Irreducible Complexity – Arguments Against

by Dave on December 6, 2011

in General, Theology

I’ve recently stumbled across a video series that is well done and insightful in regards to dispelling the theory that certain features of life are irreducibly complex, and therefore, must have been created.  This is an argument that I just  wish that my brothers in Christ would simply give up.  The more I see illogical arguments for the existence of god the more I wish they would just go away.

There is no proof for God, and irreducible complexity isn’t even close to respectable.  If you have not heard of irreducible complexity then it is better if you just don’t, but if you want to, here is a good article on it  Irreducible Complexity.

IC has been put forth to aid in the defense of the bible indicating that the earth is only 10,000 or so years old, or, if it is older, that god designed the life about that long ago.  This Young Earth Creationism (YEC) view is dangerous to Christianity.  It is dangerous because it forces people to believe in something that is contradicted by all evidence here on earth.  I personally believe that the universe was indeed created by god, and he did it roughly 14 billion years ago and has used evolution as his mechanism to create all forms of life.  God is Great!

But this pseudo-science is trying to undermine the majesty of god’s creation by making up arguments that have no basis.  These videos encapsulate many of the best arguments that I have seen against this ill informed approach.

Irreducible Complexity: Cut Down to Size

and

Rebuttals: irreducible complexity

Enjoy.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Kevin DeYoung is about as Wrong as you can get

by Dave on December 1, 2011

in Theology

Kevin DeYoung, a Calvinist, has a post on his blog that I greatly enjoyed today.  This post and position is a great example of how two people could agree on a conclusion, but disagree on everything else.  I agree with the title of his post, but nothing else.

DeYoung’s post Why We Must Be Unapologetically Theological is a post who’s title sounds like something I would write.  I am a big fan of truly understanding the Majesty and mystery of Christan faith.  But once I get past the title, things go down hill quickly.

If you want the nutshell of this, just look at the graphic on his post.  It says “theology is simply the part of religion that requires brains”.  Wrong Kevin.  Theology is about Jesus and the gospel and is here for everyone.

1.  DeYoung says:

God has revealed himself to us in his word and given us his Spirit that we might understand the truth.

While I could agree with this on the surface, DeYoung is viewing this in a wild way.  First, he assumes that the only revelation of god is scripture, so he subordinates the Holy Spirit to the bible!  Wow, how can a Christian do such a thing.

2…. then the most important defense of his truth

The New Testament places a high value on discerning truth from error.

Well, I certainly believe that the New Testament is there to do exactly that, to tell us what is true.  But DeYoung goes no further in this point, he simply continues to say that we must guard truth, but does not say how to tell trutth.

3.  Now, to diminish Jesus teachings…

The ethical commands of the New Testament are predicated on theological propositions.  So many of Paul’s letters have a twofold structure.  The beginning chapters lay out doctrine and the latter chapters exhort us to….

Here is where DeYoung really begins to miss the idea.  He is assuming that the idea of the new testament is contained in the letters of Paul.  But that is just not true.  Paul talked about the most important aspects of Christianity with the people face to face.  He is clarifying, in general, fringe elements of the ideas in his letters.  There are a couple of exceptions, most notably 1 Cor 15, but in general Paul does not discuss the actual gospel.

4. Now to tell people that God is Love is not good enough, we must know that he is good to us through other means…

Theological categories enable us to more fully and more deeply rejoice in God’s glory.  Simple truths are wonderful.  It is good for us to sing simple songs like “God is good”……But he is also pleased when we can sing and pray about how exactly he has been good to us in the plan of salvation and in the scope of salvation history…….

Wow, I don’t even know what to say about this since this is loaded with code-speak for Kevin’s weird version of theology.  Kevin, the primary message is that god is good.  But as you can see in the quote DeYoung is immediately ready to tone it down and limit it by saying we need to understand exactly how…..  Now if I was saying this it would clearly be implying that the how is through Jesus and god’s love.  But for DeYoung, it is some complex web of him hating us and sin and finding mercy and yada yada yada

5…. now we find out that god is good because he has divine wrath to us (!)

Theology helps us more fully and more deeply rejoice in the blessings that are ours in Christ…..But how much fuller and deeper will your delight be when you understand that salvation means election to the praise of God’s grace, expiation to cover your sins, propitiation to turn away divine wrath, redemption to purchase you for God, justification before the judgment seat of God….

