Vision Series 2023

Good morning, everyone.

There's probably no God, so now stop worrying and enjoy your life.

That's a statement that was a slogan that was put across as an advertising.

A number of years ago now, on the side of buses all through London,

mostly funded by the atheist Richard Dawkins.

Not to be outdone, German atheists did a similar thing,

where they put a similar statement, except they went one step further and said,

there is no God, therefore stop worrying and enjoy your life.

They rented their own bus, toured the country with it.

They also had a statement there of fulfilled life.

And as that bus toured throughout Germany,

German Christians got their own bus and put on the side of it,

what if he does exist?

The thing was that they toured together throughout Germany,

and often these buses were parked up overnight beside one another.

And so it was a great delight to the media in Germany to be able to take photos of this.

It went throughout social media.

The two opposing buses living side by side.

But from that moment, our culture has been fed the message that Christianity,

it's irrational and in some cases it's even immoral.

They're the underlying currents of a secular society that we are in at the moment.

Things we watch on TV, read online, even hear about over coffee at work or university

or those sorts of things, cause us to reject the faith,

or cause many people in fact to reject the faith that they've never understood in the first place.

They pick up little statements that are plausible.

And so then they reject what they don't even know in the first place.

That such is the power of the new atheist movement and its popularity

with little statements that are implausible in and of themselves,

but have a significant influence.

In fact, these messages are so strong and frequent

that many Christians, people who declare themselves to be Christian,

but who have not actually thought deeply about the faith that they have,

the Christian faith that they held is becoming less and less real for them

in their life, in their minds, their hearts,

as it appears that what they once held to is implausible.

It's not acceptable.

It's not even good in our day and age.

The prominent atheist Richard Dawkins,

his own view is that faith is an evil precisely because

it requires no justification and Brooks'

words, to be a person of faith means that you don't think.

That's his view.

Now, our vision series this year is about helping us see

that Christianity, that faith in Jesus Christ is...

It is good and it is, in fact, desirable.

And so, if you are a sceptic sitting here amongst us

or you're a sceptic tuning online in this series,

I welcome you in this series.

If you have not...

...the atheistic bus,

you might want to actually ask,

what kind of God is it

whose existence is deemed improbable?

That is, what kind of...

Have you thought deep enough about that?

The British bus campaign proudly informed us

that the Christian God, particularly,

is a God who's...

...associated with worry

and a lack of enjoyment in life.

What is ironic about that

is that one of Dawkins' own pin-up boys himself,

the atheist...

...probably the most prominent atheist of all time,

once said that atheism is a long, hard, cruel business.

Whereas the God of the Bible is about life.

Joy in life.

See, this vision series that we're doing this year,

it flows out of who we are as a church

and what we seek to achieve as a church here at St. Paul's.

We treasure Jesus together for the joy of all people.

That is, joy in Christ

is what we want for our neighbourhood

and that is to grow in God confidence.

That is totally reasonable to be a person of faith,

even in this day and age.

And so today I want to...

...that issue of whether it is reasonable to be Christian in this day and age,

whether it's reasonable to be a person of faith in this day and age.

And I'm going to tackle that by first addressing whether it's faith is reasonable,

God is reasonable,

and finally, is it reasonable to have faith in Jesus Christ?

So if you've got the St. Paul's app,

you can take some notes on there if you like

and follow along.

So is faith reasonable?

The St. Paul's app,

discovered that there was in fact a God.

You know, you die, you discover that God exists,

and you're fronted with God, what would you do?

And Dr. Russell's reply was very fast,

quite hubris.

He said,

God,

not enough evidence for you.

And at the other end of the spectrum,

you've got people like Elizabeth Anscombe,

possibly the greatest female philosopher ever,

and the greatest female philosopher that no one's ever heard of.

She looked at the...

...from atheism to Christianity.

And frankly,

you can come up with your own list of people,

you know,

the deconversion stories,

and all that sort of...

You can come up with your own list of people

who have gone in two different directions

by looking at the same information.

How do you account for the difference?

The common argument that's used in our society at the moment,

amongst our culture,

you solve that problem by saying

that religious people...

