Christianity – Page 100

Helpful Atheists

I’ve been challenged by my recent conversations with my atheist friends to consider my comments on morality – apparently atheists find the suggestion that Christians are more inclined to act morally somewhat abhorrent and arrogant – they argue that there are plenty of nice atheists. Which is true.

I made my suggestion in what I thought was a logical and coherent manner. If atheists are prepared to acknowledge that Christianity – in its pure, biblical form complete with love and an other person focus, is a force for good – then it follows that Christians must be gooder than average. I thought that made perfect sense. It lead to vitriol and condemnation.

I may have countered the standard accusation that “religion” has killed lots of people and done bad stuff by breaking Godwin’s Law – and invoking Hitler, and other terrible atheists who have killed many more people throughout human history as a response. This is altogether another argument and worthy of a separate post – this line was rejected on the basis that they weren’t motivated by their atheism. I disagree slightly, but take the point… anyway, that’s a rather long intro to this little story about a nice, helpful atheist who has agreed to help out those Christians who subscribe to rapture based theology. He’s going to send mail on their behalf, post rapture. You can choose from a series of letters and greeting cards… like this one…

So there you have it. Atheists can be nice people after all…

May 17, 2009

Want a youth ministry that rocks?

Let Ignatius ignite you.

His essential ingredients of Youth Ministry:

An Xbox 360
A copy of rock band
A book deal
A moderately priced hair cut

He’s edgier than Mark Driscoll.

“Ignatius makes Song of Solomon look like Dr Zeuss”

And all about rigourous training and preparation…

“I’m very serious about preparation – I’ll spend two or three hours doing prayer lattes.”

It’s 10 minutes of awesome Youth Ministry instruction…

Relax children, it’s a mockumentary…

May 15, 2009

More on atheists

I’ve had a pretty long debate stretching over two days with my atheist friends. I have some observations I’d like to make… they are generalisations so come with the standard general disclaimer.

Atheists being branded as they are will always immediately dismiss Christianity on the basis that they’ve made the debate occur a step before Christianity – this means not engaging with any Christian material (ie the Bible)…
They’re a-theist not a-Christian. If you argue the questions from a Christian perspective they dismiss them immediately because you’re not tackling the issue at the root.
They will also refer to God as “it” and remove any Christian terminology from the argument – which makes arguing from a Christian perspective difficult. The Christian then becomes an apologist for Islam, and any other theistic world view in the process. In fact, by doing this they bring in every non-credible and crazy religion and ask you to defend them on equal footing – which is why the “atheist movement” for want of better nomenclature – have invented the Flying Spaghetti Monster and describe Jesus as a Zombie Carpenter…
In attacking the rhetoric this way they’ve moved the goal posts – and apologists must adjust accordingly.
The fundamental differences between the two positions are, in my mind best expressed as follows: Theists look at a complex universe and say a big creator must have made this, atheists look at the complex universe and say it’s too complex for a big creator, it must have been small particles accidentally colliding, or its complexity is a product of infinite possibilities occurring in infinite time. Alternatively, as expressed by one of the atheists in the discussion:

Theism uses the impossible to explain the rational.
Science uses the possible to explain the irrational.

Where somehow, if I understand that point correctly, science is equal to atheism. Which comes as a surprise to me, and no doubt to many Christian scientists.

May 13, 2009

Prayer fail

One of the proofs that one of my atheist friends suggests would swing him towards faith is some sort of observable scientific testing of prayer.

The problem with this is that too often they then demand the test meet some “observable” criteria, that they set, like growing an amputee’s limb back…

I think prayer works, my personal experience of prayer suggest that it works, but then I tend to pray within the constraints of rational possibilities (eg not that an amputee will grow a limb back) consistent with instructions on prayer from the Bible.

There is however, another side of the coin. Where people can pray in stupid ways that just lend themselves to atheists pointing and laughing.

Like this 63 year old Indian man who has refused to bathe for 35 years as part of his regular prayer ritual.

I would suggest, that if you’re hanging on to some sort of superstition in order to achieve a particular, and stated aim, that 35 years is too long. Particularly if the aim is to have a male child.

An Indian man who fathered seven daughters has not washed for 35 years in an apparent attempt to ensure his next child is a boy, newspapers report.

Kailash “Kalau” Singh replaces bathing and brushing his teeth with a “fire bath” every evening when he stands on one leg beside a bonfire, smokes marijuana and says prayers to Lord Shiva, according to the Hindustan Times.

