RC Sproul is an Agnostic - "God's existence uncertain"

http://Godnoliar.com/Sproul_vs_Bahnsen.htm

For the full context of the quotes in this video, see the link above. Also, here is the full context pasted below...

QUESTION TO SPROUL FROM STUDENT

Angus Gillespie - of the South Carolina Gillespies. You can know nothing for certain - empirically or inductively, correct? That's what your saying? Then, you [RC Sproul] can't know anything at all, for certain, right? It seems to me, though, that the Scripture - and here it get back to the same argument I suppose - that Scripture does say you can know certainly. That, over and over again, the Scripture writers say, "These things are written, so that you can know certainly." And that are...we are...

You state that men know certainly that God exists. But you can't know for certain, that men know certainly God exists. You seem to end up in the same Skepticism that Gordon Clark does. I was wondering what your thoughts on that would be?

SPROUL ADMITS HE IS AGNOSTIC

Sproul response: Again, let me repeat the difference between how the word "certainty" is used. The Bible speaks of having assurance. I have a blessed assurance. But my knowledge of what the Bible is, and what the Bible says, is fallible, cause I'm less than omniscient [all knowing].

When I'm talking about certainty, I'm talking about philosophical certainty, in a very technically defined manner. And in that sense I don't have certainty about anything, even that I'm right here. Deduction - I think, can give us far more certainty than Greg [Bahnsen] allows, in terms of the relationship of propositions, and the laws of immediate inference and that sort of thing. But, I grant, that that's even then, only if rationality is valid. And the only way you can have rationality valid - I've already yielded, is that ultimately that God exists. But I cannot know for certainty - you know, that God exists. I can have full assurance of heart - when the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit comes, you see - I look at the evidence, and I know the evidence is overwhelming - the Holy Spirit tells me, "Hey, that evidence is for true, that's for real," - you know? Cool. How do I know for sure, that the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit isn't indigestion? I'm playing the Devil's Advocate now. I have to deal with pagans every day, and not just Christians. And, I'm not going to go up to them and say, "Because I say so." And that's what you're left with. And that gives you precious little certainty. Cause then in the final analysis all I have is the autonomy of your presupposition about the boldest assertion the world has ever heard - the existence of God. And I want to know - How you escape subjectivism - I want to know - How you escape fideism - I haven't heard it yet. I keep hearing denials about fideism. Fideism historically means the rejection of natural theology, by definition. You know, historically going all the way back to Cusanus, right up through the history of philosophy, the term fideism has meant, that any knowledge of God must come - not through natural theology but through faith - I've heard all night, that we don't come through natural theology, we do come through faith, but where not fideists. I'm absolutely bewildered at that point.

Objection to this video -- from user "Aspenmarelle" wrote me -- "Sproul is stating that to attain "ABSOLUTE" certainty would require omniscience. But he elsewhere says VERY CLEARLY (see his work "Classical Apologetics") that the evidence for the existence of God is ALL TOGETHER CONCLUSIVE. Demonstrably conclusive. Irrefutably conclusive. These are his words, not mine. Sound agnostic to you?"

My response: G'day! Thanks for the comment.

You seem to agree with Sproul we cannot be absolutely certain that God exists. I know Sproul admits that it is only "probable" that God exists and not "certain". He's forced to this position because he says that human testimony can prove God. (i.e. human Science / theistic proofs can prove God).

And since everything human is fallible - Sproul is basing God's existence on something fallible - and he is therefore forced to say that God's existence is fallible, or "probable".

C'mon - anyone that thinks that God "probably" exists or that it is "probably" conclusive that God exists, is an Agnostic.

Clearly, we cannot adopt Sproul's position that God's existence is supported by human testimony (science/arguments). Anything human is fallible - human evidence is always uncertain.

We must stick to Divine Evidence - the Bible. It's only BY FAITH we know God created the words (Heb 11:3). Divine Evidence is always certain. God cannot lie and he cannot make a mistake. In fact, he is the perfect communicator - being the author of language itself. The Bible is therefore, Perfect Evidence. And if evidence is perfect then it will make the man who believes it absolutely certain. "He that receives the testimony of God has set to his seal that GOD IS TRUE" (John 3:33).