...on faith,

but secular people ground their life in fact,

logic, rationality, science.

Religious people have faith,

they have a bias towards...

...in some way,

have a bias towards religion,

they have an emotional need

to believe that there's something else in this world,

whereas secular people are just...

They've removed all of that tradition and culture.

...people are just unbiased.

Secular people are just looking at the world objectively

and looking at life rationally,

and they have no need to believe.

Now, the main thing I want to say about that view...

...is it's so untrue.

It's so untrue.

In his book, A Secular Age,

Charles Taylor calls this view

the subtraction story.

This is where a person might say,

well, you're not the supernatural,

but because of science and because of reason,

I've just subtracted God.

I don't need God.

And now I just see the world as it actually is.

Now,

what happens as a shock

to most non-believers

is the fact that

to move from belief to unbelief

is simply a shift from one...

...set of beliefs.

It's not a move from belief to unbelief.

It's a move from this set of beliefs

to this set of beliefs.

And one of the very first sets of beliefs

is what is called exclusive rationality.

It's the belief

that science is the only arbiter

of what is real

and factual

and that nothing should be believed

unless it's proven

with evidence and observation.

Now, I think science is fantastic.

I mean, I'm a type 1 diabetic.

50 years ago, that was a death sentence.

But because of science,

it's not anymore.

And so,

you look at a statement like that

and you go,

it sounds reasonable.

And yet it's a statement

that can't meet its own standards.

In other words,

what is the observed proof

that science is the only arbiter

of what is real and factual?

You can only use a circular argument.

You can only use science to prove science.

You can't go beyond it.

And so, it's a circular argument.

There's no other proof to it,

to that statement.

So, in other words,

it can't even stand up

to its own definition.

It's a long and complex.

But even reason and proof

must start with faith.

It must start with faith in reason

and belief in some concept of proof.

For example,

for the reason,

rationality,

depends on the faith

that our senses,

our ears,

our eyes,

our minds,

our memories,

are not actually tricking us.

test that

without using

and assuming

their reliability

in the first place.

Observation and scientific evidence

can neither prove

that there is a God

or prove

that there is a God.

All varieties

of secularism

are a set of beliefs.

It's a belief system.

It is not simply

the absence of faith.

Interviewed between comedian

Ricky Gervais

and US comedian

and talk show host

Stephen Colbert.

Gervais is a

agnostic

atheist,

which means he's not sure

whether he knows

he is or not.

Colbert

is a confused Catholic.

And Gervais was explaining

how in his life

he's not a person of faith,

he has no need for religion,

no need for faith whatsoever.

His whole life

is based on science,

on evidence,

on faith,

for the explanation

of all things

in the world.

He made it very clear

that he had no faith

whatsoever.

He then

made a comment

about how the universe,

he was just talking about

how the universe,

Colbert asked him,

so where's it all from?

He says,

well,

it's very simple.

It all started

from this freakish,

minuscule burst of light,

you know,

what we call the Big Bang.

It's this tiny,

minuscule thing,

this energy

just boom.

And Colbert,

rightly so,

very quickly

jumped in there

and said,

you can't prove that though.

There's no proof for that.

You are relying,

very rightly so,

you are relying

on the theory

of Stephen Hawking.

And

he then added

that particular view

that that's where

it all started

is a step of faith.

And Gervais

beautiful moment.

There was this

immediate tension.

It was all very humorous

and they were all like

engaging and friendly

and lovely with one another.

And there was this tension

where he's like,

yeah,

but,

and then Colbert

rescued him,

come in and

changed the subject

and moved on.

He had to acknowledge

at that point

he was a person of faith.

That his whole

system of belief

was faith.

The starting point

is faith

in something

that he can't

and then they moved

on to something else.

You see,

theism,

the existence of God,

the belief in the existence

of God,

and atheism,

the belief in the

non-existence of God,

cannot be 100%

proven by data.

systems of thinking

and believing

that need to be

compared

and contrasted

to determine

which makes

the most sense.

And so,

I say again,

if you're a skeptic

in the room

or online,

don't go down

the line

and be projecting

something that you

don't know.