May 12, 2009

YouTube Tuesday: An Atheist on evangelism

This has been floating around for a while – but I haven’t posted it yet. It’s timely based on the emails I’ve had flying back and forth between my atheist friends and myself today…

It’s magician Penn Teller, renowned atheist, encouraging people who believe in hell to evangelise – and presenting an interesting set of instructions for evangelistic methodology.

“How much do you have to hate somebody not to evangelise…”

May 12, 2009

Houstons, we have a problem…

So the Hillsong takeover of the Garden City Church is in full swing – with the church to be renamed: Hillsong Brisbane Campus.

The Houstons are turning their global domination strategies back to Australian shores and focusing on “multisite” expansion – ala Mark Driscoll.

Here’s how the previous minister of Garden City felt about the expansion – this is an excerpt of an article in the SMH today:

Garden City’s senior pastor for eight years, Bruce Hills, was forced out before the arrival of the Houstons. Garden City Christian Church announced Mr Hills’s resignation in December, amid criticism that the church was not growing enough. Yet in an address to a Christian conference at Easter, Mr Hills revealed he had a nervous breakdown last September. “Emotionally I just imploded,” he said.

When he returned from eight weeks’ leave, Garden City Christian Church elders told him: “We’d rather have more of a CEO leader than you. We’d like you to resign.”

Describing it as “the deepest, darkest experience I’ve ever been through”, Mr Hills said he was “really angry about what these people had done”.

Steve Dixon, who has been acting pastor at Garden City since Mr Hills’s resignation, will now be “campus pastor” of Hillsong Brisbane.

I love the way this church – and Hillsong – have been so caring and compassionate to their leader. Very biblical. Especially the bit where they sacked him because the church was not growing enough… I assume they mean numerically, because this would certainly indicate a level of spiritual immaturity.

Oh, and Craig reckons they’re now a denomination. In completely unrelated news – have you ever noticed that you only have to switch one letter in denomination to make it demonination? That would be a Freudian slip if ever I saw one…

May 11, 2009

Swines flew*

Ok team. I have a question. Well, two questions. I was reading through the passage in Mark this morning where Jesus encounters the demon possessed man – with the demon called Legion. It’s an odd story, not because it’s all about demon possession and features a crazy guy living in a cemetery – it’s crazy because there’s a herd of pigs wandering around, being tended to. Here’s the story for those needing a refresher:

9 Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?”

“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” 10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

11 A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. 12 The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” 13 He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

14 Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. 15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. 16 Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man—and told about the pigs as well. 17 Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region.

So, as I was saying, I read this this morning with a friend who’s a new Christian – and we speculated about why there would be pigs being tended by people – in a presumably Jewish city. We presumed it was Jewish because there seems to be no reaction to the fact that 2,000 pigs have just been demon possessed and drowned. If I were a farmer and some guy caused 2,000 of my stock to die, I’d be pretty upset. When I was working in a law firm at uni there was a case I did a lot of photocopying for where the government had culled a bunch of cows on the suspicion that they had tuberculosis – and that was a case worth millions of dollars… so there wasn’t much of a reaction recorded re the destruction of livestock… they just asked Jesus to leave town.

So we were wondering why Jews would be keeping a herd of 2,000 pigs that they couldn’t eat and didn’t seem to care about.

But Wikipedia suggests the region Jesus was in was a Gentile region – which just makes the story odder not simpler. Because you would assume these Gentile farmers would be pretty unhappy with a Jew killing their herd.

So what’s your take on the story?

*I wonder if swine flu is a case of a phonetic fulfillment of any contractual obligation to partake in an activity when “pigs fly”…

May 9, 2009

Reasonable doubt

Terry Eagleton is a former Catholic Marxist philosopher and academic who wrote a great critique of the God Delusion that even had die hard atheists (eg Jack Marx who at the time was blogging for the SMH and is now at News Ltd) pondering their positions.

He’s now got a book out – called Reason, Faith and Revolution – and it has been reviewed by a NY Times blogger.

While his own take on the book suggests he’s by no means sold on Christianity himself:

“I do not invite such readers to believe in these ideas, any more than I myself in the archangel Gabriel, the infallibility of the pope, the idea that Jesus walked on water, or the claim that he rose up into heaven before the eyes of his disciples.”

