A Conversation with a Deist 

On my Facebook page, I posted this link to a video from our pastor on Christian literature, in particular on C.S. Lewis.  

I then received a response from someone named Jack—who I do not know. He is a friend of a Facebook friend. Jack describes himself as a “deist.” I’ve pasted below the bulk of our Facebook interactions about God, the Bible, and Christian literature. My comments are unedited—they appear below just as I typed them on Facebook. 

Jack: The problem with Christian literature is that the stories develop with the protagonist and the antagonist with the plot being raised to a crescendo, and, then, magically, God steps in and supernaturally makes everything better making human effort irrelevant. Which relates to the larger perspective as to why did God let all this go on in the first place? If he could climax the chain of events at the end of the story, why couldn’t he have stopped the catalyzing event that started the problem in the first place. Evidently, God likes the drama. Or maybe Christian literature is the product of anthropological impulses within the human psyche that can only produce story lines with inconsistent and illogical ramifications. 

Bob: Interesting perspective, Jack. However, from my perspective that shows a misunderstanding both of Christian literature and of Christian theology. First, the doctrine of God’s affectionate sovereignty and providence indicates that God is continuously involved in human history—He need not “step in” because He is constantly shepherding all of life even as He works with fallen humanity (human effort and sin are not irrelevant, they are so relevant that God’s Son gave His life). 

Second, all literature, “secular” and Christian, is predominated by a Creation/Fall/Redemption theme. Whether it is the most shallow TV show, or the 1970s/80s Star War trilogy, or the grandest literature, we commonly see a theme that begins with an idyllic setting that meets tension and temptation leading to a fall from grace or defeat and moves to a redemption or victory narrative. I believe that even “secular” literature knowingly or unknowingly follows the ultimate reality of Creation/Fall/Redemption/Consummation. Third, yes, there is a final act in the divine theo-drama—Consummation—where God, not magically, but affectionately and sovereignly works not apart from human effort and human sin, but works to restore humanity. 

Jack: Hey Robert, thanks for responding. . .good points all. While my perspective may be a “misunderstanding” from your viewpoint, your answers stem from an insider’s perspective that only sees the positive aspects of one’s religious background wherein rationalizations are made in the deity’s defense despite the harsh realities of everyday life. Understand that my purpose is not an actual indictment of the deity, but a pointing out of the inconsistencies religionists and religious texts foist upon the deity’s motives and plan. In light of reality contrasted with what one should expect from a theological perspective in regard to sovereignty and providence, the two just don’t make sense. I choose a deistic answer wherein the deity sets things in motion according to natural law, and individuals and society move and interact without the deity’s intervention, be it active or passive. 

Bob: Jack, I’m enjoying our interaction. Here’s my major difference with your perspective: the Bible is the most realistic literature ever written because God tells the truth about life in a fallen world. Read the Psalms and you’ll see people not only realistic about life, but boldly lamenting to God. Rather than “defending their Deity,” they understand that God is (infinitely) big enough to “defend Himself.” 

So, you started with a problem with Christian literature being unrealistic, the ultimate Christian literature—the Bible—is the most realistic literature. In light of reality in a fallen world—and that’s the key—a fallen world—this world makes sense. A sovereign God created beings in His image—thus giving them a will to choose. They/we chose sin and thus the realistic, fallen, sinful world we live in, and the fallen world God is calling back to Himself. I choose a theistic answer, even more, a Christo-centric answer where our Deity so loved this rebellious world that He sent His Son to intervene in this world by voluntarily sacrificing His life for us. 

By the way, if you knew me, you’d know that I’m anything but someone who pretends about life. Like the Psalmist, I have many very realistic conversations with God. He can handle all my confusion and concerns and then some. 

Jack: In respect to part of your first point: (1). While orthodox doctrine maintains that God is constantly “shepherding” his creation, the degree to that shepherding is acutely increased in the apocalyptic sections of the Bible wherein God stops working behind the scenes his wonders to perform, but openly intervenes his power to behold. In the literature by various Christian authors, events and circumstances move along a timeline that is mainly influenced by human decisions, which, then require God to intervene in a direct manner that changes the timeline and the logical series of cause and effect initiated by the characters within the novel. It is as if the protagonist and the antagonist move apart from God’s sovereignty and benevolent providence getting themselves into messes (human effort and sin) which only God can remedy. (2). This illustrates a logical contradiction in the never-ending debate between free-will and God’s sovereignty. If, as you maintain, God is constantly intervening, then free-will is irrelevant, and the course of human history is a plaything for God like a situation simulation game. (3). If free-will is a reality, then God must be hands off, and the stepping or stomping in is a reality that characterizes both biblical and extra-biblical Christian literature wherein God has to make things right by external coercion such as the various bowl, trumpet, and scroll judgments of the book of Revelation, not to mention the Daniel and Matthew apocalypses. (4). Due to these considerations, Christian literature is an exercise in over complicating the issues and intricacies of human life. The following is, therefore, a summary of all Christian literature in only two words – GOD WINS! 

