Friday, 1 February 2019
Saying what the Bible says, as the Bible says it
This is well worth reading:
https://warhornmedia.com/2019/01/31/itching-ears-demand-precious-language/
God graciously gave me a realisation some years ago that affects all subjects, not just ones controversial in the culture. It was this: our position on an issue is not Biblical unless we can not only affirm what the Bible says, but also would naturally say the same thing in the same way. i.e. The structure of our own thinking is such that we not only tick the box "the Bible says X, so I agree with it", but that we have the same overall world-view in general and consequent approach to an issue in particular that we have the same framework and would find the Bible's way of expressing things a most logical and reasonable way to do so.
By this, I don't of course mean that we culturally become 1st century AD or 10th century BC Israelites. I don't mean that where there are cultural illustrations or backgrounds that we pretend that those are the very same backgrounds or illustrations that are immediately accessible to us. I'm talking about the inner logic and worldview of a way of thinking. The steps that lead through from premises to conclusions and applications. Nor am I denying the need for pastors to explain things to people in a way that is understandable and accessible. I am not saying that we should adopt archaic or incomprehensible patterns of speech. What I am saying is that it's not just the formal content of our practical affirmations and denials that matter, but the routes we take to get there.
The above link quotes an example of an absolutely wrong sort of way of affirming the Bible's teaching. It, on the surface, ticks the box of being able to say, "yes, I affirm the Bible's teaching". But it is far, far from a statement that flows naturally from the Bible's overall revelation of the truth about God our Creator, the world, man, our relationship to God, and human sexuality. And that is why - of course - you don't find any statements of that same flavour in the Bible itself. It is why you do find things like Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6. Again, I'm using the issue of sexual immorality used in the above article. But is applies in all sorts of areas. Do we think, reason and conclude like the Bible does? Then - and only then - is our thinking actually (and not just notionally) Biblical.
Thursday, 3 January 2019
The wholesale corruption of medical research
http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/fake-science-08-06-2017
Why is this of interest? One of the tenets of atheist propaganda is that such things aren't possible; that scientific journals mainly print objective, verified truth. That wholesale corruption of any area of the scientific establishment isn't possible, because all the checks and balances make it impossible. So - and here we come to the bit they're most interested in - if the leading scientific journals promote molecules-to-man evolution, then the only possible explanation is that molecules-to-man evolution is a fact. Science, they claim, isn't like other human endeavours where all the normal features of fallen human culture like self-interest, fiefdoms, political power-plays, gate-keepers, empires, financial/funding and career prestige/reputational considerations etc., are in play.
Reality, however, shows the reverse; that across all the scientific disciplines, the same factors are in play as in the rest of human life. Inconvenient truths are suppressed, and convenient untruths are promoted, when it suits people to do so. This isn't a conspiracy theory; there's no allegation that some secret octopus overlords are synchronising mind-control of all the main institutions. Rather, it's an argument that arguments from authority, such as "X % of scientists who are published in the top journals agree on assertion Y" is no more valid a proof of assertion Y than any other naked appeal to authority. It's no more valid than appeals to accept a truth on the basis of the Pope's infallibility are, given the reams of proof that no such infallibility exists. So, "the leading scientific journal Nature (to pick an example) promotes molecules-to-man evolution, and therefore you should accept their expert opinion" in itself, means nothing, a) absent an impossible prior logical proof that that journal is immune to normal human behaviour and b) given that reams of evidence to the contrary exist.
Why is this of interest? One of the tenets of atheist propaganda is that such things aren't possible; that scientific journals mainly print objective, verified truth. That wholesale corruption of any area of the scientific establishment isn't possible, because all the checks and balances make it impossible. So - and here we come to the bit they're most interested in - if the leading scientific journals promote molecules-to-man evolution, then the only possible explanation is that molecules-to-man evolution is a fact. Science, they claim, isn't like other human endeavours where all the normal features of fallen human culture like self-interest, fiefdoms, political power-plays, gate-keepers, empires, financial/funding and career prestige/reputational considerations etc., are in play.
Reality, however, shows the reverse; that across all the scientific disciplines, the same factors are in play as in the rest of human life. Inconvenient truths are suppressed, and convenient untruths are promoted, when it suits people to do so. This isn't a conspiracy theory; there's no allegation that some secret octopus overlords are synchronising mind-control of all the main institutions. Rather, it's an argument that arguments from authority, such as "X % of scientists who are published in the top journals agree on assertion Y" is no more valid a proof of assertion Y than any other naked appeal to authority. It's no more valid than appeals to accept a truth on the basis of the Pope's infallibility are, given the reams of proof that no such infallibility exists. So, "the leading scientific journal Nature (to pick an example) promotes molecules-to-man evolution, and therefore you should accept their expert opinion" in itself, means nothing, a) absent an impossible prior logical proof that that journal is immune to normal human behaviour and b) given that reams of evidence to the contrary exist.
Tuesday, 1 January 2019
The year of our Lord 2019
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it [robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. - Philippians 2:5-11
Saturday, 22 December 2018
Friday, 30 November 2018
Professor Kirke on John Allen Chau
https://www.challies.com/articles/on-the-death-of-john-allen-chau/
Tim Challies began his article well enough. But when he got to this ...