What?  OK, Jesus is here for all, and one could easily argue for the least, well, that’s just what Jesus says.  But DeYoung has to resort to a bunch of Christian gobbledygook that makes no sense.  Kevin, do you really thing that the Lord of the universe needs for us to understand election, propiation and such?  Do you really thing god wants us to fear him?!?!?!  OK, let me sing the praises of the propiation of God’s Wrath!  That’s enough to get me up in the morning.

That may be your god Kevin, but its not mine.

6.  …and this paragraph in its entirety:

Even (or is it especially?) non-Christians need good theology. They may not thrill to hear a dry lecture on the ordo salutis. But who wants dry lectures on anything? If you can talk winsomely, passionately, and simply about the blessings of effectual calling, regeneration, and adoption, and how all these blessings are found in Christ, and how the Christian life is nothing more or less than being who we are in Christ, and how this means God really does want us to be true to ourselves, but ourselves as we were born again not as we were born in sin–if you give non-Christians all of this, and give it to them plainly, you’ll be giving them a whole lot of theology. And, if the Spirit of God is at work, they just might come back looking for more.

OK, I get the idea that he is saying that great oration is not the point and I agree with that.  But Paul, the Calvinist prophet, has routinely said that what he does, simply, is preach Jesus, and Jesus crucified.  I have come to realize that Calvinists turn everything around to be something about them instead of something about Jesus and this is a great example.  Come on ” the blessings of effectual calling, regeneration, and adoption”  what is that?  I study this stuff all the time and I can’t tell you what he is talking about.  Nonsense.

DeYoung is so wrapped around the axle of his own theology that he has totally lost the ability to say something that relates to real people.  Even worse, he has neglected the actual teachings of Jesus enough that he considers the teaching to be “predicated on theological propositions” therefore you need to know those before you know Jesus.  Poppycock.  DeYoung has lost touch with reality.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Roast Beef

by Dave on November 19, 2011

in General

I have found my beef heaven.  Between my wife and children (five of us, from college to eighth grade) I am the only one still eating beef, and that is quite unfortunate since I have finally figured out how to make roast beef the way I like it.  The way I like it is to resemble rare prime rib, and I had yet to figure that out.  But now I have!

I bought a 4.75 lb rump roast today at the local Food Lion since I did not want to drive the 20 miles to a store with good meat.  Originally I thought that I would get the butcher to cut me some thick cuts of the porterhouse on sale, but when I asked him to cut something thicker than 0.5 inches he said that he already cut all he is allowed to day.  What a shame.

Here is what I found:

  • Preheat the oven to 500
  • Put the meat in a shallow dish with plenty of garlic powder, Worcestershire sauce, and pepper
  • Cut onion rings and put them on the meat
  • Cook the meat for 15 to 20 minutes (about 5 minutes per pound) at 500.
  • Turn the oven off, and cook it for another 15 to 18 minutes per pound (Do Not Open the Oven Door!)
  • Take it out, let it set for 15 minutes, cut and enjoy!

Now there are a couple of notes here.  First, when I say do not open the oven door, I mean it, do not open the oven door, even for a peek.  The idea is to keep the heat in the oven and let it cook.  I read a bunch of commentary on this approach and see that some people have an oven that automatically starts to vent when you turn it off.  To ward off that problem I just lowered mine to 200 degrees instead of turning it all the way off.

I also made a horseradish sauce to go with it.  A heaping tablespoon of prepared horseradish (not the sauce kind) with another 2 level tablespoons of sour cream, and some dill week works great.

This was absolutely great.  The picture is the one I made tonight.  I wish I would have known how to do this 30 years ago.  Good luck and let me know if you tried it!

Dave

 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Interim Post – The Reading List

by Dave on November 12, 2011

in General, Theology

It has been awhile since I have posted, but it has been because I have been busy and not lazy.  As far as thoughts, ideas and Christianity, I have read or am reading a couple of books.

First, I cannot recommend too highly Scot McKnight’s new book, The King Jesus Gospel.  This book largely makes the whole concept of my site irrelevant since it tells the true story of the gospel.  Exactly what I was looking for.

Next, I was intrigued by the historical Jewish approach toward many of our modern problems.  Richard Friedman and Shawna Dolansky have written a very readable book about subjects such as homosexuality, abortion, women, capital punishment and the earth (actually that covers the whole thing).  Their book, The Bible Now looks at the bible in the context of having to make decisions about these issues in today’s environment.  Although there are no new testament considerations since the authors are Jewish, the book is a must read for those of us who want to understand these decisions and absolutely required for those who hope to influence others.