Compare and contrast.

which makes

the most sense

of our experience

of things

that we know

and things

that we need

to explain.

Which one makes

the most sense

of our social experience

of the problems

that we face

in living together

and the world

in which we live

and which is

most cohesively,

logically consistent.

So that brings me

to my next point.

Is faith

in a God?

If all people

exercise faith

to some degree,

the Ricky Gervaises

and the Stephen Hawkins

and everyone

in this world

and myself,

if we all exercise

faith in this degree,

is it therefore

reasonable to believe

in God?

To have faith

in God?

Believers in God

have argued,

this is not just

Christians,

this is believers

in God

have argued

that God's existence

cannot be proven

empirically

as if he

as if this God

were a physical object

within the world

that you can

investigate.

Most religious

philosophers

have argued

that God's existence

can be logically

inferred.

Logically inferred.

Which is exactly

what

he's logically

inferring

that this is

most likely

the start

of the universe.

It's an inference,

that's all it is.

Many scientific theories,

especially those

have to do with

established

on inference,

not fact,

inference.

Theory X

is more reasonable

than theory Y

if it explains

the data

better than theory Y.

It's that kind

of an idea.

This is not

proof

of the kind

that can be

concluded

in a laboratory.

But believers

suggest

that there are

very significant

clues

that point

to the existence

of God.

In fact,

the Bible

tells us

that God

has put his

fingerprints

right through

the universe.

The heavens

declare the glory

of God,

the skies

proclaim

the work

of his

hands.

Day after

day,

they pour

forth speech.

Night after

night,

they reveal

knowledge.

They use

no words,

no sound

is heard

from these

fingerprints.

And yet,

their voice

goes out

to all the

earth,

their words

to the ends

of the world.

right

throughout

creation,

revealing

something of

who God

is or

that there

is a

God.

And the

clues are

many.

I'm going

to mention

just a

couple.

And again,

really

shortened

version of

these.

There's

the cosmic

wonder

clue.

There is

agreement

that modern

science is

completely

insufficient

to explain

the existence

of the

world.

Whatever

brought it

about,

whatever

brought it

about,

must have

been

something

extra

natural,

outside of

nature,

supernatural.

The

existence of

God is

inferred

from

existence

itself.

Nothing

is

something.

Everything

must come

from something

that already

has a

being.

This

means that

there must

be some

unique

being that

exists

and is

the source

of everything

else.

In his

book,

The Language

of God,

scientist

Richard Collins

puts it

like this.

We have

this very

solid

conclusion

that the

universe

had an

origin,

the Big

Bang.

15

bits

began

with an

unimaginably

bright flash

of energy

from an

infinitely

small

point.

That

implies

that before

that,

there was

nothing.

I cannot

imagine

how in

this case

the universe

could have

created

itself.

and the

very fact

that the

universe

had a

beginning

implies

that someone

was able

to begin

it.

It seems

to me

that had

to be

a

beginning.

Now,

that particular

argument,

the cosmic

wonder

argument,

the beginning

of everything,

is an

argument that

has drawn

atheists in

to try

and explain

it.

People like

Stephen Hawkins,

you're left

with people

like Richard

Dawkins

and others

who have

come up

with this

concept

of the

multiple

universes.

In other

words,

to explain

God

away,

they've

come up

with a

theory that

has got

no evidence

or proof

to it

at all.

massive

step of

faith.

And they

think they're

not biased

in it.

Of course,

the cosmic

wonder

argument is

not conclusive

proof for

God,

but it is

a strong

case that

something

beyond the

natural

world

has brought

this world

into existence

and which

even now

upholds

that

existence.

Another

clue for

God's

existence

has to

do with

the design,

the fine

tuned

design

of the

world.

You can

think of

this,

imagine a

bunch of

dials that

are all

set at

exactly the

point it

needs to

be,

all randomly,

not connected

to one

another at

all.

This is

not all

on a

big long

dial

platform,

they're

all

randomly,

not

connected

to one

another,

but all

the

right

point in

order for

life to

exist.

One of

those

dials is

gravitational

pull,

not related

to any

of the

other

dials,

but they're

all at

exactly the

right point.

