Dear Luke,
This week I am going to begin a series of letters about Lesson 1, The Message of the Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I'll write at least one letter per section. I'll probably write two for most of them, including the first section, which is titled, "God Is Our Loving Heavenly Father."
I thought it might be appropriate to begin with some ideas about teaching this lesson to a person who does not believe in God. I assume Brazil is similar to Chile in that most people are Christian, and mostly Catholic and Evangelical, but even in Chile, we would occasionally have to opportunity to share our message with person who does not believe in God at all. If other missionaries are like I was, many don't feel very well prepared for such teaching situations, and it is difficult for them to develop a teaching strategy.
Before developing a strategy, the missionary first has to understand a fallacy that exists among some atheists; they proclaim that God cannot exist because science proves it to be so. Science is used as a sort of superficial excuse to hide a deeper issue. Doctor Christian Smith of Notre Dame University pointed out this fallacy very effectively a few weeks ago in his BYU Forum speech. He said, "I think that when we get down to it, a good part of what motivates [many of the scientists which pretend to have proven God does not exist] to reject God, religion, and other non-naturalistic, metaphysical views, are not actually the findings of science, but instead personal, moral, and emotional objections... Years of discussion and observation have suggested to me that in many cases if one scratches just below the surface of many allegedly scientific objections to religion one finds not real scientific problems, but instead personal, moral, and emotional concerns." Dr. Smith goes on to cite one of these scientists, "Maybe at the very bottom of it,.. I really don't like God. You know, it's silly to say I don't like God because I don't believe in God, but in the same sense that I don't like lago... or any of the other villains of literature, the God of traditional Judaism and Christianity and Islam seems to me a terrible character. He is a god who [is] obsessed [with] the degree to which people worship him and anxious to punish with the most awful torments those who don't worship him in the right way. The traditional god [is] a terrible character. I don't like him."
Is that not the case of the people of Ammonihah who said to Alma, "We will not believe thy words if thou shouldst prophesy that this great city should be destroyed in one day," (Alma 9:4)? It can be difficult to believe in a loving God who allows suffering. Quite honestly, I sympathize with atheists who feel that a loving God would not allow for the suffering caused by natural disasters, disease, and starvation in some areas of the world. Except to say that these calamities promote a sense of community over ego-centrism, courage over cowardice, and humility over pride, I have no theory as to why God allows these things to happen, and I understand that my answer may not be satisfactory most. I do not pretend to understand the will of God. For now, the best answer I can give is a quotation of Isaiah, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts," (Isaiah 55:8-9). Which is, in a way, a glorified way of saying, "I don't have the answer."
So once the missionary has understood that there is very possibly a deeper question to be answered, he might understand that leading off with trying to convince the atheist that God does exist, might not be the best strategy. An atheist who has made the conscious decision to not believe in God, has at least at one time accepted the possibility that there is a God. If you can convince an atheist that there is a possibility that God exists, you have done most of your part, and as the existence of God can be neither proven nor disproven, this shouldn't be very difficult. Once minds are opened to possibilities, hearts can explore with real intent.
The next step might be to convince the atheist that the notion of God can be good. C. S. Lewis illustrated this idea in his book, The Screwtape Letters. Something you have to understand about the book is that all of the teachings about Christianity are presented from the perspective of demons, so the principles should be applied in reverse. One demon wrote to another, "Man has been accustomed, ever since he was a boy, to having a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head. He doesn't think of doctrines as primarily "true" or "false," but as "academic" or "practical," "outworn" or "contemporary," "conventional" or "ruthless." Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping him from the Church. Don't waste time trying to make him think that materialism is true! Make him think it is strong or stark or courageous—that it is the philosophy of the future. That's the sort of thing he cares about." The message in the context of my letter to you is, don't waste your time trying to convince an atheist that God is real. Convince him first that God can be associated with good things which may be valuable to the atheist such as rational thought, academia, practicality, and logic.
The philosopher mathematician Blaise Pascal achieved this with his famous wager. According to Wikipedia, the basic outline of Pascal's Wager is the following:
1. God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
2. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3. You must wager (it is not optional).
4. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
5. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
The basic logic of his decision theory is that the possibility of infinite gain is of more value than the possibility of a finite loss (such as not participating in immoral activity) and so choosing to believe in God is a more rational choice.
A third step is to remind. In the premortal existence, we all chose to follow Christ. Perhaps some vestiges of that experience remain within the souls of men. Perhaps Elder Packer's words refer to such vestiges, "A teacher of gospel truths is not planting something foreign or even new into an adult or a child. Rather, the missionary or teacher is making contact with the Spirit of Christ already there. The gospel will have a familiar ‘ring’ to them," (quoted in Preach My Gospel Chapter 4). B. H. Roberts said, "To be known, the truth must be stated and the clearer and more complete the statement is, the better the opportunity will the Holy Spirit have for testifying to the souls of men that the work is true," (Quoted in Preach My Gospel Chapter 10). As you teach the purest of truths, even to an atheist with an open mind, the Holy Spirit can make contact with the Spirit of Christ within the man you teach, and testify with convincing power to his soul. He will be reminded in a way. The truth will have a familiar ring to it.
When I speak of these purest truths, I make reference to those truths found in the first section of Lesson 1. "God is our loving Heavenly Father. We are His children... We can communicate with Him through sincere prayer... We can show our love for Him through our choices and our obedience to His commandments... Central to our Father's plan is Jesus Christ's Atonement...Through the Atonement we can be freed from the burden of our sins and develop faith and strength to face our trials." These are the convincing truths of which the Spirit can most powerfully testify.
There is one other tool which can be very effective in convincing an atheist because it communicates the purest of truths. Joseph Smith described it as "the most correct of any book on earth," (Introduction to the Book of Mormon). The book itself was written "to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God," (Title Page of the Book of Mormon). The book is, of course, the Book of Mormon. For some reason, missionaries are so often afraid to give away a Book of Mormon before teaching Lesson 1 in its entirety. Quite frankly, I think the very worst place for the book to be is on the shelf of your apartment. At least if it has been given to someone, there is some chance, that someday, someone might read it. Don't be afraid to give away a Book of Mormon even though you haven't even taught about prophets and Joseph's vision. It is more important that the Book of Mormon be a witness of Christ than a witness of Joseph Smith's role as prophet. A brief introduction is all that is necessary.
But I'll write more about the Book of Mormon later. I love you Luke! Have a great week!
No comments:
Post a Comment