Consternation over Ben Carson, evolution, and morality

An excerpt from an article by Richard Weikart of World Community.  (click on the website link to read the entire article.)

Almost 500 Emory University faculty and students have expressed their dismay that their commencement speaker this morning does not toe the ideological line when it comes to evolutionary biology. Yes, gasp, the renowned Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon Ben Carson does not believe in evolutionary theory. Not only that, the biology professors at Emory and their supporters accuse him of committing a thought crime because he allegedly “equates acceptance of evolution with a lack of ethics and morality.”

Since I am a historian who has studied and published on the history of evolutionary ethics, I was rather surprised by the Emory faculty’s consternation. Last summer I attended a major interdisciplinary conference at Oxford University on “The Evolution of Morality and the Morality of Evolution.” Thus I am well aware that there are a variety of viewpoints in academe on this topic. Nonetheless, many evolutionists—from Darwin to the present (including quite a few at that Oxford conference)—have argued and are still arguing precisely the point that Carson was highlighting: They claim that morality has evolved and thus has no objective existence.

As the article goes on to point out, embracing the theory of evolution removes any ethical standards to preserve social unity. There is no right and no wrong. There is only one group of animals foisting their cultural norms of morality on the rest of society. Or as stated by Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson, “Ethics as we understand it is an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes to get us to co-operate.”

The theory of evolution claims survival of the fittest. If evolution is true as proclaimed by the educational elite, morality has no basis in a transcendent Being and all attempts to institute social norms are simply survival of the fittest; one group being the strong setting social norms for everyone else. What’s to prevent an upstart from claiming their social norms should now be the social norm and dominant cultural influence and changing them to suit their desires? In fact, they should be expected to and encouraged to do so. This would lead to constant political, moral and social upheaval in society. The weak are to be used, abused and discarded. Only the strong survive. This is not a society I would wish to be a part of.

 

Shutting Down Christianity

Liberal disdain for all things Christian, and the desire to remove all vestiges of Christianity from public view so as to pack the Christian faith into the four walls of the church, and no place else, is nothing new. The American Civil Liberties Union has been one of those organizations at the forefront of limiting biblical exposure to the general public. Click on the links below to view two different articles on this subject.

 

Shutting Down Christianity One Commandment at a Time.

Judge Suggests Chopping 10 Commandments Down to 6.

Does God “Look on Wickedness”?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min of Apologetics Press

The prophet Habakkuk once spoke to God, saying, “You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on wickedness” (1:13). Some have questioned how this statement could be true, considering God allowed the diabolical devil to come before His presence on the “day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord” (Job 1:6). How can God be described accurately as having “purer eyes than to behold evil,” when Satan, “the evil one” (Matthew 6:13), was able to present himself before the Lord and have a conversation with Him? If God can be in the presence of “the wicked one” (1 John 3:12), how can He simultaneously not be able to “look on wickedness”?

Consider, first of all, the fact that the Bible repeatedly testifies to God’s omniscience and omnipresence. “[T]here is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13). Neither the righteous nor the wicked can flee from God’s presence (cf. Psalm 139:7-8). He fills heaven and Earth (Jeremiah 23:23-24). Indeed, God is the all-knowing, ever-present One. Thus, given the Bible’s overall teaching about the nature of God, it should be obvious that Habakkuk 1:13 means something other than “God does not know or see what the wicked are doing.”

Second, that Habakkuk meant something other than “God cannot literally look upon wickedness” is also evident from the very chapter and verse in which he makes this statement. After declaring, “You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on wickedness” (1:13a), he asked, “Why do You look on those who deal treacherously, and hold Your tongue when the wicked devours a person more righteous than he?” (1:13b, emp. added). Those who “deal treacherously” certainly are engaged in wickedness, and yet, God looks on them. Consider also verse two where the prophet asked, “[H]ow long shall I cry, and You will not hear?” (emp. added). What did he mean by “hear”? He explained in his next statement: “Even cry out to You, ‘Violence!’ and You will not save” (emp. added). Thus, to “hear” in verse two meant “to save.” Similarly, in verse 13 the prophet was not suggesting that God cannot see the wicked. He does, in fact, see them and often even allows them to continue in their existence for a time in order to fulfill His purposes.

In context, Habakkuk was bewildered by the fact that God was using a wicked nation like Babylon to punish Judah. The prophet was undoubtedly aware of Judah’s perverse ways (1:1-4), but did not understand why God would “look” toward the extremely wicked nation of Babylon in order to punish the Jews. The truth is, however, God neither approved of nor ignored Babylon’s sins. After He providentially used them to punish the Jews, He likewise brought judgment upon the Babylonians. Just as He predicted (Jeremiah 50-51; Isaiah 21; 45:1; etc.), Babylon was soon destroyed in the sixth century B.C.