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• RC
• Sproul
• Ligonier
• Ministries
• Calvinism
• Reformed
• Theology
• Sovereign
• Grace
• Piper
• Driscoll
• Desiring
• God

[togglesblock]

"God's existence uncertain"

Admittedly I was somewhat confused by Sproul's statement regarding Gods existence, but I passed on this U-tube video to an acquaintance who rightly pointed out that what we are seeing and hearing in it, is but a snippet of the whole, and before one can make an educated comment, the whole would have to be viewed. I agree, that the snippet video on U-tube could be taking Rev: Sproul out of Context, therefore I must give him the benefit of the doubt.

[AndrewcBain]

Hi.

Thank you for your comment.

Don't worry - you don't have to give Sproul the benefit of the doubt.

The full context of the quote is in the video description on the right. Simply click "more info" (located in the top right part of this page) to read it.

Hope that helps!

Feel free to tell me what you think - doesn't the whole context still convict Sproul of Agnosticism.

[treismac]

You embarrass yourself by posting this video. If you were to misunderstand Mr. Sproul's words privately it would be one thing, but to attack him on the basis of your ignorance is another thing all together. Take this video off.

[1metooyou1]

This video is silly. Goal is not to post truth by the one posting. Goal has an alternative motive. "try to make R.C. look bad. It takes and edits different talks and puts them where ever he wants. This is wrong and deceptive. What R.C. is saying is GOD is All Powerful, All Knowing, All loving... We are sinner's saved by Grace... We do not have absolute knowledge but we can know the God who is Creator.

[prairiemark]

I wonder what kind of character a man must have to search the life time of literature produced by Godly christian men...then isolate a phrase or two that sounds the worst in isolation...reproduce it and publish it to try to "prove" the man a heretic. Bain does this over and over again. It is reprehensible and unconscienable. Bain is an evil man and should be rebuked by Godly men and women.

[rbaxter119]

I am certain God is. Maybe God will give you grace and God will be your Father and give you a new nature. A man only has of God what God gives him.

[Brucev7]

I do not believe Dr. Sproul is other than a true believer.

[lhorn0828]

Here it seems that Dr. Sproul is speaking about the matter of certainty within the limited framework of human philosophy and ideas, as opposed to the special revelation of inspired Scripture.

Please do not jump to conclusions when you may misunderstand the meaning or intent of Dr. Sproul's comments.

[frimports]

@togglesblock , I agree completely I don't agree with a lot of what RC Sproul teachs but he is very knowledgeable. i believe he is speaking in a context of philosophy and the technical certainty that God exists through mental assent alone. Whereas the believer is given revelation of the truth which is supernatural and surpasses this technical philosophical sense. To say he is an agnostic is either A) an attempt to drive traffic to video or B) a ridiculous ad hoc attack.

[turtle4aire]

@faiiiill234532 Non-Believers will never understand what Jesus or any real good preacher is speaking about

! Jesus said i have come to the earth to make the blind see and the seeing become blind ! this fellow is a good example of this in action !

[turtle4aire]

Son, Mr. Sproul is talking above your head as you to be able to understand what he is saying ! Jesus said i will speak and the Non-Believers will not be able to understand what I say. If they are believers, they will be able to understand what I am saying !

Take a believer and a non-Believer and let Jesus speak to them and the Non-Believer will not be able to understand what he says at all ! the Believer will be able to understand him very clearly and really make good sense of all he says !

[faiiiill234532]

Are you for real? Do you really think this will fool anybody?

[polopowers1]

The Holy Spirit witnesses with our Spirit that we are children of God.Since when does a Calvinist believe God is assisted.Taking blind folds off un believers ? There is no truth without the Holy Spirit giving understanding EVER

[ariadne12345]

Now that you have heard from AndrewcBain, hear from the accused himself. R.C. Sproul freely offers many audio presentations which will satisfy any researcher's questions about where he stands. He is most certainly not agnostic. By his own words, R.C. Sproul happily embraces his belief in God and The perfect and only sacrifice for a fallen world who is Jesus Christ.