"Beyond Opinion" - A Review of Chapter 8

Chapter 8, by Joe Boot, is titled, Broader Cultural and Philosophical Challenges. Joe opens this chapter citing Hebrews 11:1-1,6 and the following citation from Augustine of Hippo: Faith gives the understanding access to these things, unbelief closes the door upon them… A right faith is the beginning of a good life, and to this also eternal life is due. Now it is faith to believe that which you do not yet see; and the reward of this faith is to see that which you believe.

Then Boot starts his theme with, In our contemporary climate of skepticism and doubt, the role of belief and authority in human knowing often goes unrecognized. Our world demands proof for knowledge, as far as it goes, but I want to suggest that believing in Christ leads us to true understanding and wise living. The apologetic task is first and foremost a spiritual conflict that sometimes shows itself through competing worldviews that seek to undermine faith in Jesus Christ. That is why our apologetic must rest upon the orthodox Nicene faith, the faith embraced by our fathers and mothers who lived very early in the life of the church, and the faith that has continued to be embraced by Christians in all the years since.

Mr. Boot tells us we are involved in a cosmic conflict, and therefore we must have the need for salvation from sin, and relief through the gospel, in the forefront in our approach. Without an awareness of our fallen human condition, there is no good news and consequently no conflict. Of course, in our apologetic approach we will encounter religious pluralism, moral relativism and relativism in general, as well as skepticism. Of these problems Boot says, Underlying each of these views is an attitude toward knowledge that fundamentally challenges the value and surety of faith in Christ as revealed in Scripture. Each is built on the illusion of neutrality…and autonomy…. And therein lies our problem of how to reach the lost, and to this Boot addresses the chapter.

Boot explains that apologetics is not a science, but a craft in which we learn to adjust our methods to fit different situations, all the while remaining faithful to the truth. In science, anyone given the same conditions will achieve the same result. But a craft is not like that. To practice a craft is to be guided by a set of skills and practices handed down from one person to another, slowly mastering and being mastered by a knowledge that enables one to uniquely contribute to the craft as a whole. Our first master to hand down the craft of apologetics was, of course, Jesus Christ. As we read Scripture, we see how Peter, Paul, and John, for example, teach us good apologetic defenses. From them we look forward in history to the various church “fathers” who time and again defended the faith against the same type of opposition we encounter today.

An excellent section in this chapter is Boot’s discussion of “Augustine and Apologetics by Stealth.” If we all could follow the principles discussed here, we’d be a formidable force against unbelief.

Boot’s conclusion tells us that everyone has belief in something, but faith is a necessity. And we must establish an authority that governs the reality of our life. And this is what we need to get across to the skeptic, the doubter. Boot’s closing statement is something we need to remember in our quest to bring the truth to the lost:

In all our apologetic efforts and the constant struggle to share our faith effectively with the nonbeliever, amid all the contemporary challenges hurled at Christians, and as we war against our spiritual foe in heavenly places, let us remember that the battle is the Lord’s. Ultimately, it all depends upon him. Without his power, our efforts are feeble. If we do not depend upon Christ, if we build upon any other foundation, if we rest on our arguments and abilities, we will utterly fail, for Christ is the wisdom and power of God. He is the image of the invisible God and the repository of wisdom and knowledge; all else is wood, stubble, and straw to be burned in the fire. Without love for Christ first and foremost - no matter how strong our efforts - we will be only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor. 13:1). May God deliver us from our pride and use us graciously in his mercy.

Apostate Church of England Spirals Down

The Church of England continues its spiral into apostasy to the point where I don't see how they can even claim to be Christian. Read this article on their schools for Muslims. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article5576412.ece

Mark Driscoll - A Preacher to Avoid

I've heard lots about Mark Driscoll over the past few years, especially when I started following the Emergent Church movement in which he was initially involved. What I kept hearing was that he was a foul-mouthed, worldly teacher who felt that was the only way to reach a certain segment of society.

Well, I don't think there is any excuse for crude and obnoxious behavior from a preacher of the Word of God. You won't find St. Paul giving the excuse that he had to use crude language and behavior to reach people. In fact, you will find Paul saying that we shouldn't behave or speak that way as Christians.

Now I admit, that from the teachings I have seen and heard by Driscoll (which haven't been all that many), he is, for the most part, fundamental and fairly orthodox in his doctrine. A friend invited me to watch a sermon of Driscoll's on Revelation, and I about had a cow when Driscoll said that Jesus had tattoos on his leg. Although Driscoll's overall message was good, his methodology - especially his irreverence - really bugged me.

Well, it seems the Lord must have wanted me to know more about this guy (I've never spent time investigating him) because two days after my friend showed me his video and tried to defend Driscoll's method, I received in my daily e-mail updates from a couple of apologetics ministries some really serious information about Driscoll.

So rather than repeat all the stuff I read, I am going to direct you to two links. After reading this stuff I have decided to steer everyone who asks away from this false teacher.