And the

possibility

of those

dials

set at

exactly the

right spot

without a

purpose or

without a

cause is a

massive leap

of faith,

massive leap

of faith.

especially

for a

scientist

who works

on the

principle,

foundational

principle of

a scientist

is the

world is

orderly.

It can

be observed

and yet

their starting

principle is

randomness.

The secular

science.

So here's a

way to maybe

illustrate that.

imagine that

a man is

before a

firing squad,

poor person,

10 crack

marksmen,

brilliant

marksmen,

to doom

this poor

prisoner,

and they're

all standing

10 metres

away.

These guys

are that

good,

they can

shoot

something

a kilometre

away,

but they're

all standing

10 metres

away.

And

countdown

happens,

bang,

every single

one of

the misses.

He's still

alive,

he's like,

wow.

Could that

have been an

accident?

Well, I

mean, on one

level, you can

take each one

of the guys

and you

separate them

and you go,

well, this

guy coughed

at the wrong

time,

all at

exactly the

same time,

this guy

was completely

drunk,

this guy

momentarily

blind,

you know,

blah,

blah,

blah,

you know,

like you

could get

all 10 of

them and

go,

well,

there's a

logical

explanation

for all

10,

or you

could sit

back and

you could

look at

that and

go,

hang on

a bit,

something's

there is

someone back

here behind

these 10

people influencing

this decision

because they

don't want

that guy

shot.

There's a

conspiracy.

Believers

in God

suggest that

the fine

tuning of

physics makes

much more

sense in

a universe

in which

there is a

creator and

designer

standing behind

it all.

It's

improbable that

all the

physical

constants of

the universe

just happen

to be

perfectly

tuned for

life on

their own.

To quote

the scientist

Collins again,

if any one

of these

constants was

off by even

one part in

a million

million,

the universe

could not

have come to

the point

where we

see it.

Matter would

not have been

able to

coalesce,

there would

have been no

galaxy,

stars,

planets,

or people.

to conclude

it was

something

intended and

something

designed.

Is that

conclusive

proof?

No, it's

not.

Because it

suggests

that it's

more likely

that a

God,

then there

is not

a God,

it can't

be dismissed.

Because there's

not just

ten guys

lining up

here.

The

philosopher

Alvin

Plantinga

says that

there are

at least

thirty

very strong

similar

arguments

for the

existence

of God.

The

distinguished

physician

Lewis Thomas

wrote,

I cannot

make peace

with the

randomness

doctrine.

This is

an atheist.

I cannot

abide the

notion of

purposelessness

and blind

chance in

nature.

And yet,

I do not

know what

to put in

its place

for the

quieting of

my mind.

Now,

none of

these are

so strong

as to

force

belief.

But they

do make

it completely

rational to

believe

in the

existence

of God.

Completely

rational.

In fact,

these arguments

suggest

it's

rational

and takes

less of a

leap of faith

to believe

in God

than to

not believe

in God.

Ultimately,

non-belief in

God is an

act of

faith because

there is

reason for

the world

and all

that's

within it

with all

its deep

mathematical

orderliness

and matter

itself

all simply

exist on

its own

with no

source behind

it at all.

So,

yes,

it's

reasonable

to be

a person

of faith

because

everyone

is.

Yes,

it's

reasonable

to believe

in God

and lastly,

is it

reasonable

therefore to

believe in

Jesus Christ

which is

what we

want to

do as

a

Jesus.

Now,

the clues

for God,

all those

arguments

lined up,

not only

do not

prove

God's

existence

but at

best

they would,

you could

conclude

that

this is

just some

abstract

God,

nothing more

than the

Greek

philosopher

Aristotle's

unmoved

mover

who created

the world,

got it

moving but

completely

unaware that's

what he

did.

Christians

believe that

the main

way that

we know

specifics

about this

God is

through

self-revelation.

that is,

we don't

know God

first and

foremost

because he

has spoken.

He's

revealed

himself.

And

Christians

believe that

he has

done that

decisively

in the

person of

Jesus

Christ.

one is

referring to

Jesus

when it

makes that

claim that

Jesus

himself is

the final

and decisive

communication

of God

to his

universe.

