Maybe God wanted you, Cory, to be exactly the person you are today! There’s a butterfly effect in history. Only an all-knowing Being who transcends time can see the ripple effects of every seemingly small, insignificant event.
Besides, God did intervene: he used men like Churchill, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Patton, and millions of servicemen and -women and civilians to put an end to it. Thank God!
Another benefit of believing in the God that we Christians believe in is Final Judgment: No one gets away with anything. “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay” are very happy words for victims of genocide and other forms of evil.
To which he replied:
Your final judgment remark is interesting. Does one go to heaven because of their beliefs or because of their actions in your view??
I anticipated a trap that he was setting related to my belief in the exclusivity of Jesus Christ. What comfort is “vengeance is mine” to victims of genocide if they themselves haven’t received God’s gift of eternal life through Christ? I wrote:
You already know my answer to that question. God will judge with perfect justice. If our actions qualify us for heaven, then by all means that’s the basis on which we’ll go there. But you already know that, as a Christian, I will say that none of will be so qualified. We’re all sinners. None of us is good by nature. This is why God sent his Son as our substitute, to accomplish for us what we are unable to accomplish for ourselves. And to suffer for us the penalty that we deserve to suffer.
God has graciously given us a means of salvation. I urge you to repent and believe in Jesus while there’s still time.
I guessed wrong. Markum didn’t go in that direction, as you’ll see in his response. But I do like what I wrote above, and I like my appeal for repentance and faith. As much as I enjoy verbal sparring, this isn’t a game to me. Ultimately I want Markum (and anyone else who doesn’t know Christ) to repent and be saved. I was praying that the Holy Spirit would work through my feeble words.
Markum replied as follows:
I’m sorry but, no, I didn’t know the answer, and I’m not sure I do even now. Presumably, if he’s just, he’ll do what’s just, but that’s not what I asked. I’m asking you what takes precedent over the other in your view: right beliefs or right actions? In other words, does a shitty person with the right beliefs go to heaven, while a good person with the wrong beliefs goes to hell?
*in your view*
I replied:
Sorry, given the little I know about you, I assumed that you were setting a rhetorical trap, since (I gather) you argue frequently with Christians, many of whom are evangelical just like me. If you’re genuinely interested in conversation, we can have a conversation.
This was my “high and inside” pitch to brush him off the plate. He said, “Not so much a trap as an attempt to highlight the way in which many of our intuitions regarding justice, don’t jive all that well with the ‘traditional’ view of Christian salvation.” I continued:
We are saved neither by our actions nor our beliefs; we are saved by God’s actions through his Son Jesus. For one thing, if you read the gospels, especially the Sermon on the Mount, you’ll see that Jesus isn’t terribly impressed with our actions: His main dispute with the Pharisees, for instance, relates not to what they do—they were perfectly ethical people—but to who they were; their character. What mattered was the motives underneath their actions. They weren’t doing what they did out of a genuine love for God and neighbor, which from Jesus’ perspective is the main thing. What matters is our “hearts” (understood figuratively). This is why he says, using hyperbole, that anger is murder and lust is adultery: the same problem lies at the root of each. Unless or until we are healed there, it doesn’t matter what we do.
So, no, in that sense, “right actions” are irrelevant. And as Jesus tells the Rich Young Ruler, no one is “good” except God alone. So I suppose the “good person with the wrong beliefs” is strictly hypothetical, from a Christian point of view. Everyone has sinned sufficiently so as to deserve death and hell. “If you, O Lord, should mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand?” The answer, biblically speaking, is no one.
Moreover, we are not saved by right beliefs. The apostle James makes this point throughout his eponymous New Testament letter. Please read it. He implies that demons themselves, in a sense, have the “right beliefs.” They are not thereby made acceptable to God.
We are saved by faith, but even faith, biblically speaking, is a gift. We can’t muster it through will power or education; it’s received, but even this reception is made possible by the Holy Spirit. There’s no aspect of salvation for which we get to claim credit—as if we’ve accomplished something ourselves. It’s all grace. “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” Eph. 2:8-9.
But the object of saving faith is Christ alone, and what he accomplished through his life, death, and resurrection. As I indicated above, it’s only through his faithfulness to God, not our own, that we are able to be in a saving relationship with God.
While I was typing this response, he asked about serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer.
Jeffrey Dahmer, for example, a cannibalistic murderer that raped and murdered numerous men and young boys (he once drilled a hole into one of his victim’s heads and poured sulfuric acid into it to try and make him more docile), allegedly repented and converted before being murdered in prison.
Sooo Jeffrey Dahmer, in your eyes, and assuming he was genuine in his conversion, is righteously living in heaven right now?
You see what he’s doing here: He’s using the possible conversion of Jeffrey Dahmer to discredit the gospel: I’ve already said that we’re saved by grace alone through faith in Christ alone and what Christ accomplished through his life and atoning death. In extreme examples like Dahmer, God’s prodigal grace violates our sense of justice.
I’m not sure I disagree with Markum! On the other hand, if the cross of Christ can atone for even Dahmer’s sins, there’s hope for me—and Markum! That’s worth celebrating!
So I replied:
“Assuming he was genuine in his conversion”? Sure. Does that offend you? If so, imagine how the sins for which you’re responsible—which are bad enough, I’m sure—offend God. The good news is that God has done everything necessary to purchase for you forgiveness and mercy if only you’ll turn to him!
Would you have God only forgive people who are “better than” Jeffrey Dahmer? That’s a pretty low bar. No one who understands the gospel takes comfort in saying, “At least I’m better than this other person!” We know ourselves to be sinners who need God’s grace at every moment, and it’s only on that basis that we are acceptable to God.
As I did when I invited him to repent and be saved, I wanted to put the ball back in his court. Forget about serial killers! What about you? Do you feel responsible for your own moral failures? The fact that you’re “not as bad as” notoriously evil people doesn’t excuse your guilt.
I’m reminded of something Tim Keller said about the perceived “narrowness” of the gospel: Secular people, he said, complain that our insistence that Christ is the “only way” to heaven is far too exclusive. From his perspective, however, the more popular alternative—that all “good” people go to heaven—is far more exclusive: Exactly how good do we have to be? “Mother Teresa good”? Or will we take comfort in the thought that “at least we’re not as bad as” Jeffrey Dahmer?
My point is, if we really believed that our “goodness” made us fit for heaven, how many of us would sleep well at night?
I don’t know whether Jeffrey Dahmer is in heaven. If he is, it’s only because his sins were paid for by the blood of Jesus Christ—because God’s justifiable anger toward Dahmer’s sin was poured out on God the Son. If Dahmer is not in heaven, he’s in hell experiencing this wrath for himself.
Either way, I’m not ashamed that Christ’s blood is more powerful than the worst evil that men can do.
And that was the end. Our dialogue stopped at the point.
Thoughts?