I’ve never had an encounter with a leprechaun, but I do have encounters with God. I’ve never read the writings of a gnomes, but I have read a book that claims to be a message from God, and have found it to be the greatest source of wisdom I’ve ever seen. I’ve never heard of a band of people who spent three years following a great pixie teacher who after he was crucified by the Romans, claimed that he rose from the dead, even at the cost of their own lives. I’ve never heard of faith in the Loch Ness monster inspiring a worldwide movement that transformed civilization. The concept of the Easter bunny does not provide a rational explanation for our existence, or the existence of the beautiful world that is our home.

It is true that none of the writers of the various books of the Bible knew that they would be collected one day, but they do all seem to be communicating a message from or about God, even if it’s not always explicit. Nevertheless, the Church did assemble the collection and does claim that it is the Word of God. If I assembled and published a collection of poems and said that it was a collection of poems by Robert Frost, one could say that the book claims to be a collection of poems by Robert Frost, even if each individual poem does not contain such an attribution.

Strictly speaking, it is true that I cannot deny the existence of gnomes based purely on lack of evidence. The Loch Ness monster is a little bit easier because it is a huge physical creature in a confined space. It should be possible, given sufficient technology, to exhaustively search the loch and prove that Nessie is not there. Proving that the monster never existed is much more difficult. The Easter Bunny is clearly a recent cultural invention that no one beyond the intelligence of children claims to be real. Also, the concept of the Easter Bunny doesn’t really fit my understanding of Easter, which provides some evidence against its existence as far as I’m concerned. However, strictly speaking, I cannot absolutely claim that there is not an Easter Bunny somewhere in the universe.

Here’s what it boils down to. Logically, if an honest, reliable witness tells me that he’s had a conversation with a gnome, gives me lucid details of the encounter, appears to be of sound mind, and I have no reason to think he’s been deceived, then I have no basis on which to disbelieve him, even though his tail seems fantastic, and he cannot provide any material evidence. On the other hand, when an atheist who is bent on the elimination of religion claims that there is a flying spaghetti monster orbiting the Earth, I can easily reject his claim as unreliable knowing his agenda and the argument he is trying to make.

If Dr. Craig’s 3 minute talk was the only reason I had for being a Christian, I would not be one. There is much, much more behind my faith than the fact that it can’t be disproved. Christian doctrine provides the best explanation for the world and the people in it, and has guided me to a very rich and rewarding life. It provides the best answer for the problems of our world, as well as an ultimate hope that cannot be taken away. Ultimately, I don’t care about leprechauns. If they do exist, they are terribly elusive, so I’ll probably never see one. If they don’t exist, my life is no different. (However, if I do see a leprechaun, and he gives me a pot of gold, that would be cool.)

It certainly is more dramatic to say the Bible claims to be a unified message from God, but it works very well at that level. Indeed, the reason I went from Atheism to Christianity was that I saw that this collection of writings spanning many centuries, cultures, and literary styles comes together as a beautiful, unified whole. I became convinced this could only happen under the influence of a power that could coordinate these writers across the miles and centuries that separated them, and such a power was consistent with the God that Christianity says speaks through the Bible.

Right now I’m reading the writings of Irenaeus of Lyons, who wrote circa 200 AD. His writings are the earliest ones we have that list all four of the Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In his arguments against Gnosticism, he uses references from all of the books that now make up the New Testament, as well as much of the Old Testament. He treats them as a unified whole over two centuries before the Council of Ephesus ratified the New Testament canon in 431. But even before Irenaeus, Jesus treated what is now called the Old Testament Scriptures as a unified message from God, and he preached to a first century Jewish culture that also saw them that way.

Regarding Dr. Craig’s position, I see him as merely making a statement of logic. I don’t take that to mean that you don’t have a right to conclude God doesn’t exist because you’re not convinced there is enough evidence. Belief about these kinds of things is a very complicated process. It’s not like a mathematical proof or a chemistry experiment. I cannot provide A+B+C=God. Therefore, if you don’t see it, you don’t see it. However, I can say that according to the rules of logic, you cannot say you’ve proved God does not exist merely because of insufficient evidence. Do you see the distinction I’m trying to make between proof and being convinced? We can be convinced about a lot of things for which we don’t have proof. Indeed, outside of the realm of hard science, we have a hard time proving any of the things that make life worth living. Can I prove that my wife loves me? No, but I’m convinced she loves me, and I love her.

Sometimes you need to be exposed to religion from a different perspective before it clicks. I did not really connect with the church I grew up in; it took someone from outside who I respected intellectually to get my attention about Christianity. Jesus promises that those who seek will find, one must be an honest seeker who would be willing to change his life for the truth.

It can be shown using historical critical methods that we have a good record of Jesus from the four canonical Gospels. I may do a blog post on that soon. The value of Irenaeus is that he is one of the few writers from that period whose works have survived, and he documents what was already commonly accepted among Christians at that time. If you read the paragraphs surrounding where he lists the four gospels, you would see that he also appeals to the common belief that existed in all of the churches that were founded by the Apostles. All of the Gnostics came later, introducing elements of Greek mystery religion into the churches. Each Gnostic sect had its own elaborate system of deities that is completely at odds with the Judaism out which Jesus and the Apostles came. And while the Gospel was preached to all people, regardless of ethnicity, social class, or education, Gnosticism was very elitist, and only a small number of “spiritual” people had any hope of complete salvation. In fact, for the Gnostics, most people didn’t even have souls.

You touch on some big topics that I can’t get into right now, but it may be inspiration for some blog entries later. I appreciate your honesty and respectful tone. I hope you will continue to seek the truth until you find it.