Critiquing: In What Way Has Jesus Overcome the World if There’s Still Suffering and Sin Here?

May 11, 2023 | #STRask – Stand to Reason

Overcoming Tribulation — Role of Perseverance — Metaphorical Interpretations — Revelation Context — Spiritual Victory

---

Introduction

The content discusses the theological concept of Jesus overcoming the world despite the presence of suffering and sin, addressing how believers should interpret and respond to tribulations. It attempts to reconcile the promise of overcoming with the reality of ongoing suffering.

Logical Structure

Claim 1: Jesus has overcome the world

The content repeatedly asserts that “Jesus has overcome the world,” based on John 16:33. However, this is followed by an acknowledgment of continued tribulation and suffering. The explanation provided is that overcoming does not imply the immediate cessation of suffering but instead offers a foundation for peace and perseverance.

Explanation and Analysis

1. Peace Despite Tribulation:
   • Quote: “These things I have spoken to you so that you may have peace… In the world, you have tribulation.”
   • Explanation: This section aims to offer comfort by suggesting that the knowledge of Jesus’ victory should provide peace. However, it raises a logical inconsistency as it suggests a form of victory that does not alleviate the core issue it claims to address—tribulation.
2. Overcoming Through Perseverance:
   • Quote: “Life is hard, and then you die.”
   • Explanation: The aphorism is presented as a source of encouragement, emphasizing the need for perseverance. This view posits that hardship is a natural part of life, and the true victory lies in enduring these hardships with the promise of future relief. The argument, however, conflates enduring suffering with overcoming it, which might not align with the initial expectation set by the promise of overcoming the world.

Claim 2: Future Reward as a Motivation

The content suggests that enduring current hardships is an investment in future rewards in a “new heavens and new earth.”

Explanation and Analysis

1. Investment in Future:
   • Quote: “We’re logging time for a benefit in the next world.”
   • Explanation: This claim shifts the focus from present relief to future rewards. It introduces a testable proposition: the existence of an afterlife where suffering is alleviated. However, this claim is speculative and unsubstantiated within the framework of empirical evidence. It assumes a future state without providing a method to verify its validity.
2. Comparison to Biblical Figures:
   • Quote: “Momentary light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory.”
   • Explanation: Using Paul’s writings to support the argument, the content suggests that present suffering is trivial compared to future glory. This comparative approach aims to diminish the weight of current suffering by promising an exponentially greater future reward. Yet, this is a form of cognitive bias known as future discounting, where present conditions are undervalued in anticipation of future gains.

Claim 3: Different Manifestations of Jesus

The discussion includes an analysis of the differing manifestations of Jesus post-resurrection versus in Revelation, suggesting a veiling of glory to maintain recognition.

Explanation and Analysis

1. Veiling and Revelation:
   • Quote: “Jesus’ glorious self was… ‘veiled’ from them at the post-resurrection experience.”
   • Explanation: The content theorizes that Jesus appeared less gloriously post-resurrection to be more recognizable, whereas in Revelation, his full glory is revealed, causing fear. This hypothesis attempts to explain the contrasting depictions but remains speculative without empirical support.
2. Speculative Nature:
   • Quote: “I don’t really research it to find other people’s opinions.”
   • Explanation: Acknowledging the speculative nature of the explanation undermines its authority. It suggests a need for a more rigorous, evidence-based approach to theological interpretations, rather than relying on conjecture.

Unsubstantiated Claims

Several claims in the content lack substantiation:

1. Afterlife Reward:
   • Quote: “Hardships of this world will no longer be present in the next world.”
   • Explanation: This claim assumes an afterlife without empirical evidence, making it both speculative and untestable.
2. Jesus’ Victory Over Sin:
   • Quote: “Jesus has conquered death and sin on the cross.”
   • Explanation: While central to Christian doctrine, this claim is not supported by empirical evidence and remains a matter of faith.

Cognitive Biases and Logical Fallacies

1. Future Discounting:
   • Explanation: The content downplays current suffering by emphasizing future rewards, which may lead to neglecting present needs and realities.
2. False Dichotomy:
   • Quote: “Has Jesus severed his personal, earthly relationship with John?”
   • Explanation: This presents a false dichotomy by suggesting only two possible interpretations of John’s reaction in Revelation, ignoring other plausible explanations.

Obligation to Substantiate Claims

All claims, especially those involving promises of future states or metaphysical realities, require substantiation. In this content, many claims are presented as definitive without empirical support or methods for verification. The lack of substantiation undermines the logical coherence and persuasiveness of the arguments presented.

Methods to Test Alleged Promises

To evaluate the promises, one could:

1. Seek Empirical Evidence: Investigate historical and contemporary accounts of experiences claimed to be related to the divine promises.
2. Philosophical Inquiry: Analyze the logical consistency and implications of the claims within a broader philosophical context.
3. Personal Reflection and Community Feedback: Engage in personal reflection and seek feedback from diverse communities to understand different perspectives and experiences.

Degree of Belief and Evidence

The degree of belief should be proportional to the evidence available. In the content, the strong assertions about Jesus’ victory and future rewards are not matched with equally strong evidence, calling for a more balanced and evidence-based approach to belief.

---

I hope this critique provides a clear and thorough analysis of the content. If you have any questions or would like to discuss the arguments further, feel free to comment below.