Chronological snobbery is a phrase that was used by the author C. S. Lewis. He may not have been the first, but I’m pretty sure he won’t be the last either. Basically, the phrase describes how modern man thinks he is superior to his predecessors. This belief in a superior intellect is exacerbated as the comparisons are directed at more and more ancient people groups.

Comparatively, biblical scoffers and mockers are close companions of the chronological snobbery crowd. The natural sciences lead the way in marginalizing the scriptures. Other disciplines within the educational system are in lock step with this assessment. This institution, and let’s not forget atheists, simply deny anything supernatural about the Bible or Biblical times and include a denial of the existence of God.

Contrary to those types, I hold the Bible as the authoritative word regarding what was, what is, and what’s to come. The Holy Scripture has expressed itself specifically regarding scoffers. Job, who has been quoted recently in another blog article, was the first book of the Bible to reference scoffers. (NASB) Job 16: 20 states, “My friends are my scoffers; my eye weeps to God,” and again in Job 20: 2 it says, “Mockers are certainly with me, and my eye gazes on their provocation.” Job goes on to say that he, himself is a proverb for the people. In this case I think he is saying things aren’t always as they appear to be. 

The current cultural elitism and the thinking that the ancients, our ancestors, were somehow inferior to us, is unconscionable.  I’ve heard of explanations and responses akin to, “These folks may have had good intentions, but they were incompetent when you compare them to what we have accomplished.” A short response to this snobbery  is, “Not so fast.” While it’s true that people of earlier times may not have been as technically advanced as our society, but in other areas they were certainly our intellectual equals and often times were our superiors.

One can almost hear them say, “Oh yeah, then prove it.” Yes, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Before beginning, there is an issue that needs to be addressed. The problem is twofold. First, the recorded history is sometimes skewed by an author having taken sides or by having had a personal interest in recording events in a certain way.  Then, there is a problem of current critics skewing  the record, of the records, by making a claim that some evidence has more value, or that some evidence must be rejected, or that some evidence needs to have a significantly larger amount of corroborative evidence than other ancient documents.

I believe a more philosophical approach will be useful when trying to ascertain a more accurate picture of the past and those past thinkers. An important aspect of this approach is to understand that every person, society, or culture has held to some basic propositions. These can normally be put together in a form that is called a worldview. Some of these basic beliefs (aka. tenets) are found consistent both cross culturally and across time. For now I just want to say that everyone has a base set of propositions that they believe.

A term previously used to describe Western Civilization was that it had a Judeo-Christian world view. In some ways this might be a descriptive overview of our culture and heritage still. But it certainly doesn’t accurately portray today’s society. When looking at the current events and when reading about the views of the people that lend support to an institutionalized political correctness; we can see the Judeo-Christian world view being marginalized. However, the Christian world view is defendable. In fact, I don’t believe any other world view can adequately answer the questions our world presents us with. It is the only world view that is consistent and makes sense of it all.

Let us begin with an example from the Bible. Now the Bible is authoritative. It has been more scrutinized and continues to be more scrutinized than any other book of historical significance. It is also more vehemently denied its proper due by people than any other book of historical significance. A part of the problem stems from people today not understanding the differences they have with the peoples of that time.

Let’s go back to the time when Jesus and the apostles were alive and walking around on this earth. We find there was a line of demarcation between two religious groups. There was a group called The Pharisees which believed there was a resurrection at the end of the age. There was another group called The Sadducees which held to the view that there was no physical resurrection. Jesus, who was no fan of the Pharisees, did support the position that said there is a resurrection of the dead. Jesus even destroyed the Sadducees argument in a confrontation He had with them. The event is recorded in Matthew 22: 23-33, “On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, ²⁴saying, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies having no children, his brother as next of kin shall marry his wife, and raise up children for his brother.’ ²⁵Now there were seven brothers among us; and the first married and died, and having no children, he left his wife to his brother. ²⁶It was the same also with the second brother, and the third, down to the seventh. ²⁷Last of all, the woman died. ²⁸In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her in marriage.” ²⁹But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, since you do not understand the Scriptures nor the power of God. ³⁰For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. ³¹But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: ³²‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” ³³When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.”

Jesus then goes on to silence the Pharisees in verses 34-45, “But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. ³⁵ And one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him: ³⁶“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” ³⁷And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ ³⁸This is the great and foremost commandment. ³⁹The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ⁴⁰Upon these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets.” ⁴¹Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question: ⁴²“What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is He?” They said to Him, “The son of David.” ⁴³ He *said to them, “Then how does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying, ⁴⁴‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, until I put Your enemies under Your feet”’? ⁴⁵Therefore, if David calls Him ‘Lord,’ how is He his son?” ⁴⁶No one was able to offer Him a word in answer, nor did anyone dare from that day on to ask Him any more questions.

Does anything about the argument between these two groups sound familiar? Are there similar distinctions between two particular groups today?  Part of the rift drawn between the views of Christianity and those of the secular humanists and scientific naturalists is a disagreement over the same question of life after death. Some may say one must make a distinction between the Pharisees and the natural scientists by claiming natural scientists don’t adhere to any set of religious beliefs.

A simple response is, “Ah contraire,” there is no other group that holds more ‘zealously’ or tenaciously to their beliefs than the natural scientists do. One can come to the same conclusion when looking at the similarities between the Sadducees and the secular humanists. They all hold religiously to their beliefs.

Secular humanists appreciate the ability to make it up the rules as you go. They have concluded that hedonistic pleasures are not wrong and should not carry any negative connotations for any who practice such things. Within this group are folks proclaiming there is no God.  Therefore, why not live it up with a little immediate gratification. To borrow Hillary Clinton’s snarky phrase, “At this point, what difference does it make.” However, I have urgent news that will rain down and dampen their little parade. The truth of the matter is; there is a God and there is a resurrection.

It’s not a good idea to have and hold onto a world view that makes categorical denials about God existing, all the while knowing that most people throughout time have disagreed with them. Remember, these natural scientists and secular humanists are so much more intelligent than anyone else even though their evidence is so weak.  It seems that they think that if they can yell louder, silence the opposition, and bully everyone else, they can make it come true.

However, it can be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that God does indeed exist, and this. The book this author has written, “A CONVERSAUNT EXISTENCE” philosophically proves God’s existence. Additionally, there is a mountain of evidence and many other books that show God is real. With the knowledge of God’s existence secure, it should be reasonable to expect that there are arguments to answer the other questions contained in a world view. There are other articles written in “netcastblog.ambassadorships.net” that offer answers to those questions and much, much more.

Ultimately, regarding humanity, it appears not much has changed. People themselves are still trying to declare what is right or wrong, good or bad, and alone determine the correct course of action. For two thousand years the New Testament’s proclamations and truths have been contested and ignored by non-Christians. Downfall, ruin, and a complete separation from God is all that awaits these lost souls.

Brad Nelson