And he’s not a fan of “institutionalised religion” which comes in for a pretty stinging rebuke (according to the cover note). Instead he’s trying to empower the left by presenting Christianity as a solid option. So, while offering up the standard criticism of Dawkin’s insistence that religion and science are incompatible he tackles the issue from a social perspective too, here’s a passage from the review (which is worth a read):

“The language of enlightenment has been hijacked in the name of corporate greed, the police state, a politically compromised science, and a permanent war economy,” all in the service, Eagleton contends, of an empty suburbanism that produces ever more things without any care as to whether or not the things produced have true value.

And as for the vaunted triumph of liberalism, what about “the misery wreaked by racism and sexism, the sordid history of colonialism and imperialism, the generation of poverty and famine”? Only by ignoring all this and much more can the claim of human progress at the end of history be maintained: “If ever there was a pious myth and a piece of credulous superstition, it is the liberal-rationalist belief that, a few hiccups apart, we are all steadily en route to a finer world.”

May 5, 2009

Luther: A hippy?

Some people see eschatology as a dirty word thanks to the Left Behind mob – and I’ve always been pretty wary of people who define themselves by their views on “end times” – but here’s a second post tagged eschatology in two days. There was a comment on my post about how your eschatology shapes your actions that is worth sharing with everybody.

Joanna – who based on her email address I assume used to be a Richardson – but that’s a guess… pointed to a famous quote attributed to Luther:

“Interestingly, Martin Luther – who certainly agreed with you that preaching the gospel was an urgent task in the light of the return of Jesus – when asked what he would do today if he knew the world was ending tomorrow, answered ‘I would plant a tree.’ Was he a man with a poor eschatology, or just a strong theology of creation? Or both, do you think?”

From what I can gather – the quote, more accurately rendered is:

Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree.

I’m not about to throw stones at Luther’s eschatology, that would be profound arrogance on my part. I am curious as to why he would answer the question that way – so I’m doing some research. At the outset I’d posit that either he really enjoyed gardening, or he thought that guessing games concerning the end of the world were pointless and that we should go on living life regardless, others speculate that Luther’s vision of the New Creation features a redeemed version of the current one, and a tree would be a part of that…

There are a few seemingly reputable sites that cast some doubt on whether or not he actually said this at all… but it turns out he did enjoy gardening.

From my initial googling, Option 2 seems to be the favoured interpretation around the online traps.

However, there are others who run with it more literally, like those planning the celebration of the 500th anniversary of Luther’s posting of the 95 theses… who plan to plant 500 trees in the Luthergarden as a visual celebration.

Then there’s the TreeLink mob who claim Luther as a tree-planting champion…

Personally, and this is probably again shaped by my “bias” – and the weight of Luther’s teachings regarding the importance of evangelism against this one quote of dubious origins – I think if he did say it he was probably emphasising the fact that “nobody knows the time and place” so we shouldn’t live as though each day should be our last – but should go on living in readiness. Which, given the weight of Luther’s teachings and the picture we have of the life he lived would involve bold proclamation of the word as a priority.

Some poor souls who run a repository of “spiritual quotes” attributed this one to Martin Luther King Jr.

Incidentally my favourite Luther quote for a long time was this:

Be a sinner and sin strongly, but more strongly have faith and rejoice in Christ.

May 4, 2009

Don’t buy this book: WWJE

I had a fun chat with Robyn, Keagan, Phoebe and Tim today about whether or not it would be a bad thing if Koorong went out of business.

It prompted an idea. I’m going to run a semi-regular (however often I get around to it) feature of the worse books on offer from Koorong.

I thought I’d start with an old favourite (of mine – in principle rather than in actuality) – What Would Jesus Eat and the matching cookbook. They actually exist. Funnily enough the detox diet offered by the cookbook includes “fasting” – I would have thought that too obvious to print.

Here’s a look at the blurb – written by the publisher – because that’s all I’ve read.

The Ultimate Program for Eating Well, Feeling Great, and Living Longer

Though there are many diet programs claiming to be “God’s way” to healthy living, and while some of them are based on biblical principles, and even have proven effective for weight loss, WHAT WOULD JESUS EAT? is the first to note the obvious health benefits of what Jesus ate. In this comprehensive program, Dr. Don Colbert reveals the sensible approach to healthy eating laid out by the ultimate role model.

Wait, what? There are other diet programs based on biblical principles. Why have I not been told?

