One of the most common objections made to the absolute claims of Christianity is that Christians are arrogant. Christians are arrogant to claim that they are right; arrogant to claim others are wrong; arrogant to claim that truth can be known.
Unfortunately, in the midst of such accusations, no one bothers to ask which definition of humility is being used.
Over the years, the definition of humility has undergone a gradual but nonetheless profound change. Especially in the intellectual community. In the modern day, humility has basically become synonymous with another word: uncertainty.
To be uncertain is to be humble. To be certain is to be arrogant. Thus, the cardinal sin in the intellectual world is to claim to know anything for sure.
Of course, this shift presents a real problem for Christianity. Christians believe that God has revealed himself clearly in his Word. Thus, when it comes to key historical questions (Who was Jesus? What did he say? What did he do?) or key theological questions (Who is God? What is Heaven? How does one get there?), Christians believe they have a basis on which they can claim certainty: God’s revelation.
Indeed, to claim we don’t know the truth about such matters would be to deny God, and to deny his Word. (This doesn’t mean, of course, that Christians are certain about everything; but there can be certainty about these basic Christian truths).
Thus, for Christians, humility and uncertainty are not synonymous. One can be certain and humble at the same time. How? For this simple reason: Christians believe that they understand truth only because God has revealed it to them (1 Cor 1:26-30).
In other words, Christians are humble because their understanding of truth is not based on their own intelligence, their own research, their own acumen. Rather, it is 100% dependent on the grace of God.
Christian knowledge is a dependent knowledge. And that leads to humility (1 Cor 1:31). This obviously doesn’t mean all Christians are personally humble. But, it does mean they should be, and have adequate grounds to be.
Although Christians have a basis on which they can be humble and certain at the same time, that is not necessarily the case with other worldviews. Take the atheist for instance. He is quite certain of a great many things (contrary to his claim that one cannot be certain of anything).
He is certain either that God does not exist (hard atheism), or certain that one cannot know whether God exists (soft atheism). And, in his critique of Christianity, he is quite certain that Christians are mistaken in their claims to be certain. In essence, the atheist is claiming, “I know enough about the world to know that a person cannot possibly have a basis for certainty.” That in itself is a pretty dogmatic claim.
But, on what is the atheist basing these far reaching claims about the universe? His own finite, fallen, human mind. He has access only to his own limited, knowledge. So, now we should ask the question again: Who is being arrogant? The Christian or the atheist? Both claim certainty on a great many transcendental issues. But one does so while claiming to be dependent on the person who would know such things (God), and the other does so dependent on only themselves.
If either position is a posture of arrogance, it would not be the Christian one.
No doubt, the atheist would object to this line of reasoning on the grounds that he rejects the Bible as divine revelation. But, this misses the point entirely. The issue is not whether he is convinced of the Bible’s truth, but rather the question is which worldview, the Christian’s or the atheist’s, has a rational basis for claiming certainty about transcendental matters.
Only the Christian has such a basis. And since his knowledge of such things is dependent on divine grace, he can be humble and certain at the same time.
For more on 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 and the issue of Christian knowledge, see my sermon on this passage.
Dante says
You can see this postmodernist “humility” in Moises Silva’s introduction to his second edition BECNT entry on Philippians. One of the outstanding elements in 1 John is John’s theological certainty (which rests on historical events). Scholars’ uncertainty and unwillingness to definitively take a stance on theological matters is a problem not simply with understanding, but with faith. In being sure and firm, the apostles are setting an example and teaching the church how men of God are to stand for truth (1 Tim 3:15-16).
Angelo says
Dr. Kruger, this post is certainly useful, but still there are a couple of questions which come to mind and which I have heard being advanced by unbelievers. It is true that some of them refer mainly to US Christians, but still they affect by consequence all Christians.
First, you say “Christians believe that God has revealed himself clearly in his Word”, but this is forcefully belied by the history of Christianity itself. As we all know, believers have fought mercilessly against each other, and if in doubt, it would suffice to study the history of the so called “heretical” movements or just the history of the 30-year war in Europe 1618-1648. How all that terrible bloodshed could have been possible if “God had revealed himself clearly”? I know a common answer may be “it’s our fault” but this is not sufficient, as it would simply beg the question “clearly for whom?” as certainly not for common mortals as we are.
