Thursday, August 30, 2012
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Why Post-Modernism Won't Win
A very inspiring blog entry from South Africa. I encourage you to follow the link and read the arguments in detail, but here is a summary of the main points from the entry itself:
So, the long term chances of survival of Postmodernism are not good. Western ideologies are rising and falling faster; Western racial dominance is being challenged and the new leadership will not be so Postmodern; Generally, the more postmodern the church, in the long term the more they shrink; Demographically, postmodernists have fewer children and will go into exponential decline; Postmodernism is intellectually inconsistent with itself and with conscience and reality; the social damage of postmodernism will be exposed; the leading intellectual philosophers of the world are losing interest in postmodernism; finally, postmodernism itself should be seen as just God judging and handing over people who fail to glorify him to foolishness and degradation. Postmodernists exude an arrogance that they have history on their side as did communists before that. But generally once an empire with the myth of world conquest starts to decline it does so fast.
I love the observation that post-modernists and liberation theologians are already bored with their own ideas! The longer version is well worth your time: Why Post Modernism Won't Win
So, the long term chances of survival of Postmodernism are not good. Western ideologies are rising and falling faster; Western racial dominance is being challenged and the new leadership will not be so Postmodern; Generally, the more postmodern the church, in the long term the more they shrink; Demographically, postmodernists have fewer children and will go into exponential decline; Postmodernism is intellectually inconsistent with itself and with conscience and reality; the social damage of postmodernism will be exposed; the leading intellectual philosophers of the world are losing interest in postmodernism; finally, postmodernism itself should be seen as just God judging and handing over people who fail to glorify him to foolishness and degradation. Postmodernists exude an arrogance that they have history on their side as did communists before that. But generally once an empire with the myth of world conquest starts to decline it does so fast.
I love the observation that post-modernists and liberation theologians are already bored with their own ideas! The longer version is well worth your time: Why Post Modernism Won't Win
Saturday, August 25, 2012
What Really Happened to Ananias and Sapphira?
How do we explain God's violent judgement of Ananias and Sapphira? Here are highlights from Greg Boyd's answer:
In a fallen world that is saturated by agents of destruction, such as ours is, death operates like gravity. For a ball to drop, we don’t need to push it down: we simply need to release it. So too, for sinners to experience the death consequences of their decisions, God doesn’t need to slay them: he simply needs to let them go. There are times when he must do so, but as I said, Jesus reveals that God is grieving when he does.
The cross thus reveals, and a wealth of Scripture confirms, that evil ultimately cannibalizes itself. Allowing it to do so manifests the terrible wrath of God.
Read the whole article at: The Violent Judgement of Ananias and Sapphira
In a fallen world that is saturated by agents of destruction, such as ours is, death operates like gravity. For a ball to drop, we don’t need to push it down: we simply need to release it. So too, for sinners to experience the death consequences of their decisions, God doesn’t need to slay them: he simply needs to let them go. There are times when he must do so, but as I said, Jesus reveals that God is grieving when he does.
The cross thus reveals, and a wealth of Scripture confirms, that evil ultimately cannibalizes itself. Allowing it to do so manifests the terrible wrath of God.
Read the whole article at: The Violent Judgement of Ananias and Sapphira
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
"Is God to Blame?"
Is God to blame when we or loved ones or anyone truly suffers? Greg Boyd responds to a question about Open Theism on his new blog, "ReKnew" (formerly "Christus Victor"). Here is his excellent conclusion:
You might say that, while in the blueprint worldview everything happens for a reason, in the open view of the future, everything happens with a reason. But in the latter, as opposed to the former, you don’t need to think God is in any sense complicit in the event. In any event, the open view of the future can give the same assurance the blueprint worldview gives.
Finally, the assurance the New Testament gives to people is not that everything that’s happening now is somehow part of God’s plan — as the blueprint worldview suggests. The New Testament ascribes a lot of activity to human agents and spirits, and a lot of it is against God’s will. Rather, the assurance of the New Testament is that a) God is with you; b) God can bring good out of evil (as I said in #2 above); c) God can bring a peace that passes understanding; and most of all d) it won’t always be like this. God wins in the end, and when he does, suffering and evil will be eradicated.