Here are the links:

http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/driscoll_michels.pdf

http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/announcement/rise-up-o-men-of-god-your-women-are-fighting-the-battle/

Driscoll should be censured by all true teachers of the Word.

"Beyond Opinion" - A Review of Chapter 7

Chapter 7 begins Section Two of the book, which is “Answering the Questions Behind the Questions." This chapter is titled, “Conversational Apologetics,” by Michael Ramsden. His purpose is to address areas where “some people believe the Christian faith has - or fear will - fail them.” Ramsden’s first question is, “Philosophically Frightened?”

Christians tend to be afraid of the charge that faith is not based in reality. Ramsden says, “This conviction that faith has nothing to do with either truth or reality is very common. Faith is seen as a persuasion of the mind that falls short of the truth. In which case, faith is construed as the ability to believe in things even when you have no idea whether they are true or not, but would like them to be. A strong faith then would consist of being able to believe in things that you actually suspected weren’t true or real, yet were still firm in your convictions. And the strongest possible kind of faith that you could have, therefore, would be knowing that something isn’t true or real, and still being able to believe it. How strong a faith would be required for that! On this analysis, faith disappears in the presence of knowledge. Once you realize that that your faith has had a psychological benefit in absence of reality, it is akin to awakening to the fact that you have been taking a spiritual placebo. Now that you know that faith is not real, the psychological benefit is lost.”

Ramsden then proceeds to dismantle this charge and he shows in the next few sections that: “Faith Is Not Wishful Thinking,” Faith Is Not Speculation,” “Faith Is Not in Something but Someone.” He then asks the question, “Do You Truly Know Him?”

This is followed by Ramsden explaining the difference between “knowing and knowing.” He says, “…it is important to realize that unless faith is in response to and results in trust in the person of Christ - and not just one’s ideas or hopes about the person of Christ - then there is no biblical faith. Again, you cannot lose what you never had. So for the person who says that he lost his faith, we must first properly ask about the nature of his faith in the first place. What was it? Reliance on an idea? Or a personal relationship with the risen Christ?

Ramsden continues with the question of being existentially disappointed. This has to do with the fact that some feel the Christian faith has failed them, and he says he likes to break these down into two types of people: “people who have gone to church and discovered they didn’t like their pastor” and “pastors who have gone to church and found out that they didn’t like their people.” But the point is that the real problem is how to distinguish true Christians from false Christians. Then Ramsden brings up Paul’s letter to the Galatians and how Paul addresses this problem by examining the fruit of people’s lives. “The word he uses for ‘fruit’ is singular; there is one fruit to look for, but it has a complex taste. He then describes that fruit as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control (Gal. 5:22-23). What he is saying is that if you come into contact with people who taste like this, then this is a good indication that they are who they say they are. But if what you taste is different from that, if it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth, then what you have experienced is not really Christian. In other words, those who have put their faith in Christ look and ‘taste’ like Christ.”

More short sections follow: “The Real Deal,” “Disappointment with God,” “What Makes You Think You Are Good?” “He Knows Who Has Been Naughty and Nice!” “Curses and Blessings,” and “Return to Joy?”

Ramsden continues with the third reason people feel the Christian faith has failed them and that is “Moral Qualms.” This has to do with those who think leaving another system and becoming a Christian somehow makes them into a morally bad person. It’s that claim of “intolerance” by thinking only Christians have the truth, and this intolerance is morally reprehensible. Ramsden then explains the difference between monism and pluralism.

As we continue towards the end of the chapter, Ramsden, in response to claims of “intolerance” or a lack of “love” on the part of Christians, says this: “Love does not exist in the absence of judgment; true love exists when someone has passed the correct moral judgment on who you are and is under no illusions as to what you’re like, but still loves you.”

Ramsden conclude his chapter with the “Hope of Transformation.” “The reason God shines his light of moral judgment into our hearts is not to expose and shame us, but to transform us, because he is a gracious and compassionate God.”

"Beyond Opinion" - A Review of Chapter 6

Chapter 6 of the subject book, by John Lennox, addresses the “Challenges From Science.” He starts the chapter by delineating the biblical doctrines that are challenge by “so-called” (my phrase, not his) science: 1. God is the Creator of the universe, 2. God is participating in history, 3. God is evident in creation.

“Science” has become synonymous with naturalism. “Naturalism denies creation, holding that the universe is ultimately self-explanatory and that human beings are nothing special in the scheme of things - since, in fact, there is no scheme of things.” To participate in history God has created many miracles, but naturalism “denies the miraculous in the name of science.”

Even though Paul points out in Romans 1 that God is evident in creation, the naturalist rejects this and claims there is no God and everything came about by chance. The Intelligent Design movement seeks to prove the naturalist wrong by demonstrating that there is design evidence in every part of the natural world. But the naturalist claims ID is not science but is Christian Creationism “sneaking in the back door.” (This is easy to disprove in that many ID proponents are not Christians).

