Skip to main content

Is God Foolish?

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

People get mighty fond of their learning and intelligence, and usually detest being called ignorant or stupid. Humanistic philosophies elevate "science" (which is a philosophy in and of itself) to supreme authority and importance in matters of truth. Mankind as a whole looks down on God and considers his wisdom as foolishness. Quote miners may find the phrase "the foolishness of God" and use it to their own advantage. Inquisitive honest people may want to read the source, 1 Corinthians 1:25, and see that it means something completely different.

People are fond of their wisdom, and consider the wisdom of God to be foolishness. The opposite is true.
Image credit: Morguefile / Plume
Those who are wise in the eyes of the world arrogantly require God to do things their way, and fallaciously claim that if they cannot understand God's methods, he does not exist. What happens is that they become idolators, creating a false god that they can reference but has nothing to do with the true Creator God as revealed in the Bible.

The wisdom of man? God doesn't pay that no nevermind (Isaiah 29:14, 33:18, 1 Cor. 1:20-25). It really puts a burr under the saddles of humanistic intellectuals that God has not seen fit to have people encounter him on their terms and in their alleged wisdom. Instead, he has revealed his ways to the humble (Matt. 11:25-30). Believers are fools according to worldly wisdom, which is arbitrary and resorts to the genetic fallacy! Indeed, the knowledge we have is because God has given it to us, whether we believe he exists or not; without God, knowledge is impossible (Prov. 1:7, 2:6).

Let me stop here and refer you to a couple of excellent sermons by Dr. John MacArthur that go into detail on this. Like just about everything else I recommend, they are free to listen online or download. Or you can read the transcripts: "The Foolishness of God, Part 1" and "The Foolishness of God, Part 2". I'm letting y'all off easy, there's a 12-sermon series I wanted to post...

Humanists, professing atheists, "wise" people — they make up their own standards and rules, then promptly make a passel of logical fallacies. In a debate with James White (who argues from a Calvinist position), atheist David Silverman showed the paucity of atheistic thinking. He made false accusations and committed atrocious logical fallacies in his efforts to make God the bad guy, bringing to mind Job 40:8. He even redefined "straw man" to suit his own purposes and justify his use of it! Silverman acted like an anthropologist and historian with his fantasy about the origin of "religion", but when challenged about cosmic evolution, he said, "I am not a cosmologist". Further, when cornered about theology, Silverman said, "I am in no position to interpret". His worldview is arbitrary and inconsistent; atheism itself is incoherent. Also notice that Silverman goes back to the Christian foundation: Genesis.

To see David Silverman show his sidewinder nature in the debate with James White, brace yourself, the whole shootin' match runs about three hours. (I grabbed software to convert it to MP3 so I could hear it at my leisure, and option worth considering.) It's worth hearing to see worldly "logic" and "reason" in action, and what is considered the foolishness of God is still light years above the wisdom of man. For the video of the debate on whether or not the New Testament is evil, click here.

Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley, Frank Turek, and Bad Theology

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Andy Stanley has been disappointing some people, and causing quite a few to be alarmed by his opposition to the authority of Scripture. (Note: Do not be confused.  Charles  Stanley is his father, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, and heard on In Touch Ministries . I've found most of his teachings to be doctrinally sound, and he upholds the inerrancy and authority of the Bible.) Unfortunately, megachurch director Andy Stanley has been saying things that are destructive to the truth, including recommending the false teaching of theistic evolution. Gray wolf image credit: US National Park Service While shooting from the hip can be a good thing, someone claiming the title of pastor should reign himself in . Stanley was disrespectful of small churches, then apologized later . In another instance, " What  did he just say?", Stanley may have used a very bad word in a sermon. When the segment was legally posted on YouTube

Disappointment with Young Earth Creation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  First, a note for anyone who is curious. The usual format: introduction with some of my thoughts plus links for useful information, excerpts of featured articles, then links to keep reading. I put my name on it and call it an article when I have more to say. This one will be different. I will reference older articles, then add some thoughts that I hope will prove helpful. There is more following the excerpt and link. So, does anyone remember Ken Keathley? Medal image manufactured at Custom Medal Maker Several years ago, Ken Keathley renounced young earth creationism to accept an old earth view. Apparently, he was disappointed by people in the young earth community. No kidding? Taking Friendly Fire This is where I'm going to open up and get personal with both of my readers. Ken Keathley is not the only one who has been disappointed, and in addition, I've been deeply hurt by the young earth community. Things I have posted on social(ist) media have been &qu

Evaluating Truth Claims in Genesis

Some people try to dismiss Genesis as myth containing spiritual truth using elements from the pagan neighbors of the Hebrews. Others say it is misunderstood, as if the Creator of the universe was unable to communicate with us. With closer inspection, we see that Genesis is a historical narrative. Credit: RGBStock /  Billy Frank Alexander The idea that the early chapters of Genesis are mythological should not be accepted by professing Christians, as there are serious problems that result. (One of these is that Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others referred to these chapters as literal history, so by denying this, one is calling them liars!) Also, there are repercussions with the gospel message. Read some classical mythology, then come back to Genesis and see the difference. Myths are vague and have a different flow, but the Bible is precise. Indeed, even the sequence of creation days is specific — a day itself is defined. Interestingly, many translations have in Genesis 1:5 less accurate by us