Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian
From: alvin@spot.Colorado.EDU (Kenneth Alvin)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Certainty and Arrogance
Message-ID: <Apr.14.03.09.07.1993.5494@athos.rutgers.edu>
Date: 14 Apr 93 07:09:08 GMT
Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 66
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

In article <Apr.13.00.08.33.1993.28409@athos.rutgers.edu> kilroy@gboro.rowan.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie) writes:
>Dean Velasco quoted a letter from James M Stowell, president of
>Moody Bible Institute:
>
>>  We affirm the absolutes of Scripture, not because we are arrogant
>>  moralists, but because we believe in God who is truth, who has revealed
>>  His truth in His Word, and therefore we hold as precious the strategic
>>  importance of those absolutes."
>
>There has been a lot of discussion, but so far nobody seems to have hit on
>exactly what the criticism of "arrogance" is aimed at.
>
> <lots of stuff deleted>
>
>This is where the "arrogance of Christians" arises: many people believe
>that their own personal research can give them absolute certainty about the
>doctrines of Christianity -- they are implicitly claiming that they are
>infallible, and that there is no possibility of mistake.
>
>Claiming that you CANNOT have made a mistake, and that your thinking has led
>you to a flawless conclusion, is pretty arrogant.

I agree with what Darren has to say here, but would like to add a 
personal observation.  What I see as arrogance and the problem I have 
with it is not a sense of personal certainty, but a lack of respect for
others who come to differing conclusions.  Clearly, this is not just 
Christian vs. Non-Christian; there is a whole spectrum of belief systems
within Christianity.  I do not tend to argue with others about matters
of personal faith because, like aesthetics, it is not demonstable by
objective means.  

Choosing what to believe and rely on are important areas of personal 
sovereignty.  What bothers me is when others suggest that, in these 
matters of faith, their specific beliefs are not only true to them 
but are absolute and should be binding on others.  It follows from this
that God must give everyone the same revelation of truth, and thus 
anyone who comes to a different conclusion is intentionally choosing
the wrong path.  This is the arrogance I see; a lack of respect for the
honest conclusions of others on matters which are between them and God.
Even a personal certainty leaves room for the beliefs of others.  It is
universalizing those matters of personal faith, coupled by a proud
notion that one's relationship with God is superior to other's, that
leads to arrogance.  In my honest (and nonuniversal) opinion. :-)


>Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.rowan.edu
>"At the core of all well-founded belief, lies belief that is unfounded."
>                                                    -- Ludwig Wittgenstein

comments, criticism welcome...
-Ken
alvin@ucsu.colorado.edu

[It is certainly reasonable to ask for some humility about our own
ability to know the truth.  There are also different paths in some
areas of practice.  But I'd like to see more clarification about what
you mean when you reject the idea of saying "their specific beliefs
are not only true to them but are absolute and should be binding on
others."  If something is true, it is true for everyone, assuming that
the belief is something about God, history, etc.  Of course something
of the form "I believe that it's best for me not to xxx" could be true
for some people and not others.  I have suggested in the past that God
may be less concerned about doctrinal agreement than many people are.
But that doesn't mean I doubt that there is a difference between
true and false, nor that I think there is no benefit in finding out
what is true.  --clh]