... I wished he'd instead gone for this piece of advice for us all (us all who are inclined to believe we need to form opinions on far off things we know little about, that is):
Tim Challies began his article well enough. But when he got to this ...
Fourth, zeal is meant to co-exist with wisdom. Where I think a lot of us are uncertain about Chau is whether or not he exercised wisdom in what he did. That is something that is likely to take a lot more time and a lot more information to discern. ... It will take time for us to learn the facts and then to decide whether he went about his mission in a wise or unwise way.
... I wished he'd instead gone for this piece of advice for us all (us all who are inclined to believe we need to form opinions on far off things we know little about, that is):
"My dear young lady," said the professor..."there is one plan which no one has yet suggested and which is well worth trying."
"What's that?" said Susan.
"We might all try minding our own business..."
- C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Wednesday, 21 November 2018
The daft things that materialists say
Famous atheist Bertrand Russell wrote - and you'll still here lots of atheists saying the same thing today:
The first thing to say is probably that, it's not something that ever was, or ever could be, discovered by the scientific method. And therefore, if we take it seriously, it is not itself part of the body of possible knowledge; and Bertrand Russell himself did not know it. Whoops.
I conclude that, while it is true that science cannot decide questions of value, that is because they cannot be intellectually decided at all, and lie outside the realm of truth and falsehood. Whatever knowledge is attainable, must be attained by scientific methods; and what science cannot discover, mankind cannot know.There are very many things you could say in response to that.
The first thing to say is probably that, it's not something that ever was, or ever could be, discovered by the scientific method. And therefore, if we take it seriously, it is not itself part of the body of possible knowledge; and Bertrand Russell himself did not know it. Whoops.
Friday, 16 November 2018
Mortality
Michael Johnson: "I used to be fastest man over 200m but after my stroke it took me 15 minutes to walk length of hospital corridor."
That's the headline from an interview on the Telegraph website today.
Is Johnson describing something unusual, something surprising and shocking? Not at all. The only thing surprising or shocking about Michael Johnson is his, former, excellent health. In his prime, he was the fastest man over 200m and 400m that the world had ever seen. His physical ability and speed were exceptional. But the other part of the headline; the part about the decline in his health... that's utterly mundane. That part, in some form or fashion, happens to everybody who doesn't die "too early" because of some other tragedy.
Life is a one-way journey, to the grave. And, in the normal run of things, the most energetic bits, the healthiest bits, the peaks of physical health and achievement - these are mostly in the rear-view mirror, and increasingly far in the rear-view mirror.
And in this race, there is only ever one outcome, as far as this life goes: we lose. Eventually, the body gives out entirely: life ends. The time comes when you won't do 200m even if you're given 15 years, let alone 15 minutes, because your body will be in a box 6 feet under the ground.
But thanks be to God through Jesus Christ: death is not the end. Existence is not a short spurt of youth and activity followed by a long, slow decline and then final defeat and death. This life is just a drop in the ocean of eternity. And all the weakness, sorrow, pain and death itself are enemies that Jesus Christ has defeated, when he defeated the ultimate enemy - sin - through his death on the cross. All the sad and bad things are, as Sam Gamgee put it, going to come untrue. We don't need to rage and fight against the dying of the light - taking inspiration, as Michael Johnson now does (and good for him), in the hope of making the fastest possible recovery (this time). The dying of this temporary light is the setting of the moon and fading of the stars, the darkest part of the night, before the coming, glorious and eternal Son-rise.
That's the headline from an interview on the Telegraph website today.
Is Johnson describing something unusual, something surprising and shocking? Not at all. The only thing surprising or shocking about Michael Johnson is his, former, excellent health. In his prime, he was the fastest man over 200m and 400m that the world had ever seen. His physical ability and speed were exceptional. But the other part of the headline; the part about the decline in his health... that's utterly mundane. That part, in some form or fashion, happens to everybody who doesn't die "too early" because of some other tragedy.
Life is a one-way journey, to the grave. And, in the normal run of things, the most energetic bits, the healthiest bits, the peaks of physical health and achievement - these are mostly in the rear-view mirror, and increasingly far in the rear-view mirror.
And in this race, there is only ever one outcome, as far as this life goes: we lose. Eventually, the body gives out entirely: life ends. The time comes when you won't do 200m even if you're given 15 years, let alone 15 minutes, because your body will be in a box 6 feet under the ground.
But thanks be to God through Jesus Christ: death is not the end. Existence is not a short spurt of youth and activity followed by a long, slow decline and then final defeat and death. This life is just a drop in the ocean of eternity. And all the weakness, sorrow, pain and death itself are enemies that Jesus Christ has defeated, when he defeated the ultimate enemy - sin - through his death on the cross. All the sad and bad things are, as Sam Gamgee put it, going to come untrue. We don't need to rage and fight against the dying of the light - taking inspiration, as Michael Johnson now does (and good for him), in the hope of making the fastest possible recovery (this time). The dying of this temporary light is the setting of the moon and fading of the stars, the darkest part of the night, before the coming, glorious and eternal Son-rise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
