Posts

In a discussion following my post about “How bad preaching leads to financial ruin”, I was reminded of the widow in 1 Kings 17 (among other passages) and asked to reconcile it’s apparent teaching that followers of God should be prepared to make illogical financial decisions. First, I reject the notion that the widow in 1 Kings 17 was acting against sound reason. Her instruction came from a confirmed prophet of God. In fact, I would argue that there is good reason to think that the story is advocating the financial blessings that could accrue to those who trust the Word of God even in the midst of hard times. ...

In Heretics pg. 16-17 G.K. Chesterton writes: Nobody has any business to use the word “progress” unless he has a definite creed and a cast-iron code of morals. Nobody can be progressive without being doctrinal; I might almost say that nobody can be progressive without being infallible at any rate, without believing in some infallibility. For progress by its very name indicates a direction; and the moment we are in the least doubtful about the direction, we become in the same degree doubtful about the progress. Never perhaps since the beginning of the world has there been an age that had less right to use the word “progress” than we. In the Catholic twelfth century, in the philosophic eighteenth century, the direction may have been a good or a bad one, men may have differed more or less about how far they went, and in what direction, but about the direction they did in the main agree, and consequently they had the genuine sensation of progress. But it is precisely about the direction that we disagree. Whether the future excellence lies in more law or less law, in more liberty or less liberty; whether property will be finally concentrated or finally cut up; whether sexual passion will reach its sanest in an almost virgin intellectualism or in a full animal freedom; whether we should love everybody with Tolstoy, or spare nobody with Nietzsche;—these are the things about which we are actually fighting most. It is not merely true that the age which has settled least what is progress is this “progressive” age. It is, moreover, true that the people who have settled least what is progress are the most “progressive” people in it. The ordinary mass, the men who have never troubled about progress, might be trusted perhaps to progress. The particular individuals who talk about progress would certainly fly to the four winds of heaven when the pistol-shot started the race. I do not, therefore, say that the word “progress” is unmeaning; I say it is unmeaning without the previous definition of a moral doctrine, and that it can only be applied to groups of persons who hold that doctrine in common. Progress is not an illegitimate word, but it is logically evident that it is illegitimate for us. It is a sacred word, a word which could only rightly be used by rigid believers and in the ages of faith. ...

We know one church whose membership included several chartered accountants. Not surprisingly, they were all placed on the church finance committee. But after the church went through the study Experiencing God, the entire committee resigned. They announced, “The church asked us to serve on the finance committee because our training is in finance. But we have been trained to take a conservative approach to budgeting. Our education has predisposed us to avoid walking by faith. Yet God says without faith, it is impossible to please him.” The committee suggested that rather than only enlisting accountants to serve on the finance committee, the church should should primarily find people who knew how to walk by faith. -God in the Market Place, pg 208 ...

In a presentation sponsored by the Heritage Foundation, Jay Richards presents the major themes from his excellent book, Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism Is the Solution and Not the Problem. In his book, Jay explores the question of why Christians should care about economics and why he believes capitalism is the best economic system we’ve come up with so far. In his opening Jay makes the point that while many people talk about fighting poverty, few people employ their minds in coming up with permanent solutions. Instead, Jay argues, we are all too often content to dole out handouts to those in need. While that may be necessary in emergency situations, it is not a sustainable long term solution. ...

As a biological phenomenon, religion is the product of cognitive processes that have deep roots in our evolutionary past. Some researchers have speculated that religion itself may have played an important role in getting large groups of prehistoric humans to socially cohere. If this is true, we can say that religion has served an important purpose. This does not suggest, however, that it serves an important purpose now. There is, after all, nothing more natural than rape. But no one would argue that rape is good, or compatible with a civil society, because it may have had evolutionary advantages for our ancestors. That religion may have served some necessary func­tion for us in the past does not preclude the possibility that it is now the greatest impedi­ment to our building a global civilization. ...

A rather interesting discussion on Facebook began when a friend of mine posted the following: The Prince of Peace also is the holy, righteous, and just God of wrath. Justice is the reason for wrath Justice, not wrath. In order for God to be a “God of wrath” there would need to be something for God to display his wrath to for eternity, making sin a necessity, which would entail dualism. ...

Felicity Dale has written an excellent series of posts intended to answer the question “Do organic/simple churches believe in leadership?”. Here is an excellent video which I believe summarizes what the Bible teaches with regard to leadership in the Body of Christ: Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” ...

No matter where you go in the world you are confronted with the fact that mankind is a deeply religious creature. The religious behaviour may be a misfiring, an unfortunate by-product of an underlying psychological propensity which in other circumstances is, or once was, useful. On this view, the propensity that was naturally selected in our ancestors was not religion per se; it had some other benefit, and it only incidentally manifests itself as religious behaviour. ...

A BELIEF is a lever that, once pulled, moves almost everything else in a person’s life. Are you &. scientist? A liberal? A racist? These are merely species of belief in action. Your beliefs define your vision of the world; they dictate your behavior; they determine your emotional responses to other human beings. If you doubt this, consider how your experience would suddenly change if you came to believe one of the following propositions: ...

The following is a portion of an email conversation (reposted with permission) I had with Dan Barber regarding the foundation for morality. Morality is only objectively grounded when you have an object to ground it upon. which object? A single, solitary human with a mind. Without humans and his mind, there is no need for morality. Ask yourself do we need a moral code at all? What for? The answer is yes! Because man has not the automatic instincts like all other animated life forms do. We have to learn about our nature and the space that we live within, Using our creative mind. All things related to how the mind works most effectively has to do with morality. All things that destroy the mind are against human life. ...