Mr. Lennox demonstrates that the conflict between science and religion is really no more than a myth. In fact, this is proven from the history of science where we see it was the Christian faith that brought about the scientific method because Christians knew that God would create an orderly universe that could be investigated. Lennox cites C.S. Lewis: “Men became scientific because they expected law in nature and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver.”

Lennox then discusses the limitations of science; science cannot provide moral right or wrong. Science also cannot tell us the “why” of things that can be only answered in the realm of philosophy. When it comes to “The Nature of Scientific Explanation,” Lennox examines the “God of the Gaps,” “Reductionism,” “The Existence of the Universe,” “The Nature and Role of Faith in Science,” and “Evidence from Scientific Discoveries.” A lot of interesting reading is to be had here.

As we continue in the chapter we begin addressing “Arguments From Cosmology and Physics.” An excellent citation in the opening of this section is from Arno Penzias, “who was awarded the Nobel Prize for discovering the microwave background…” Arno stated, “The best data we have are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms and the Bible as a whole.”

From cosmology and physics, Lennox leads us into “Arguments from Biology.” Since this section is about evolutionism contrasted with true science, it doesn’t give new information, rather it explains how to address some particular logic fallacies put forth by evolutionists.

Lennox then addresses the idea of information and how it just doesn’t spring from nowhere; an intelligent programmer has to be behind it. (An excellent book that uses this idea to refute evolution is Werner Gitt’s “In the Beginning Was Information.” This book alone should be enough to prove evolution wrong.) Interestingly, Lennox points out how naturalists are always looking for signs of intelligence in the universe and seeking some sort of message from space to prove it, yet they refuse to apply the same principles to earth. “Now, if we are prepared to look for scientific evidence of intelligent activity beyond our planet, why are we so hesitant about applying exactly the same thinking to what is on our planet?”

As the chapter comes to the end, Lennox discusses the complexity of DNA compared to scratches that make up the Chinese language. “Is it not to be wondered at that our archaeologist immediately infers intelligent origin when faced with a few simple scratches whereas some scientists, when faced with the 3.5 billion-letter sequence of the human genome, inform us that it is to be explained solely in terms of chance and necessity?”

Lennox masterfully ends the chapter with this: “Either human intelligence ultimately owes its origin to mindless matter, or there is a Creator. Strange, is it not, that some people claim that it is their intelligence that leads them to prefer the first to the second?”

More Apostasy in the Church

A great site for keeping up with the latest heresy and nonsense is “A Little Leaven - A Museum of Idolatry.” There isn’t a day that goes by when I can’t find something on this site to show me that there is no end to the twisting of God’s Word to suit personal agendas. An article there is another one of those things you don’t come across every day in the Church. Let me just cite "A Little Leaven"

Apparently the First Congregational United Church of Christ in Ashland, Oregon has forgotten that Jesus Christ has commissioned the Church to go and make disciples by teaching people to observe all that He has commanded (Matt. 28:18-20). Making disciples includes teaching people about the sin of homosexuality and God's coming wrath and judgment of people who practice homosexuality (1 Cor.6:9-11). It has been reported in the Ashland Daily Tidings:

that the First Congregational United Church of Christ’s Rev. Pam Shepherd, seeing the act of signing marriage licenses for heterosexual couples as a form of discrimination against gays and lesbians, decided that in the name of fairness no licenses should be dignified with the signature of the church’s clergy until all families receive equal treatment under the law. The article quoted Rev. Shepherd as saying, "I’ve been for civil rights for gay and lesbian people for a long, long time, but I never thought, “I’m helping the discrimination every time I sign a license."

I think this is another example of what happens when an assembly goes against Scripture and has a woman pastor; I’ve never seen where this didn’t lead to apostasy. Personally, I wouldn’t want to dignify that church with a request for her signature!

The Social Gospel

The January 2009 issue of the Jews for Jesus newsletter has an article by David Brickner about the “Social Gospel.” This movement by the likes of Rick Warren and his ilk is nothing new, as Brickner points out. Here is an excerpt from the article that I think sums it up:

Why was it, and why is it popular to blend evangelism with social action? Can’t each stand on its own merits? Some believe it is necessary to combine them in order to gain an entrée for the gospel, or to earn respect from those who think Christians don’t care about social concerns. The problem is, since social action is far more acceptable to unbelievers than attempts to point them to Jesus, it is easy to convince ourselves that our social actions will speak volumes about our faith. And people will want to know more about Christ, some insist, without our having to offend them by talking about sin and the Savior.

We all prefer appreciation to rejection - I know I certainly do. And isn’t it wonderful that some of the things God commands us to do may lead people to appreciate us? But if we try to blend that which people usually appreciate with that which they often reject, we should not be surprised to find ourselves giving precedence to the former at the expense of the latter. That’s how many “missions” programs minimize the difficult doctrine of the uniqueness of Christ for salvation, undermining the gospel message and rendering it essentially powerless. Hence the phrase “social gospel” implies a lot of social, but not much gospel.

Rick Warren, are you listening?