God’s perfectly holy, just, divine nature will not allow Him to “look on wickedness”—meaning, He cannot delight, accept, or ignore iniquity. He hates sin (Proverbs 6:16-19). He “is against those who do evil” (1 Peter 3:12). He may have allowed Satan to come into His presence with the sons of God, but God never looks upon wickedness with pleasure and approval.

Be careful, however, not to confuse God’s refusal to approve sin, with the idea that He does not use sinners—or even Satan—to accomplish His will. He used the extremely wicked Chaldeans to bring judgment upon the Jews. He used the Medes and Persians to destroy the Babylonians. And He even used Satan to prove that His servant Job was faithful, and ultimately to show Himself as the sovereign Ruler of the Universe, Who warrants man’s unwavering respect and loyalty.

C. S. Lewis, Screwtape and Easter.

C.S. Lewis devoted a chapter to Easter in his book ‘The Screwtape Letters’. Of course, according to character Easter isn’t named but…

“My dear Wormwood,

It is that dreadful time of year again when even those most firmly in our clutches find themselves maddeningly open to venturing into Enemy territory and attending a service celebrating that event-which-must-not-be-named.

Granted, we have been effective at neutralizing much of the threat this time of year poses to patients such as yours by ensuring the stupid humans go on vacation.  Making the time surrounding that event-that-must-not-be- named prime time for vacations and school breaks was one of the more brilliant suggestions from our tactical division.

I am, however, concerned that this year you report your patient is staying home.  This makes him vulnerable.  If he goes at all, make sure it is to one of those sappy affairs that is all butterflies and sunrises, eggs and bunnies – all new beginnings and positive thoughts.  Sappiness we can deal with.

But it is best if he doesn’t go at all.  And certainly not to anything that would actually introduce him to that event-that-must-not-be named! That noxious moment when He refused to admit defeat at the hands of Our Father Below and resorted to trickery and deceit – and called it a victory!  We were cheated!

(I must calm down…I feel myself turning into a newt!)

This means you must be on guard against the Enemy’s more annoyingly earnest followers who would invite him to one of their pathetic celebrations.  Particularly the ones where someone might actually try and explain things from the Enemy’s point of view!

We can’t afford a repeat of what happened with your former patient.  Need I remind you how you let her slip through your fingers?  Yes, I think I will.  First, you let her begin that friendship with that most awful of creatures, an actual follower of the Enemy.  Not one of the overbearing, obnoxious, self-righteous, legalistic types I actually recommend you bring into her orbit, but the most revolting kind of all; the likable, normal, authentic kind.  Oh, how I hate them!

It wasn’t long before they began hearing of grace (I can barely bring myself to write such a contemptible word!), the most powerful of the Enemy’s weapons and the one thing we try most to protect humans from believing.

Indeed, if you recall, it was precisely at this time of the year that she accepted an invitation from the aforementioned type of nauseating creature to precisely the kind of service I am warning you about.  And it was the worst possible kind – one where the event-that-must-not-be-named was not only celebrated, but the disgusting human who spoke even gave reasons to appeal to her mind!  Her mind!  The one area we pride ourselves on owning, and have convinced the world one must abandon to even consider the Enemy!

This must not happen again.

Don’t rely on any of our departments brewing bad weather this weekend – even we can’t bring rain everywhere at the same time.  And the Enemy has a way of bypassing those effort s and luring them anyway (we aren’t really quite sure what happens when those idiots pray – it’s an area we have yet to be able to invade).

And don’t settle for mischief with the service itself (bad microphones and the like).  Have your fun with such things, but remember that you are not a junior tempter anymore!  Be a true warrior of the Father Below and rise to the occasion of preventing the Enemy of gaining any ground by keeping him away from any of those sniveling Enemy-lovers who would take it upon themselves to invite him to one of their revolting services.

Every day we lure more of their pathetic lives into our own ravenous desire that, in the end, consumes their very soul.  This is the satisfying route.  Yet the Enemy would have them as sons and daughters!  It makes me want to vomit.

So whatever you do, keep your patient safe.  The event-which-must-not-be-named must be neutralized!

All to say, it is a dangerous time of year.

Your affectionate uncle

Screwtape”

Spiritual Malpractice

Here’s another article from Church and Culture.  This one is about the failings within the church. It isn’t easy to look into the mirror and see our own faults but they are there as this article describes. My recent study of the book of Galatians addresses the legalism faced by the early church. As this article describes, it hasn’t been eradicated from the church and probably never will be until the Lord’s return. We must be aware of it and fight it at every turn. It must be kept out of the the gospel of Jesus Christ. He and He alone saves. It is not by anything we can do. Here is the article.