In the

past,

God

could

through the

prophets

at many times

in various

ways,

but in

these last

days,

he has

spoken to

us by

his

son,

whom he

appointed

heir of

all things

and through

whom he

made the

universe.

It's the

radiance of

God's glory

and the

exact

representation

of his

being.

Hebrews

1,

what we see

in Hebrews

is very

clear,

it's talking

about Jesus,

that this

Jesus is

God the

son,

the exact

representation

of God

and he

has now

come to

dwell.

And so

therefore,

it's not

surprising

that the

man that

Christians

call Jesus

Christ is

the single

most influential

person in

their life.

And his

influence

continues to

grow today.

A greater

percentage of

the world's

population than

ever before is

Christian.

And

Christianity

adds to

50,000

people a

day or

just under

19 million

new

Christians a

year.

And

Christianity

is the

most

equally

distributed

of any

of the

major

religions.

Christian

faith.

That is,

the Christian

faith has

crossed the

cultural divisions

of humanity

and found a

place in

all kinds,

rich and

poor,

east and

west,

all kinds

across the

world.

Why has

Jesus had

such an

impact on

humanity in

the last

20

centuries?

Jesus,

the answer

is by

looking at

his life,

his words,

his actions.

Jesus,

you see the

quality we

would ordinarily

consider

incompatible in

the same

person.

Jesus combines

high majesty

with the

greatest humility.

He joins the

strongest commitment

to justice and

astonishing mercy

and grace.

movements of

justice in

this world,

very few of

them,

in fact,

all of them

have got

enemies in

some description,

people that

they want to

have justice

towards and

those who

they want to

tear down.

Very rarely

do you see

justice

working together

at the same

time.

He reveals a

transcendent

self-sufficiency

and yet an

entire trust in

and a reliance

upon his

heavenly father.

We are

surprised to

see tenderness

without any

weakness,

boldness,

humility,

without

uncertainty,

indeed

accompanied by

a towering

confidence.

His unbending

conviction,

but he's

completely

approachable.

His insistence

on truth,

but he's

always bathed

in love,

without

insensitivity,

his integrity,

without rigidity,

his passion,

without prejudice.

people who

have pondered

and read

Jesus'

words,

his deeds,

his life,

have groped

for good

ways

to explain

what it is

that they

see.

And many

have come

to realise

that the

remarkable

claims of

Jesus

may in

fact be

the only

way forward.

What he

says about

himself

is true.

is that

his claims

were so

self-centred,

but his

character,

his actions

were so

un-self-centred.

We never

see him

pompous,

you never

see him

offended,

we never

see him

he's

approachable

to the

weakest

and most

broken,

he's never

moody

or irritable.

there is

an

unsurpassed

moral

and

spiritual

beauty

about the

character

and the

team.

Houston

Smith in

his book

The World's

Religions

says that

only Buddha

and Jesus

so

impressed

their

contemporaries

that the

contemporaries

ask not

just who

are you

but what

are you?

What order

of being

do you

belong to?

What species

do you

represent?

Only

these two

figures in

history

had

characters

that

transcended

ordinary

human life

to the

degree

that that

question was

necessary for

them.

And

Buddha

of the

two

Buddha

asserted

with great

clarity

thank you

Rachel

asserted

with great

clarity

and

emphasized

over and

over again

that he

was not

a god

that he

was not

an angelic

being

that he

was not

a divine

being

in any

way.

God

said

to be

God

and

continually

claimed to

be the

God who

made all

things

the creator

of the

universe.

This

creates a

great

challenge.

Jesus

is one

of the

very few

people in

history

who founded

one of the

great world

religions.

I'm

talking

Scientology

or something.

I'm

talking the

big world

religions.

Millions and

millions of

adherences.

He belongs

to that

very,

very small

group of

people who

had a

very significant

impact on

him.

Because of

their brilliant

teaching but

also because

of their

admirable

lives and

characters.

The difference

between Jesus

and every

other one of

those in

that category,

that small

category,

he's the

only one who

claimed to

be God

himself.

