Critiquing: Why Does It Matter Which Higher Power Someone Believes In?

October 26, 2023 | #STRask – Stand to Reason

Higher Power — Church Issues — Necromancy — Parachurch Dilemmas — Listening Prayer

---

Introduction

The content under review discusses several questions related to Christian beliefs and practices, primarily addressing the significance of the specific higher power one believes in, the impact of attending different types of churches, and the theological implications of certain practices and organizational directions. This critique will assess the logical coherence of the arguments presented, identify any logical fallacies or cognitive biases, and highlight unsubstantiated claims, providing contextual analysis and potential ways to test the alleged promises.

Outline of Key Points

1. Belief in Higher Powers:
   • Argument against believing in any higher power other than the Christian God.
   • Importance of the authenticity and capability of the higher power.
2. Evaluating Church Attendance:
   • Advising friends on attending helpful versus hindering churches.
   • Identifying false teachings and heretical churches.
3. Necromancy Concerns:
   • Discussing the practice of wishing dead loved ones “happy heavenly birthdays.”
   • Distinguishing between innocent practices and theological errors.
4. Parachurch Organization Disagreements:
   • When to leave an organization due to theological differences.
   • Impact of non-biblical teachings on organizational effectiveness.
5. Listening Prayer:
   • Critique of the concept of listening prayer as non-biblical.
   • Evaluating the influence of such practices on organizational and individual spirituality.

---

Detailed Critique

Belief in Higher Powers

The argument against believing in any higher power other than the Christian God is presented as follows:

“If their higher power is Buddha, and Buddha, according to Buddhism, doesn’t even exist anymore, you know, he got extinguished, then how is Buddha going to help them? He’s not going to help them.”

Logical Inconsistency: The argument hinges on the assumption that because Buddha is not considered a deity in Buddhism, he cannot function as a higher power. This overlooks the fact that different belief systems conceptualize higher powers differently. The assertion that only a “real” God can help, as per Christian theology, lacks substantiation outside of its own doctrinal framework.

Cognitive Bias: There is a clear instance of confirmation bias here, as the speakers are interpreting the efficacy of higher powers through the lens of their own religious beliefs without considering the validity of other perspectives.

Unsubstantiated Claim: The statement that believing in any non-existent higher power is merely self-deception (a placebo) is unsubstantiated. It is necessary to support such claims with empirical evidence or logical arguments that transcend religious boundaries.

Evaluating Church Attendance

In advising on church attendance, the content emphasizes identifying and avoiding false teachings:

“My concern is that there are things in this church that are a real problem, what they’re teaching because they’re not teaching what Christianity has taught for 2000 years.”

Logical Inconsistency: The argument assumes a monolithic interpretation of Christian doctrine over 2000 years, which is historically inaccurate. Christian teachings have varied widely across different eras and denominations.

Cognitive Bias: The speakers exhibit a status quo bias, favoring traditional interpretations of Christianity and dismissing newer interpretations without adequate examination.

Unsubstantiated Claim: The suggestion that certain churches are hindering rather than helping is based on subjective assessment without clear criteria or evidence. There is a need for objective evaluation standards to substantiate such claims.

Necromancy Concerns

The practice of wishing “happy heavenly birthdays” to deceased loved ones is critiqued as potentially crossing into necromancy:

“If they think they’re actually talking to a dead person or something like that, I mean, that’s a little bit strange. And to do so formally would be a violation of Old Testament law.”

Logical Inconsistency: The leap from wishing a deceased person well to engaging in necromancy is not logically justified. The practices are different in intent and form, making the comparison flawed.

Cognitive Bias: This reflects an overgeneralization bias, where a broad and severe label (necromancy) is applied to a relatively benign and culturally common practice.

Unsubstantiated Claim: The claim that such practices are “prohibited in scripture” does not account for the diverse interpretations of scripture among different Christian groups. Providing a broader theological context or scholarly interpretation would strengthen this argument.

Parachurch Organization Disagreements

Discussing when to leave a parachurch organization due to theological differences, the content states:

“I do not agree theologically with the direction the organization is moving. When do you know it’s time to leave?”

Logical Inconsistency: The guidance given lacks a clear framework for determining when theological disagreements are significant enough to warrant leaving. This makes the advice subjective and potentially inconsistent.

Cognitive Bias: The advice may suffer from confirmation bias, as it assumes the correctness of the individual’s theological stance without considering the validity of alternative views within the organization.

Unsubstantiated Claim: The assertion that certain theological directions are unequivocally wrong needs substantiation through theological and doctrinal analysis. Objective criteria for assessing theological integrity would enhance the argument.

Listening Prayer

The critique of listening prayer as non-biblical is presented thus:

“There is not a single verse that intimates in the slightest way that prayer entails listening. Okay, that is a complete human invention.”

Logical Inconsistency: The argument assumes that all valid Christian practices must be directly supported by specific biblical verses, which is not a universally accepted standard among Christians.

Cognitive Bias: The speakers exhibit a conservatism bias, resisting changes and innovations in prayer practices based on a strict interpretation of scripture.

Unsubstantiated Claim: The claim that listening prayer is a “complete human invention” dismisses the experiential and interpretative aspects of religious practice. Substantiating this claim would require a thorough examination of biblical texts and historical practices of prayer.

Conclusion

The content presents several arguments that exhibit logical inconsistencies, cognitive biases, and unsubstantiated claims. From a critical standpoint, it is essential to evaluate these arguments with a clear framework, empirical evidence, and a consideration of alternative perspectives.

Recommendations for Improvement

1. Substantiation of Claims: Ensure all claims are backed by empirical evidence or logical reasoning. For example, provide historical and theological context when discussing the evolution of Christian doctrine.
2. Objective Criteria: Develop and apply objective criteria for evaluating theological teachings and practices. This could include scholarly interpretations, historical consistency, and empirical outcomes.
3. Acknowledgment of Diversity: Recognize and address the diversity of beliefs within Christianity and other religions. This would involve engaging with and critically analyzing various interpretations and practices.
4. Testing Alleged Promises: To test the alleged promises of God, one could propose empirical studies that examine the outcomes of religious practices across different belief systems. This approach aligns one’s degree of belief with the degree of available evidence.
5. Logical Coherence: Ensure that arguments are logically coherent and free from cognitive biases. This involves critical self-reflection and the inclusion of counterarguments to strengthen the overall argumentation.

---

I invite further discussion on these arguments in the comments section. Your thoughts and critiques are welcome!