I have also started to study the letter of James.  Although I already had the Tyndale version of the Doublas Moo commentary on James, I was looking for something a bit up to date.  For those who do not know, Moo has written two versions of a commentary on James and apparently I have been reading the inferior of the two.  After talking with appropriate theologians, I got Scot McKnight’s (I really like Scot) fairly recent and quite comprehensive tome on James.  If you want a comprehensive study I highly recommend it.  The historical and biblical research and interpretation is impressive.

I have also been trying to finish Scot’s Community Called Atonement, but that repeatedly goes to the back in light of the more recently publish works.  But it is quite good and recommend it.

I also have read and re-read a couple of times the John Piper response to N.T. Wright’s book on Justification.  The Future of Justification, A Response to N.T. Wright is a Calvinist rebuttal to the new perspective exposition of Tom Wright.  I am not a 5 point Calvinist, actually I am a zero point Calvinist, but I often find that counter arguments to concepts provide good illumination into the context under scrutiny.  In this case I am just further reinforcing my view that the Calvinist movement simply misses the point as to what Christianity is all about.

I have also read twice, Pope Benedict’s wonderfully illuminating book Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration.  I know that many of my protestant friends will be reluctant to read  an obviously Catholic book, but it is well worth it.  This book is not full of church dogmatics, rather it is full of substantiated reason and exegesis of the core biblical texts.  Well worth the time.

I also went through N.T. Wight’s Paul for Everyone Paul for Everyone: 1 Corinthians (New Testament for Everyone) with a study group of a couple months and found it amazingly useful.  Reading Tom Wright’s translation of the bible has me waiting eagerly for his new, personal translation.  The Kingdom New Testament: A Contemporary Translation actually has come out!  As I am writing this I just ordered it, I can’t wait.  (and as I am still writing I got confirmation from Amazon that the book is on its way!)

The reading pile has gotten bigger with various other titles, but the one I most looking forward to is the classic by Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged.  I am into the first couple of chapters and quite entertained.

I hope you all enjoy some of these as much as I have.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Christian Smith and Biblicism

by Dave on August 12, 2011

in Denominations, Theology

Christian Smith’s new book The Bible Made Impossible is an excellent argument for the need to go beyond the typical evangelical propositions concerning the bible.  Before people get too upset about him striking at the core of evangelical Christianity (more on that later), please note that he is also the one who coined the term Moralistic Therapeutic Deism (MTD) which is the opposite extreme.  I personally can attest to the problem with MTD since I belonged to a church for quite a few years who could not move past the shallow and selfish and go to the next level by helping others including the poor.  When I started complaining that we don’t need another building or to spend more money and we should start helping the poor they kicked me out.  So much for country club church with me.  Christian Smith nailed it in that one (see the Wikipedia article on MTD) and he has done it again with his latest effort.

As bad as MTD is, I believe Biblicism is even more dangerous.  Per Smith, Biblicism is:

  1. Divine Writing:  The Bible is God’s very own words in human language
  2. Total Representation:  Everything God wants us to know is in the Bible
  3. Complete Coverage:  All issues are represented there.
  4. Democratic Perspicuity: All reasonable people can get the meaning of what is written
  5. Commonsense Hermeneutics:  Read the plain literal meaning of the texts
  6. Solo Scriptura:  The bible needs no outside creed or teaching to interpret any part of the text
  7. Internal Harmony:  There are no inconsistencies
  8. Universal Applicability:  What is taught in the bible is valid for everyone at all times.
  9. Inductive Method:  Everything we need to know can be known by piecing together the bible
  10. Handbook Model:  The bible makes a good handbook for living using its divine knowledge

Does that sound like anyone you know?  It does to me.  I live in rural Virginia and regularly run across people for whom this is the only way to understand the bible.

Smith’s central premise is that there is Pervasive Interpretive Pluralism in Christianity and given that, Biblicism cannot be true.  Further, Biblicism itself contributes to the amount of interpretive pluralism out there in the community.  I certainly agree.  To say it in other words, if the bible is a divine representation of everything God wants to tell us and it is plain what those teachings are then why do so many people have different opinions about the truth the bible is supposed to reveal?  Good question.  The answer is that the Biblicism outlined makes the Bible impossible.  It is not the Bible we have been given.

I feel this biblicism is dangerous because:

Post continued, click here…

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Israel – Conservative Crusader Lies

by Dave on July 4, 2011

in Politics

I have been fact checking postings that some of my friends make on Facebook lately since it seems that the far right has decided that they no longer need to base anything in fact.  So I thought that I would start posting some of these informal fact checks here so they are saved in a place I can access in the future, instead of just on someone else’ wall of Facebook.  So here is the first.