Read the entire article here: "How can you put your trust in a God who's not in control of everything?"
You might say that, while in the blueprint worldview everything happens for a reason, in the open view of the future, everything happens with a reason. But in the latter, as opposed to the former, you don’t need to think God is in any sense complicit in the event. In any event, the open view of the future can give the same assurance the blueprint worldview gives.
Finally, the assurance the New Testament gives to people is not that everything that’s happening now is somehow part of God’s plan — as the blueprint worldview suggests. The New Testament ascribes a lot of activity to human agents and spirits, and a lot of it is against God’s will. Rather, the assurance of the New Testament is that a) God is with you; b) God can bring good out of evil (as I said in #2 above); c) God can bring a peace that passes understanding; and most of all d) it won’t always be like this. God wins in the end, and when he does, suffering and evil will be eradicated.
Read the entire article here: "How can you put your trust in a God who's not in control of everything?"
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Quote from Thesauros
The excerpt below is from a commenter on Alice Linsley's "Just Genesis" blog. I think that the four points regarding the Bible's teachings are well worth consideration:
It's
just so sad, depressing even, to watch atheists consistently,
constantly fail to comprehend the realities of life. It's mind numbing
to observe such a relentless stream of ignorance.
I ran into another example yesterday. An atheist was mocking Christians:
I ran into another example yesterday. An atheist was mocking Christians:
“How arrogant of Christians to think that a planet, let alone a universe was created just for people.”
Actually, I’d have to agree - If that is what Christians believed and If that
is what the Bible taught. Neither assumption is correct. The problem
is, almost everything that atheists say or think shows their lack of
understanding about the Bible and about their Creator. The Bible, which
Jesus taught is a revelation from God, to us, about God and His plan for
the cosmos, teaches the following:
#1. The Cosmos was not created for us. It was created for God / Jesus.
#2. We, humans, were not created for us and for our pleasure. We were created for God / Jesus.
#3. God does not love us because we’re good. God loves us because He is good.
#4. God does not love us because we have value. We have value because God loves us.
“For by Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible; all things were created by Him and for Him.”
Colossians 1:16
Saturday, August 4, 2012
"Guilty as Charged" in the Brave New World
"We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the
Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on
biblical principles."--Dan Cathy.
Apparently not, Dan. Simply being supportive of "the family unit" seems to make one a bigot in the eyes of the mainstream media. Customers who attended the "Ckick-fil-A Day" are presented in the news across the nation as actively oppressing gays. I present the link here to the actual "offending" story, betting that more than 90% of Americans, and probably 99% of gay activists, have never even read it. Notice that the story is in the Baptist Press, which means that activists must actively monitor religious media for anything relating to marriage/family, and that marriage is only mentioned briefly at the end of the interview. If activists are indeed monitoring Christian media, that act amounts to censorship reminiscent of the Soviet Union!
Cathy's incredibly generous charitable activities were not mentioned in any mainstream press articles of which I am aware.
"Guilty as charged," Cathy says of Chick-fil-A's stand on biblical & family values
Apparently not, Dan. Simply being supportive of "the family unit" seems to make one a bigot in the eyes of the mainstream media. Customers who attended the "Ckick-fil-A Day" are presented in the news across the nation as actively oppressing gays. I present the link here to the actual "offending" story, betting that more than 90% of Americans, and probably 99% of gay activists, have never even read it. Notice that the story is in the Baptist Press, which means that activists must actively monitor religious media for anything relating to marriage/family, and that marriage is only mentioned briefly at the end of the interview. If activists are indeed monitoring Christian media, that act amounts to censorship reminiscent of the Soviet Union!
Cathy's incredibly generous charitable activities were not mentioned in any mainstream press articles of which I am aware.
"Guilty as charged," Cathy says of Chick-fil-A's stand on biblical & family values
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)