Be Prepared To Address Paranormal Phenomena

Alex Tsakiris' recent interview of Victor and Wendy Zammit is worth listening to, for more than one reason. They summarize their case for an afterlife based on a wide variety of paranormal phenomena. We've discussed a lot of the evidence in the past. That's not what I'm primarily interested in here. What I want to highlight at this point is their discussion of Christianity. How would you respond? I've outlined my response in previous posts. Are you prepared to address objections like the ones Tsakiris and the Zammits have raised?

They're supernaturalists, but they reject a Christian worldview. They're citing paranormal phenomena, including a lot that's supported by good evidence, against Christianity. Dismissing much or all of the phenomena as demonic wouldn't be convincing to them if the dismissal is based on beliefs they don't accept. How would you argue for a Christian perspective in that sort of context? Even within a Christian worldview, an appeal to a demonic explanation would have to be justified rather than just asserted. Why should we think these phenomena are demonic? Are you aware of the factors involved in making such a case? Or if you're going to claim, for example, that near-death experiences (NDEs) are evidence of an afterlife, but don't tell us much or anything about the nature of that afterlife, why should we believe that? You'll need to present an argument. Does that argument hold up to scrutiny? For example, Christians sometimes claim that people who have had an NDE might have been mistaken about what happened during the experience. But how reasonable is it to argue that so many people were mistaken about so many aspects of their NDEs? If a particular aspect of thousands of NDEs seems inconsistent with Christianity, how reasonable is it to argue that all of those thousands of people misinterpreted or misremembered the same aspect of the NDE and in the same way, especially if the aspect in question is one that seems easy to interpret and remember? You ought to be prepared to address such issues. Are you?

Individuals and organizations involved in Christian apologetics often give a lot of attention to belief systems like Islam and atheism. To some extent, that makes sense. There are a lot of Muslims in the world. Atheists are only a tiny percentage of the population, but they have a disproportionately high influence on society. It makes sense to give a lot of attention to such groups. But does it make sense to give them as much attention as we do, relative to other apologetic concerns? No. I suspect that a lot of people who are highly knowledgeable about, say, philosophical arguments for God's existence, a scientific case for creation over evolution, or historical evidence for Jesus' resurrection would do poorly in a discussion with somebody like Tsakiris or the Zammits.

How significant is that? Well, what's Christianity's foremost competitor in the United States and other societies of a similar nature? Theism. People will acknowledge the existence of God, but define him significantly differently than Christianity does. They believe in a God of their imagination. It may be a somewhat Christianized theism, retaining some elements of Christianity, but on balance it's a form of non-Christian theism. In other parts of the world, something similar will occur with Islamicized theism, for instance.

And what effect do NDEs, séances, and other paranormal phenomena have in such a context? They can be perceived as evidence for that sort of theism. If theism is already popular on other grounds, such as not having Christianity's ethical restrictions and not being as exclusivistic as Christianity, how much more popular will it be if NDEs are thought to support its view of the afterlife, for example?

Think of the many books on NDEs that have been on best-seller lists in recent years. How often have NDEs been discussed on television programs, web sites, etc.? When polls show so many people in allegedly Christian societies thinking they're going to Heaven for no good reason, rejecting Christian exclusivism, and so forth, isn't it likely that NDEs (and similar phenomena) have played a role in that? They're not the only factor, but they are one factor among others.

For these and other reasons, Christians ought to be more prepared than we have been to address these issues. I'm not saying that every Christian should specialize in the study of paranormal phenomena. But we need a lot who do, far more than we have now.

Shortly before he announced his apostasy, I had an email exchange with Michael Sudduth (who's highly knowledgeable about paranormal issues), and I asked him for resources he'd recommend that address NDEs from a Christian perspective. He only came up with Gary Habermas, and he seemed hesitant even about that recommendation. Habermas does know a lot about NDEs, but primarily in the context of arguing for the supernatural in general and Jesus' resurrection in particular. You wouldn't be able to say much in response to somebody like Tsakiris or the Zammits if all you had were Habermas' material.

I hope a lot of Christians, maybe some of you reading this post, will specialize in the study of the paranormal. Even if you don't specialize in it, at least give it much more attention than Christians have typically given it so far. The issue is likely to grow in significance with the passing of time. Paranormal phenomena are being documented more and more. Advances in technology, among other factors, should keep that trajectory going.

The distinction made between Protestants and Catholics during the interview is worth noting. Once again, we see Catholics largely contributing to a problem and failing to take the lead in addressing it. As with so many other apologetic issues, if there's going to be significant progress made in addressing paranormal phenomena from a Christian perspective, it's likely that the work will be done primarily by Evangelicals.

The concept of laboring where there's been neglect is a common Biblical theme (Nehemiah 2:17, Matthew 9:36-38, Romans 15:20-21). We often apply that principle to missions and other ministry contexts. It ought to be applied to apologetics as well. We need people to continue to labor in responding to atheism, Roman Catholicism, and other subjects commonly addressed. But we also need more ground to be broken and more laborers where there are far too few.