Seems there’s a lot of substance to this diet…

Readers will discover:
* Why foods forbidden in the Old Testament are unhealthy
* Jesus’ favourite foods, including “fast foods” and dessert
* The health benefits of foods Jesus ate, and the health risks of foods He avoided

Also included are Dr. Colbert’s tools to effectively follow the plan: recipes, nutritional information, and practical advice, including how to follow Jesus’ model of eating with foods readily available today.

Jesus favourite fast food? Obviously not figs. They’re never ready on time. Dessert? Wine vinegar perhaps? Frankincense cakes? Or just bread. And obviously the blanket full of animals dropped in front of Peter in his vision are available in the sequel – “What would Peter eat”… A cursory reading of the Gospels would suggest Jesus ate fish, bread, and figs – and that he drank wine. I’m not sure you can build a diet plan on that information.

What would Moses eat is no doubt a book full of Quail dishes, but no recipes featuring milk or honey.

May 3, 2009

The End is the Beginning

Ahh, the Smashing Pumpkins, what a band. Who’d have guessed that that title would stand the test of time and become the title of this post…

So, one more reflection from my sermon today and my thoughts on Matthew 9-10.

One of the other things I stressed was the urgency of the harvest – I picked up this little pointer from Tony Robowtham at Spur in Brisbane last week – but that I should have known given the family I married into – the language of the harvest is loaded with a sense of urgency.

It strikes me that your approach to evangelism is greatly influenced by your eschatology – how and when you think the world will end will profoundly effect how you live and how urgently you approach the task.

Given that I’m of the inclination that the world could end whenever God calls stumps – I’m inclined to priorities evangelism over things like caring for the planet. I can see how that’s a much greater concern if you’re a long term thinker. Probably not as profound as it seems in my head, but worth jotting down for when the idea resurfaces in my head in the future and I search for eschatology on my blog.

May 3, 2009

Pick your poison

I preached today. As I mentioned last night. My passage was Matthew 9:35 to 10:23. All about the harvest. I was very careful to to point out that I think the passage refers to a specific group of people being equipped for a specific time – the disciples were called to proclaim the kingdom of God to the nation of Israel. And they were given the ability to heal people and drive out demons – I pointed out that we don’t have that ability.

A helpful soul came up to me afterwards and quoted Mark 16 – which is contentious – because it comes with this disclaimer: “((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.)) ”

Here’s the quote this helpful soul gave me while suggesting I had it all wrong and we could in fact heal sick people and drive out demons:

17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Again, I’m pretty sure the passage in Mark 16 is directed at the disciples – and you’ll find that in verse 15, that I didn’t quote.

I thought very hard about saying something along the lines of – “well I don’t see you drinking poison and playing with snakes” – but that would not have been loving. So I didn’t. Instead, I blogged it.

May 3, 2009

Hist, hark…

I like CJ Dennis. But that is neither here nor there. It’s late. I have a sermon to polish that I’m preaching in the morning and I did not polish it during the daylight hours because I was at Townsville’s Groovin the Moo. Now, Robyn is in bed asleep and I am making last minute (but suggested) changes. I guess this is what full time parish ministry feels like?

I’m preaching on Matthew 9 and 10. All about the harvest – which means I’m telling farm stories.

May 2, 2009

Eight thoughts on the environmental lobby

The last Green post scored 42 comments – possibly more by the time you’re reading this because the last one was a thoughful and lengthy comment from Joel. Anyway, like I said yesterday I am not sure I can keep going down this path because it seems pretty circular at times. But, Amy’s pastor friend challenged my biblical position and I haven’t really addressed that since, so here are some biblical propositions:

1. The great Biblical imperative – or the greatest commandment we are given is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart” (Mark 12) we’re also to love our neighbours as ourselves. Some in the “green friendly” group make caring for the environment an outworking of “love” – I put it to you, readers, that God’s understanding of love should define ours. And rather than quoting John 3:16 – I give you Romans 5:8:

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

If Jesus death is the focal point of God’s love – and indeed the focal point of God’s word – then should it not be our focal point? Rather than distractions like the environment. There are plenty of people worried about the environment and not enough worried about evangelism as far as I’m concerned. And while some claim care for the environment does not mutually exclude care for people – but nor is it the purpose of existence – and in fact it is a distraction.

2. Creation was made for man, not man for creation – we are given the impression from the first page of the Bible – from the creation story – that creation was made to house mankind. As a location for the narrative of God’s redemptive story. Jesus’ priestly prayer in John 17 thanks the father for those he was given by the father “before the creation of the world” – and Ephesians 1:4a is helpful too…

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

And Psalm 115:16 is more specific:

The highest heavens belong to the LORD, but the earth he has given to man.