A second objection is related to the rise of the Religious Right in the US. Falwell and company allied themselves openly with one political party, and by consequence the other party has been openly demonized. Religious Right has taken the political issues of one political party, and baptized them, proclaiming them as the only valid Christian policies. That’s why we have in this country Christians supporting guns, supporting torture etc. What can this be called, except extreme arrogance? This is for sure how it looks to our brothers and sisters in Europe and in other parts of the world.
And third, closely related to the previous point, Christians in this country massively voted for the most arrogant, selfish candidate in US history? Again, what can this be called, if not arrogance?
These are the objections I have heard recently, but I am sure there are many more.
Corena Hall says
I am a legal immigrant who loves this country dearly. But I am a child of God and to the unbeliever who challenges my support and conviction of President Trump I will say this. I am a human being who prays and I chose to stop the ongoing degradation of this country but not choosing the person who was going to continue this pattern. My God created this world and it’s all His yet He gives me free will and free choice, He gives me the power of prayer and wisdom. But I know not a mans heart. I detested what the previous persons in office did but I followed the laws before me because God allowed that person to be a leader just like I fully believe President Trump was God’s hand on this nation. I know He will always be Sovereign God no matter what the unbeliever says or thinks. That’s my confidence in the God I serve who answers prayers. It’s time to stop rhetoric and throwing tantrums and stand behind our President who did not need to put himself or his family in this position but maybe even unknowingly was prompted by the hand of my mighty God!
Lee says
Thank you for your comment. I ,too, believe GOD is in control , has a plan, and HIS will will be done.
I agree , Trump is not the best choice for president , but he is far better then the alternative choice in this election.
No president will ever please all the people , all of the time. Give Trump a chance
Aloysius says
You could say that, the 30 years war was not the out come of God being unclear but rather man being blind to what God has revealed.
Angelo says
I contemplated that possible answer in my post and explained why it does not solve the issue, as it simply begs the question. If man was blind, then to whom did God reveal his truth? To “blind” humans?
Dean says
Is that a real & true relevance though…The Bible teaches that human nature is fallen(because of sin) & that Christians get it wrong at times. But this doesnt stop God from being God or the devil being the devil.
Politics is a messy affair but that doesnt change the fact that God has revealed Himself to humanity & that many distort & manipulate truth to their own shallow ends.
Yes, God reveals his intelligence & power in nature along with His salvation & mercy in His dealings with OT Israel & the NT church with Christ being the fulfilment of a promise.
Atheism says there is no God as it clings to Naturalism which appears to have no moral basis & no real hope for redemption. This is it, the here & now is the claim without evidence & much ‘scientific’ posture. If Biblical revelation is allegedly arrogant then so is Atheism.
The Bible teaches us about the arrogance of man/humanity that distorts knowledge & truth.
Heath says
Greetings! Non-believer here.
“For this simple reason: Christians believe that they understand truth only because God has revealed it to them (1 Cor 1:26-30).
In other words, Christians are humble because their understanding of truth is not based on their own intelligence, their own research, their own acumen. Rather, it is 100% dependent on the grace of God.”
Could you explain why appealing to a higher power for your certainty makes said certainty less arrogant than the atheist you present in your text?
In your piece, both of the characters (theist and atheist) assert that they know something. One appeals to a mysterious higher power. The other appeals to their own wit. Presumably the one appealing to a higher power also has to use their wit to determine the credibility of the higher power’s truth. So, where does your reasoning that the theist is less assumptive come from?
Thank you!
———
As a side note, your presentation of atheism is either inaccurate, a straw man, or misleading. If you’d like, I’d be happy to exchange dialogue about adding nuance and understanding to your portrayal of atheism. This *might* be a case of an atheist being arrogant, but I’ll wait for your response to determine if that’s the case. 😛 haha
Dean says
Christianity declares a revealed power that has shown the way in tones of mercy. If Atheism is going in the wrong direction(which it is) & continuing on its path, then surely that is an arrogant thing to spurn correction.
Heath says
Thank you for your reply. You didn’t address my question (or perhaps I just don’t see the thread of connection), so maybe I can word it differently.
As best as I can tell, you say that Christians are humble because they don’t rely on their own intelligence, but rather on God’s revelation. That, in fact, seems to be the thesis statement of this piece.
Could you explain why appealing to a higher power (that is undetectable to the atheist) for knowledge is less arrogant than using human reasoning?
Also, just so you are aware, atheists do not “claim certainty on a great many transcendental issues.” Generally, atheists are extremely reluctant to claim certainty about matters that have little or no evidence. If you say otherwise, could you provide your reasoning, as this is usually a central tenant to an atheist’s world view.
Thank you again for engaging!