Israel a Sponsor of Terror

Obama Puts Israel on ‘State Supporters of Terror’ List, Then Opens Diplomatic Relations With Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. This is from the site, Conservative Crusader.

Now that is some grabber for a headline, right?  But, I have the scoop on this.  This is a case of a radical group distorting facts and lying.  The radical group in this case is the Conservative Crusader.

The official “State Sponsors of Terrorism” list has the following countries on it. Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria. The following countries were once on the list and have been removed. Iraq, Libya, North Korea and South Yeman.

The article implies that Obama removed North Korea from the list while putting Israel on the list, but that is simply not true. Israel has never been on the list, and it was the Bush that removed North Korea from the list.

Post continued, click here…

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

A New Universalism – No One is Going to Heaven

by Dave on May 14, 2011

in Theology

With all of the worry these days about people allowing too many people into heaven, it may seem odd to consider the exact opposite.  That is, perhaps no one is going to heaven.

We have been debating and considering the nature of our soul over on Scot McKnight’s blog The Jesus Creed, and one of the ideas that is coming up is that we are somehow a composite being, not a dualistic being consisting of a body and a soul that can be separated.  More specifically, we do not have a soul that can go anywhere when we die since our body will be dead and the only way the soul can exist is with the body.

I admit that this idea rocks my perception of life and god to its core.  I have been taught and never questioned the absolute fact that we have a soul that will live on.  Only in the past year have I been able to even consider such a thing.  Let’s face it, science has never been able to come up with a way to measure or confirm the existence of an immortal soul.  But on the other hand, every major religion out there says that there is an immortal soul, right?

Well, if I am going to seriously consider that there may not be an immortal soul and be a Christian, I need to look at what the bible says about my soul.  There are many approaches that I could take to researching this, but for the first attempt I decided to explore the most immediate implication.  If there is no immortal soul that can be separate from the body, then this soul obviously cannot go to heaven when we die, right?  To examine this I set out to look at all of the instance of the word heaven in the New Testament and see if any of them said that we will ever go there.

If you want to view the raw data then take a look here. These data came from a search on Bible Gateway.com by choosing the word heaven, looking in all books from Matthew to Revelation, and use the NIV, which should be the NIV 2011 edition.  This results in 276 entries while my table only shows 271 entries.  The entries I eliminated were the three occurrences of the phrase “highest heaven” and the two occurrences where the section heading had the word “heaven” in it but did not have the it in the actual text.  I eliminated the “highest heaven” ones because when I looked at other translations and the Greek it seemed that the word heaven was not actually there, just the word “highest”.

Here are the categories I came up with. (after the jump) Post continued, click here…

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Rob Bell – Love Wins – Impressions

by Dave on April 2, 2011

in General, Theology

I have had awhile to live with Rob Bell’s new book, Love Wins now and am starting to feel comfortable with his message and content.  I am a fan of the audio media since I drive a minimum of one hour a day and try to get 30 minutes of exercise in too.  Along with some lounging in bed, mellowing out while eating lunch at my desk, I am nearly able to knock off his book in a day.  With just a little bit of extra time dedicated specifically to the task and it is a one day deal.

One of the very nice things about Rob’s book on audio is that he narrates the book himself.  I have experienced this in a couple of his other books and admit that it makes the experience quite nice.  Rob is an engaging speaker and his writing in the book reflects his speaking style.  I have read some folks who are rather dismayed about his style in writing, well, I suggest that you try the audio version and you will see why he writes the way he does.

The overall tenor of the book comes across as Rob sharing his view of the nature of God and the implications of that nature in the realm of what happens post-life.  He grounds most of his arguments in the bible, though I agree with some other commentators that he sometimes seems to lack precision in his exegesis.  I am going to withhold a firm conclusion on that until I have participated in some of the debates on the content.

Post continued, click here…

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Tom Wright – Paul for Everyone – Romans

by Dave March 26, 2011

I picked up the N.T. Wright study guide; Paul for Everyone Romans a few weeks ago in anticipation of going through this Epistle with a study group that I have attended for the better part of a year now.  I had high expectations that Tom would present his ideas in a clear and compelling way [...]

Read the Full Article

Al Mohler Wants Hell

by Dave March 16, 2011

Anyone who knows me will attest of my preoccupation with Al Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.  Big Al is a tried and true Calvinist who feels that it is important for all of us to shun anyone who feels the primary message of Jesus is Love, and most particularly to shun the [...]

Read the Full Article

← Previous Entries