Billed as “the largest secular event in world history,” this past weekend a “Reason Rally” took place on the Washington Mall to galvanize the nation’s atheists.

What makes someone an atheist?

I know, the “Reason Rally” would say “reason.”

I’m not so sure.

One of the more tucked away stories related to the rally was that of Nate Phelps, the estranged son of Westboro Baptist Church Pastor Fred Phelps.  Yes, that Westboro Baptist Church; the one that has become infamous for picketing military funerals in order to hurl such epithets as “Thank God for dead soldiers” and “God hates fags.”

Nate, now a professing atheist, spoke at this weekend’s event.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Phelps discussed his childhood, the events surrounding his departure from the church, and his views on religion.

After reading the interview, I could only think of two words:

Spiritual malpractice.

This is not a descriptive term often used, but it should be. The world is full of the walking wounded – people who have been terribly abused by those in spiritual leadership who have misused power, become sexual predators, fallen into greed, or spewed legalism – who have not only fled the church, but who struggle with their faith.

Less talked about is spiritual malpractice in the home which, in the context of a deeply secular culture, creates a breeding ground for skepticism and disillusionment.

Consider Nate Phelps.

It’s a delicate matter to judge any family’s internal dynamics.  Even those within it can disagree as to its evaluation.  Yet this has been a family – and church – that has paraded itself out for public consumption, and the children have spoken with an increasingly unified voice.  Fred Phelps has 13 children.  Already four of those children have left the church and, apparently, the Christian faith.

Taking the interview with Nate at face value, it’s easy to see why they’ve gone astray – and to learn some valuable lessons about how not to raise children if you want them to embrace faith in their lives.

1.      No questions allowed.

Nate: “It was not an option to openly discuss any doubts which you might have. It wasn’t safe, physically or otherwise, to even consider such a thing.

“So I learned early on to keep my thoughts to myself. And, you know, plus there was a component, you know, we heard regularly that we were just dumb kids and didn’t have any idea what we were talking about.”

One of the most important practices for spiritual health and wholeness is the encouragement of spiritual questions; questions about the faith, the Bible, theology, philosophy, logic, as well as social and ethical and issues.

Questions like, “What does the Bible mean when it says that?  Why is this the church’s position on that social issue?  Where does it say in that in the Bible?  Why would God allow that?  How can Christians hold to that when the world is the way it is?

Children need an environment where there are no wrong questions, bad questions, or illegal questions.  If Christianity is true, it will stand up under any amount of intellectual scrutiny.  If questions are disallowed, then there can only be one conclusion: there must not be answers.  If you don’t know the answer, simply say, “That’s a great question.  I don’t know the answer, but I’ll find one!”

2.      Behavior before acceptance.

Nate: “I mean, the general attitude amongst the Christian community is, as it has been for centuries now, that if you don’t believe in god, that you are the enemy and there’s something morally degenerate about you.

“And you know, that attitude’s been around for a long time. It’s not going to go away. But I think if we’re ever going to change it, just like some of the other misperceptions throughout our history, we have to be honest about it and try to have dialogue with people.”

One of the fundamental differences in approach between the religious leaders of Jesus’ day, and Jesus Himself, was that the religious leaders demanded anyone wanting to come to God to clean up their act on the front end.  Jesus, on the other hand, encouraged them to come to God as they were, and then allow God to change them from the inside out.

Jesus would eat with them and be their friend, go to their parties and weddings, accept them relationally and emotionally, long before they made a decision about His life-changing message.

One of the great needs of many today is to “belong” before they “believe.”  When people go through periods of doubt or disillusion, and almost all do, they must not be demonized.  When conformity comes before acceptance, a toxic atmosphere develops that breeds condemnation over grace.

Acceptance, love and grace provide the context for faith development, not exclusion, rejection and judgment.

3.      Narrow, rigid theology.

Nate: “The actual theology is called Calvinism. And at the centerpiece of Calvinism is this idea of absolute predestination, that God is the one that picks the saved, as opposed to us making that decision for ourselves. And it was, you know, the environment was such that whatever our father defined as the doctrines of the Bible was what we were required to believe. So there really wasn’t any choice in the matter.”

Let’s not get into Calvinism vs. Arminianism.  That’s an honest, in-house theological conversation.  What haunted this young man was a theological environment so defined by a father’s persuasions that there was no room for him, or anyone else, to differ.  And as anyone who has studied theology knows, once you get beyond the “mere Christianity” C.S. Lewis so wisely espoused, orthodox Christians have differed on tertiary matters for two millennia.