Buddha

emphatically

said that he

was not

God.

And Muhammad

of course

would never

have ever

claimed to

be Allah.

Nor did

Confucius

claim to

be God.

Jesus is

also part of

a second

group of

people in

history.

And this

second group

of people

are the

people who

claim to

be God.

And what

makes Jesus

unique in

this group

of people,

this group

were never

able to

convince

anyone but

a very

small select

group of

people,

very small

group of

followers,

that they

were in

fact God.

In the

whole history

of humanity,

there is

only one

person who

not only

claimed to

be God

himself,

but also

got enormous

numbers of

people to

believe it

in his

own time.

And that's

Jesus Christ.

So why

did Jesus

succeed as

the only

person who

ever claimed

deity and

founded one

of the great

world religions,

indeed the

largest

faith on

the face

of the

earth.

Firstly,

his life

was exquisitely

beautiful.

It is

extraordinarily

difficult.

I'd

encourage you,

I'd

challenge you

this even

today.

difficult to

claim to

be perfect

and to

be God,

to be

divine,

and then to

get people

who live

with you

to believe

that.

My kids

don't believe

I'm God

at all.

They don't

believe I'm

perfect at

all.

The other

reason that

Jesus was

worshipped by

Jews as

God,

that in

itself is an

extraordinary

claim.

no Jew

ever believed

that God

would be

human.

So

sacrilegious.

And yet

many Jews

worshipped him

in the first

century.

How did that

happen?

The

resurrection.

The

historical

evidence for

the resurrection

of Jesus

is,

and there

are three

basic lines

of evidence

that converge

for the

resurrection.

The first

is the fact

that there

was an

empty

tomb.

Historians

see the

empty

tomb as

just a

given.

The

question is

what happened

to the

body?

The second

is the

testimony of

the hundreds

of eyewitnesses.

The Apostle

Paul can

say in a

public document

about 20

years after

the event,

while people

are still

in the

event,

that

hundreds

and

hundreds

and

hundreds

of

people

saw

Jesus

raised

from

the

dead.

It's

one thing

about

resurrection.

It's

another thing

to start

the rumour

while people

are still

living and

claiming that

those people

saw it.

The third

has to do

with the

impact of

the resurrection

of Jesus

followers.

Very few

marginal

people that

developed a

confidence and

a fearlessness

that enabled

them to

spread the

news of

Jesus

resurrected

gladly

throughout the

Roman Empire

and give

their lives

for them.

Some people

have claimed

that the

disciples stole

the body

and hid it.

you don't

die for a

hoax.

Something

extraordinary

must have

happened to

the

disciples

of the

normal

course.

And if we

try to find

an alternative

explanation for

the resurrection,

we may in

fact find

ourselves

making even

greater leaps

of faith

than if we

believed in

the

resurrection.

In Jesus

Christ is a

man who

claimed to

be God

and yet who

lived a

life so

great that

he became

the only

person in

the history

of humanity

to convince

people

that he

is in

fact God

and he's

still doing

it today.

Friends,

and particularly

if you're a

skeptic here,

you can't

be indifferent

to that

claim.

You can't

resolve the

issue by just

saying,

well,

he was just

a great

teacher.

He's able

to convince

people.

His

declarations

about

himself

don't

allow

that.

You can't

respond that

he'd ever

made such

great claims

about himself

because of

the historical

evidence for

those claims.

We can't

be content

with the

explanation

that he

was deranged,

that he

was a

fraud,

because of

the evident

of his

life on

his followers.

And because

of the

case of

the

resurrection.

This

leaves us

with the

final

possible

explanation,

namely

is,

that is,

that he

did what

he claimed

to have

done.

And as

the creator

of the

universe,

he still

makes those

claims on

our life.

Thomas,

in John

14,

still stands

today for

your life

and mine.

I am

the way.

I am

the truth.

I am

the life.

He is

it,

the source

of life.

the truth

about life,

the way

for life.

Except

through him.

As hard

as it is

to be a

person of

faith and

to believe

that Jesus

is God,

come to

earth,

it may

in fact be

just more

difficult not

to do so.