-Heath
Dean says
Hi Heath,
It is true that Christians are accused of being arrogant because we make the claim (by faith) that God is true & can be known & has made himself known by the world which He made, His established OT nation Israel, His Son & the NT church.
From what I can say Atheism makes the claim that there is no God (without evidence), it is anti-Theistic & rejects out right a super natural Creator. I think it is agnosticism that seeks a type of middle ground in human terms. The secular world of science bears this out by what it will & won’t publish (an act of arrogance considering the big bang scenario & the inability to explain life from non- life & the genetic code filled with intelligence that doesn’t come from chemicals).
Historically, human reason seems to have been born out of the enlightenment. We don’t need God anymore, we are going to do things our way. I think it is termed modernism, man is the measure of all things. That’s the best I can explain it so far. Maybe you have heard of Antony Flew? A famous atheist philosopher who rejected atheism in the end for Deism (I think).
Christianity uses reason & science but it is the revealed Word of God which is the measure of truth & reality, even if I can’t see a demon or the devil doesn’t mean they are not real. That’s as best as I can offer for the moment. As Dr Kruger points out, it’s not that Christianity answers all our questions, but it is enough, sufficient to build upon. Lest we end up lost is space & chasing our own tails finding out the more we know the more confusing things get.
At the end of the day, when Christianity says it can know, it is labelled arrogant. When Atheism says it can know there is no God (without provng it) it is being humble. That seems to be the modern narrative minus the critical thinking.
I hope this is helpful.
Heath says
Thank you for taking the time to respond!
I hope that you’ll do a little more research/thinking about what an atheist actually claims. If you look carefully at the position of the atheist, it does not actually posit the nonexistence of any god. It simply refutes the claims of god/s that have thus far been proposed. There is an important difference, albeit nuanced, in this position that prevents it from being an assertion (or a truth claim). Case in point, I bet that most atheists would freely admit this: “There might be a god or gods.” They could not say this if they believed there are no gods. It’s much like a jury giving a “not guilty” verdict. They don’t claim with certainty that the crime was not committed. Instead, they’re saying that there is not sufficient evidence to say “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
All that said, I don’t think that Christians are arrogant in general; at least any more so than any other group.
Thanks again!
Heath
John S says
Hi Heath,
Ok I started an answer but how about an example. A rich man comes along to a large group of beggars and gives bread to some indiscriminately without any judgement, for reasons only know to him. One who received bread says to one who didn’t “look at this bread that was given to me freely, you should try to get some too!”. The guy isn’t going to say ‘you are so arrogant’. He might say ‘that’s not bread’ or ‘that bread will make you sick’. He might be mad that the other guy got bread and he didn’t. He might call the guy deluded or crazy or stupid – but not arrogant.
Now if the beggar had done something to stand out, or get to the front of the line, then said ‘see I got some because (fill in the blank)’ then he could be charged with arrogance. But arrogance is specifically ruled out by the Christian gospel, the message of the Cross, and God’s unmerited mercy.
I think by your way of reckoning arrogance there is no possibility of anyone ever knowing truth without being arrogant. So the question is really pointless because anyone who claims to know truth is arrogant – unless one claims to not be able to know any truth. And as has been pointed out that argument crashes in on itself. So I guess I’m suggesting that the fundamental starting point for all humans in regard to knowing the truth is arrogance for you, while for me it’s that all are opposed to the Truth (which is to say God).
Would it be possible for someone to know truth without being arrogant?
Philmonomer says
To my mind, this understanding of Atheists doesn’t reflect reality. While i suppose there are some Atheists out there claiming “certainty,” my guess is the vast majority say “I don’t believe God exists. But I’m not ‘certain’ about it.”
Even Richard Dawkins himself doesn’t claim certainty. (See Dawkin’s 1-7 point scale for belief in the existence of God. He doesn’t even put himself at 7 (“I am 100 percent sure there is no God.”)
Philmonomer says
(I apologize if I am posting this twice. I’m not sure what happened to my first comment–i.e. if it still exists out there in the internet “tubes.”)
To my mind, this understanding of Atheists doesn’t reflect reality. While i suppose there are some Atheists out there claiming “certainty,” my guess is the vast majority say “I don’t believe God exists. But I’m not ‘certain’ about it.”
Even Richard Dawkins himself doesn’t claim certainty. (See Dawkin’s 1-7 point scale for belief in the existence of God. He doesn’t even put himself at 7 (“I am 100 percent sure there is no God.”)