Any environment that majors on the minors quickly falls into a lifeless dogmatism that can reduce spirituality to an empty embrace of theological constructs as opposed to a life in Christ.  Faith becomes a matter of intellectual assent, a system of thought that is more head than heart, more religion than relationship.

4.      Authoritarian Control.

Nate: “As far as the relationship with my father, the best way I could describe it was I was afraid of him from very early on. That never really changed, growing up. But it never got to the point where it was a sense of having a, you know, father like you might imagine that was an educator, a helper, you know, that kind of father figure. So he was always the disciplinarian and a threat in my mind.”

A good father is both firm and tender; a person who bears authority and compassion.  A father who breeds nothing but fear, brings nothing but judgment, and drives through intimidation rather than leading through vision, is a poor father.

And an abusive one.

Jesus went out of His way to tell His followers not to “lord” it over anyone.  Fathers are told in Ephesians not to “exasperate” their children through overbearing leadership.

All to say, there is a difference between a director and a dictator.

In the case of Nate Phelps, the spiritual malpractice resulted in his rejection of the Christian faith.

“I left on the night of my 18th birthday, literally at the stroke of midnight.

“I bought an old car, used car from one of the people that worked at the high school, and I packed all my stuff up without anybody knowing about it. And on that night, when everybody was asleep, I went out and got the car and put it in the driveway and loaded the trunk with my boxes and then went back in the house and waited at the bottom of the stairs, watched the clock go up to midnight, and I left.”

This weekend the “Reason Rally” can pat itself on the back all it wants about the intellectual superiority of atheism.

I, for one, will use the time to mourn the spiritual malpractice that led so many of them to attend.

James Emery White

Sources

Notorious pastor’s atheist son speaks out at Reason Rally, Kim Geiger, Los Angeles Times, March 24, 2012. Read online.
On the rally itself, see “Richard Dawkins to atheist rally: ‘Show contempt’ for faith,” USA Today. Read online.

 

Starbucks Blows Off its Pro-Family Customers

From The Christian Diarist.

Starbucks held its annual shareholders meeting last week, during which the Seattle-based coffee company affirmed that support for same-sex marriage is one of its core values.

Following the meeting, the National Organization of Marriage announced a “Dump Starbucks” protest campaign.

“The majority of Americans,” said NOM President Brian Brown, “believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. They will not be pleased to learn that their money is being used to advance gay marriage in society.”

Brown’s remarks, and NOM’s protest campaign, fomented predictable yelps of outrage from the LGBTQIA (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, Intersex, Aesexual) community, which considers opposition to same-sex marriage prima facie evidence of bigotry.

But it also elicited unexpected criticism from certain leaders within the evangelical community, who think that Christians ought not join NOM’s protest campaign.

“It’s not that I’m saying a boycott in and of itself is always evil or wrong,” blogged Dr. Russell Moore, Dean of the School of Theology and Senior Vice President for Academic Administration at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.

“It’s just that, in this case (and many like it),” he continued, a boycott exposes us to our worst tendencies. Christians are tempted, again and again, to fight live the devil to please the Lord.”

Well, I respectfully disagree with Dr. Moore. I believe that NOM, whose stated mission is “to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it,” is standing in the gap for those of who are not homophobic, but who believe that God intended marriage to be exclusively between man and woman.

I had no idea Starbucks had waded into the same-sex marriage debate. As a customer, I do not expect the coffee company to embrace my point of view on the issue. I do, however, expect the company to be neutral.

As Brown suggested, I am deeply offended that Starbucks is using the money I have spent on its lattes to support public policy that offends my religious sensibilities. Just as I am deeply offended that the Girl Scouts are in bed with Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortion providers, while they are asking me to buy their cookies.

Well, I am no longer buying Girl Scout cookies, though the girls actually selling the cookies know nothing about the organization’s tacit support for abortion. And I will no longer buy my lattes at Starbucks, though the baristas working there have nothing to with  the company’s misguided core values.

Companies like Starbucks, organizations like the Girl Scouts, don’t care if they offend the faith community. That’s why neither will get another dollar from me.

Starving for Religion in ‘Hunger Games’

The Hunger Games movie is all the rage. Here’s an interesting commentary from Real Clear Religion regarding the movie and series.

“The importance of religion in the wildly popular “Hunger Games” books and new movie is a lot like the barking of a dog in the Sherlock Holmes story “Silver Blaze.”

Holmes directs a police inspector’s attention to “the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.” “The dog did nothing in the night-time.” “That was the curious incident,” remarked Sherlock Holmes.