God’s plans included us before the world was created. It’s not like we’re here as groundskeepers to look after the planet, the planet is here for us – in order that God might gather a people for his glory.

3. The great overarching trajectory of the Biblical narrative is a story of the movement from creation to new creation. The Bible starts and ends that way. The problem of sin breaks God’s good creation – so that it is no longer good – but cursed (in Genesis 3) and groaning (in Romans 8). We can not, by our toil, and based on the curse, expect anything but the fruits of our labours. There is no promise that we will redeem creation – but instead that God will. As Christians we must be careful not to make the mistake of trying to redeem that which is not ours to redeem. In Romans 8 the suggestion is that creation will only be released from bondage when God’s people are revealed – that to me suggests the order of priority – and indeed suggests that if you really want to see creation released you should be preaching the gospel. Romans 8:19

The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed.

4. Putting caring for creation ahead of caring for people is a contravention of God’s command referenced in point 1 – there are examples where caring for the planet is a way to care for people, and I hear those points, but our priority as Christians is to worship God – and Romans 12:1 would suggest:

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship.

And anyone who argues that less pollution is somehow of more value to a sovereign God, in control of the end of all things than the salvation of his elect should spend some more time reading their Bible.

I would contend that the Green movement often makes an idol out of the environment. The non Christians and pagans involved in the party would call it caring for the “mother earth” – and see some sort of spiritual significance to what they do. Significantly many “alternative” religions – those outside of Judaism, Christianity and Islam – elevate creation to the status of God. Thus doing exactly what Romans 1:25 tells us not to do:

They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

5. It is right to care for creation – because creation in its natural state points to a creator. Maintaining the beauty of creation is a worthwhile aim. But. The brokenness of creation also points to the brokenness of humanity and the curse. Romans 1:20:

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

6. Your concern for creation is shaped primarily by your eschatology – how and when you think creation will end will shape how and when you choose to treat creation. The Bible says that nobody knows when creation will end – Mark 13 – but that when it does God will control it.

No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come. 34 It’s like a man going away: He leaves his house and puts his servants in charge, each with his assigned task, and tells the one at the door to keep watch.

It won’t be a cosmic accident. It will be purposeful. It may well be that God will use human stupidity to bring about the destruction (or almost destruction) of the world – that would be fitting. What we do know is that there has always been a sense of urgency given to gospel work because our lifespan is but a fleeting moment – evangelism is a task spoken of with far greater urgency than conservation. The gospel is the power of God – the same passage in Romans that argues that people will recognise that there is a God through faith is preceded by Paul saying just that – Romans 1:16:

I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile

And now some that for the sake of not spending too much time on this I won’t go into too much.

7. God’s expectation is that we use the resources of the planet for our lives. That’s been clear right from the start – the trees in the garden bearing fruit that was good to eat, the curse suggesting that man must toil the ground in order to survive, buildings have always been made from wood and stone (the Temple for example). We are called to be good stewards – but whether or not mining is stewardship is not a question of theology but of economics – and we should not expect non-Christians to act in any way but greed.

8. Jesus curses a fig tree – not really relevant just an instance of God interacting with nature in a not very positive manner… Matthew 21:19…

Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered.

May 1, 2009

Anonenmity

Anonymous comments aren’t much fun for anyone. Unless they’re loaded with unintentionally funny vitriol. I can almost imagine how much fun this comment on Simone’s blog would have been to write. It’s from an old post of hers critiquing a Christian rewrite of Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah (which for those of you who are culturally arrogant is the same as Jeff Buckley’s Hallelujah and the one on the Shrek Soundtrack). You can hear the Christian rewrite here. You can read the comment in its original context here. And you can indulge in a little bit of voyeurism by checking out Simone’s husband Andrew’s public but thoughtful disagreement with his wife on whether lacking cultural sophistication is sinful here.

Here’s the anonymous comment. Beautiful.

Ok, first of all, you do not know the first thing of what ‘christian’ means if you ever put it in quotes. so dont do it again.
second of all, if someone says “i just want,” you have no idea if that is true or not; just because you are selfish does not mean that everyone is.
lastly, there is no right or wrong in how you listen to music. i mean, that is the stupidest thing ive ever heard! why would there be music if poems would do? i am a recording artist and song composer, so i should know.

April 30, 2009