It’s not something I like to talk about. In fact, it invites all sorts of pictures of the type of man I am into my head. I can see some reactions. Faith is so precious, and the entire basis of salvation among we evangelicals that we kind of make it into our part of the bargain to erase doubt from our minds.

In fact, it is one of the door-opening questions of our ilk that goes “Do you knowwhere you would go if you died today?” The resolution of this sequence is that you say the prayer of salvation and you, at the end, know.

So in my moments of doubt, I actually would answer the question theway a total unbeliever would. Again, this makes me uneasy to talk about it. The case that I can be back to square one in moments of doubt, just because I don’t know where I’m going, scares me a bit.

In case anybody’s wondering, I already know a good bit of the quotes you can throw at me. I even know how it all can be blamed on my meddling with “deceptive philosophy” which takes “after the traditions of men”. I mean after all, “philosophy” is kind of in my name and it is“forbidden” by Colossians 2:8, right? And, don’t be fooled that that isthe most I can throw at myself in these instances, either. In fact, I can turn this post into a litany against my doubting flesh.

I have another plan, though. I want to talk about what I realize inthese moments. I revisit similar themes, and those themes (I believe,through the ministry of the Holy Spirit) draw me back to God. I findmyself like the apostles in John 5, I have nowhere else to go.

I could call this an illustration of the principle that I am in Jesus’ hand, and not even I can tear myself from his grip. On the other hand, I could call it persistent delusion or even a “meme” (if I believed in memes, that is).

But let’s start out with a reference to a post that actually illustrates the “value” of atheist moments to me (and perhaps you) if there were any. Some people think I just play at things. I thinkHoratio might have thought so. He conveyed that opinion to me (here). And I’ve never been certain that the casual unbeliever reading Answering the Many Creeds Question (Sort of…) was completely convinced that I wasn’t just strawman-ing the whole thing.

But, I think that one can start to see that, I’m at least trying to be honest when I talk about how I would see things on the other side. I find myself on that other side sometimes.I ended that post as follows:

[W]hen I lean back and wonder how I would ever cross the line again, it comes to me clearly that I could likely only be an unbeliever again by believing in something else, by investing inanother model and its promises. And because I lack the ability to see what that would be, I definitely lack the ability to answer how I know it is the case and none other.

I still am convinced of what I wrote. And this conviction that I have about the solving the Many Creeds question for myself (here)is what has given me the confidence to make the argument that I did.And it is my sincerity (whether or not you believe it) in approaching the argument, which makes me believe that I have done the question service. (Whether or not I answered it.)Because in this, I ask whether this principle is a good “heuristic”?(I apologize for what might be a strange word.) How well does this form of argument work in a wide field? How likely is it that applying thisrule produces something that coheres with the entire body of thought. (Here again, you might notice where disparate vs. consistent thinking shows itself again.)

I’ll continue this in Godless Heuristics (next).