The dog, of course, did not bark.

If you’ve been cut off from all popular culture for a while, “The Hunger Games” and its two sequels are novels by Suzanne Collins. She creates a dystopian future where the remnants of the United States are ruled by a despot who enforces his rule with an annual “game” that’s a cross between Roman gladiator contests and a modern reality TV show. A couple of people from each province are chosen by lottery to enter into a group battle to the death, all televised. Last person standing is the winner.”

Click on this link to read the entire article.

How to Pay for Your First House in Cash

You normally wouldn’t think an article like this would/should be found on a Christian website but you’d be wrong. God talks extensively in the Bible about the role of money in our lives. Some of us allow it to dominate our thoughts and goals in life to the exclusion of all else. This approach isn’t biblical.

Here’s a piece from Fox Business that details how one couple purchased their first home with cash. Selected are the key nuggets of what helped them accomplish this goal:

We crunched a bunch of numbers and realized that, if we continued to live simply and frugally and worked hard to bring in extra money through side jobs, we could save enough over the course of five years to pay cash for a starter home.

We knew that we could buy a decent starter home in the area where we were planning to move for around $100,000 to $110,000, so we divided $100,000 by 60 (since there are sixty months in five years) and set a goal to save $1700 every month. Because we didn’t have any debt or school loans, and because we lived simply and frugally, we were able to live on significantly less than we were making, thus freeing up a good chunk of money to put towards our house savings each month.

We used coupons, ate a lot of meatless meals, shopped at thrift stores, cooked from scratch, brown bagged it, continued to use our old and worn-down furniture, didn’t replace anything that wasn’t an absolute necessity, limited our going out to eat, only had one car, stayed home a lot, used gift cards from Swagbucks to buy any non-necessities, bought eye glasses from Zenni optical, learned to be content with what we had, and continued to live on a strict written budget.

Meanwhile, we also looked for ways to increase our income.

As our house savings fund increased, we began to get so excited that we kind of went overboard and worked long, long hours in order to meet our savings goal even faster. I wouldn’t recommend putting in such long hours, missing so many social events, or sleeping so little, but the effort paid off because, at the end of two and a half years, we paid 100% down on our first home!

So let’s summarize the key points:

1. They spent less than they earned.

2. From here, they tried to cut/limit spending as well as increase income, making their gap as large as possible. A key part of this was that they didn’t have any school or other loans to hold them back.

3. They bought a house they could afford. Note that they didn’t start out with a $500k house — they bought a much more reasonably-priced one.

This sounds like a very reasonable approach. So many young people start out their life with $50,000 to $100,000 in student loans. Then once they graduate they expect to instantly be living the lifestyle of their parents who have usually spent 30 years building and gathering their wealth and are in their peak earning years of life. This isn’t wise.  Patience and wealth seem to go together. God expects Christians to use money and debt wisely.

Proverbs 17:16  Of what use is money in the hand of a fool, since he has no desire to get wisdom?

Love and Lent

A story from The Christian Century.

How my faith was formed in the midst of betrayal.

“I saw him in the parking lot with her. I think he wanted to get caught,” my mom’s hushed voice bleeds with betrayal. Unlike most gossip, this conversation doesn’t have the quality of a listener, hungry for salacious trivialities.  The whole house feels on edge, as I sit on the couch in an adjoining room, straining to hear.

I’m fifteen years old. I missed church that Sunday morning, but I’m catching up with what happened in the service through my mom’s one-sided phone conversations. The instant mom hangs up the phone it rings again. She’s in a t-shirt and shorts, walking back and forth with bare feet on the cork kitchen tile, reciting assorted facts and collecting others.

The bits and pieces come together. Our pastor had an affair and confessed it in his sermon. He stood up in front of the church and let the gathered members know that he had succumbed to temptation, but he was ready to just “move on.”

Click on the link above to read the entire story.

‘Good Christian’ Show Attacks Christians 72 Times in 2 Episodes

This article is from NewsBusters. Follow this link to view the entire article.

“Hell Hath No Fury,” the second episode in ABC’s unholy mess “GCB,” was even worse than the pilot. Despite the vain and meager PR attempts by its Jesus-touting stars, the show’s true agenda of degrading Christianity, conservatives, and Texans shines as bright as the light of Heaven with a total of 72 attacks on the Christian faith in a mere two episodes.

“GCB’s” sin-filled debut left audiences and advertisers questioning Disney-owned ABC’s credibility. Because of the show’s blatant assault on a particular audience, Kraft pulled its Philadelphia Cream Cheese ad  from the programming faster than Kristen Chenoweth could don one of her hideous “Southern” costumes.