Bob: Jack, on that last part, we definitely agree: God wins! In the end, God triumphs over the devil, good triumphs over evil, and grace triumphs over sin. God wins! 

It’s interesting that it appears from your description that it would be “deistic literature” that would “under-complicate” life. It removes the age-old tension you mention of the interworking of God’s sovereignty and human responsibility. The Bible and Christian literature accept the tension and complicity of a sovereign God who creates beings in His image with a will to choose either good or evil, God or Satan. Christian literature accepts the complexity and the relationality of a world that is at war–a war for who captures our hearts—Christ or Satan. As I say in several books: life is a war and a wedding. And in the end, as you note, God does win the war and He weds His Bride—the Church. That is both complex and beautiful. Both realistic and hopeful. 

Jack: Hey, thanks for the interaction. I think we kept it civil enough. I conclude with the following quote from Bultmann’s “New Testament and Mythology” page 1-3 as to the mythological perspective of the New Testament as literature in response to the Bible being a realistic book. Consider the scenario wherein producers present their ideas to a studio executive for an upcoming movie entitled: God Wins: “The cosmology of the New Testament (this movie) is essentially mythical in character….” Bultmann (the producer) concludes his pitch to the movie moguls: “All this is the language of mythology, and the origin of the various themes can be easily traced in the contemporary mythology of Jewish Apocalyptic and in the redemption myths of Gnosticism. . . . Can Christian preaching (movie making) expect modern man to accept the mythical view of the world as true?” If the Chronicles of Narnia and the Lord of the Rings were hits, this worldview is broader in scope and speaks to a greater and deep-seated archetypes of the human condition than these paltry attempts at myth-making. To which the studio executives reply, “Absolutely! We’re green-lighting this project as soon as we get the rights to the book.” 

Bob: I’ll conclude with 3 reflections. 1. Tolkien helped C.S. Lewis come to Christ and Christianity by helping him see that Christianity is “the true myth”—the meta-story behind all literature. I accept that view over Bultmann’s. To be historically correct, there was no myth of any mono-theistic God dying for His sinful people, no myth of a Trinitatrian God sending His sinless Son to die for their sinful people. And no myth of the great exchange: the righteousness of the Son being placed on the unrighteous sinner and the sinfulness of humanity being placed on the sinless Savior. Apparently common themes have to be analyzed with depth if any true comparison is going to be made. Of course, people can reject Jesus’ announcement that He alone is the way, the truth, and the life and that no one comes to God the Father but by Him. 

2. Turn for a moment from stories about life (literature) to real life: the history of the Black Church in America. African American Christians prayed to God, trusted in God, and saw God at work in their daily lives through 100s of years of horrific enslavement—daily providence, or daily mini-miracles. They also saw God as answering their prayers in the Emancipation Proclamation and in the civil rights moment of the 1960s—these were major “miracles” —apocalyptic if you will. They based their faith on the real life biblical story of the Exodus. I would never tell them that God is a deistic God who wound up the watch and then went off watch. 

3. Because I believe in a theistic God who has revealed Himself in Christ, I believe in the power of prayer—God’s affectionate sovereignty working in response to our human responsibility to pray and act. So, I would pray this prayer for anyone who sees life through the grid of a deistic God. “Father, please open the eyes of the hearts of all those who look at the troubles of this life and perceive that You are inactive—the watch maker who made the watch and went off duty/watch. May their eyes be enlightened every day to grasp the height, depth, width, and breadth of your love—of your affectionate sovereignty at work moment by moment and at work shepherding the end of the true story toward the day when God wins and God weds His bride. In Jesus name, Amen.” 

Thanks, Jack. I’ve enjoyed our respectful interactions. Praying for you, my friend. 

Join the Conversation 

What would you have said if you were engaging with Jack—in a conversation with a deist—about God, the Bible, and Christian literature?

RPM Ministries: Equipping You to Change Lives with Christ’s Changeless Truth