{"id":4262,"date":"2024-12-31T15:45:20","date_gmt":"2024-12-31T15:45:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/?page_id=4262"},"modified":"2025-12-31T16:29:07","modified_gmt":"2025-12-31T16:29:07","slug":"blog-archive-2023-2","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/?page_id=4262","title":{"rendered":"Blog Archive: 2023"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><br \/>\n178. 1\/1\/23 How did Christianity succeed in its first hundred years?<br \/>\n179. 2\/1\/23 The God Hypothesis<br \/>\n180. 3\/1\/23 Money, Greed, and God<br \/>\n181. 4\/1\/23 How Goes Your Quest<br \/>\n182. 5\/1\/23 Progressive Christianity: Old-Fashioned Apostasy<br \/>\n183. 6\/1\/23 Scientism is not Science<br \/>\n184. 7\/1\/23 Against the Flow<br \/>\n185. 8\/1\/23 Why bother believing?<br \/>\n186. 9\/1\/23 Identity, History, Reality<br \/>\n187. 10\/1\/23 The Miraculous Cell<br \/>\n188. 11\/1\/23 The Air We Breathe<br \/>\n189. 12\/1\/23 Intellectuals<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n178. How did Christianity succeed in its first hundred years?<br \/>\nJanuary 1, 2023<br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>What factors contributed to the spread of the Gospel in the decades following the Resurrection?\u00a0 Did God prepare political and economic factors to facilitate the multiplication of Christian churches?\u00a0 How do conditions today compare with those of the 1<sup>st<\/sup> century with regard to sharing the Gospel?<\/p>\n<p>I recently read <em>The First One Hundred Years of Christianity:\u00a0 An Introduction to its History, Literature, and Development<\/em>, by Udo Schnelle in 2019, translated into English in 2020 by James W. Thompson.\u00a0 It\u2019s a large tome, packed with details and analysis, but written mostly from the perspective of a secular historian sympathetic to the Christian faith, but discounting its supernatural character.\u00a0 The author seems to treat the New Testament as equivalent to other historical documents . . . there is no apparent appreciation of its Holy Spirit-inspired character.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, I found some interesting nuggets, especially as summarized in Schnelle\u2019s brief final chapter, \u201cFifteen Reasons for the Success of Early Christianity.\u201d\u00a0 I\u2019ll paraphrase each one and make some comments.<\/p>\n<ol start=1>\n<li>The unity of the Roman Empire\u2019s cultural and political control was crucial to Christianity\u2019s early success.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>In world-historic terms, the Roman Empire was only recently established when Jesus of Nazareth was born.\u00a0 The early spread of the Gospel was enabled by the peace (Pax Romana) enforced across southern Europe and northern Africa, allowing safe and rapid travel via Rome\u2019s system of roads and control of the Mediterranean Sea.\u00a0 We should not take for granted Paul\u2019s missionary journeys which established churches in nations that were once both independent and testy about foreign influence.<\/p>\n<p>How much greater is our own opportunity to spread the Gospel in a world that is knit tightly together electronically, and travel is cheaper and faster than ever before?\u00a0 If only Christians in the West would use their freedom and resources to do more than show up once per week for a \u2018worship show\u2019 and a winsome talk.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"2\">\n<li>The widespread knowledge of the Greek language advanced the expansion of Christianity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>First and foremost, the New Testament in Greek could be read by most people across the Empire.\u00a0 Doubtless, Christians would copy and distribute the Gospel accounts and the epistles from town to town from Egypt to Turkey to Greece to Rome and Gaul and Spain and, ultimately, beyond to Persia and India and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>This is why there are tens of thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament that have survived from all over Europe, the Middle East, and northern Africa.\u00a0 Common use of Greek certainly enabled evangelists to show up in towns, even in Germany and Britain, and share the Gospel.\u00a0 From Greek, the message would be translated into more far-flung local languages.<\/p>\n<p>What is the universal language today?\u00a0 Certainly English!\u00a0 The modern missionary movement of the last two and a half centuries has been providentially sourced in the English speaking world, first from Britain and then America.\u00a0 The best Gospel tracts ever created are available in English and almost every other language on Earth.\u00a0 Yesterday there was a fellow at WalMart in the line ahead of me, apparently from Latin America.\u00a0 He accepted the tracts I offered him (check them out at <a href=\"http:\/\/www.thinktracts.com\/\">ThinkTracts.com<\/a>), but his slight discomfort provoked me to reach for one of the Chick tracts in Spanish that I keep handy for just these occasions.\u00a0 He responded positively to that offer \u2013 he knew how to read Spanish!\u00a0 This is all so easy to do!<\/p>\n<ol start=\"3\">\n<li>Hellenistic Judaism was widespread, giving Paul a place to start in the cities he visited.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The apostle Paul would start with the Jews, whose theology shared a Biblical foundation.\u00a0 Paul\u2019s witness to the pagan Gentiles would have to begin farther back, philosophically, explaining the God of creation.\u00a0 Many Jews were readily converted (many, alas, were not), and became local Gospel evangelists.<\/p>\n<p>Today we cross paths with many who have been raised in some branch of Christendom, and so share or at least are aware of some Biblical truths.\u00a0 If they engage in conversation, it is at least easy for them to comprehend that they have missed something, namely salvation by grace through faith.\u00a0 Most \u2018religionists\u2019 today, like most Jews and pagans of old, hope to be judged righteous enough for Paradise.\u00a0 It\u2019s not hard to quote and explain some basic Bible verses to show them their lost condition and need for forgiveness.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"4\">\n<li>Existing religions were weak and local or regional. Pagan cults were in decline and not connected from region to region.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This enabled the Biblical Gospel to stand out in uniqueness and power.\u00a0 The message of one Creator, whose Son was born into mankind, is something that seems \u2018old hat\u2019 now, but was unique then.\u00a0 The message of forgiveness and the new birth offered an assured hope not found in any cult.\u00a0 And Gospel truth was rooted in the history of the times and the prophecies of the Old Testament.\u00a0 The Gospel was grounded in historical reality.<\/p>\n<p>Today\u2019s cults and religions and philosophies abound with thinly veiled false hopes.\u00a0 The truth of the Gospel can still shake loose the weak foundations of worldly philosophies, and the Holy Spirit is still committed to the Great Commission so that <em>we know <\/em>that while we convey truth verbally (or by tract), the Holy Spirit draws the heart.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"5\">\n<li>Monotheism enjoyed an appeal lacking in the polytheistic cults of the time. As the story spread about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, many sought and found a new understanding of God.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>For someone yearning to find life\u2019s meaning, polytheism simply does not have the \u2018ring of truth.\u2019\u00a0 How can you wholly commit to just one or a few of the dishes on a large smorgasbord?\u00a0 Ultimate truth demands one ultimate God who defines Truth, who has all the power, and in whom we can trust with all our being.<\/p>\n<p>People are no different today.\u00a0 Individuals choose a false religion or vacant philosophy because it\u2019s comfortable, it justifies a sinful lifestyle.\u00a0 But those who want to find TRUTH, will find the \u2018ring of truth\u2019 in the Gospel.\u00a0 Our job is to convey the message compellingly and compassionately.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"6\">\n<li>Christianity was <u>new<\/u> in that it was not just an additional religion added to the culture \u2013 the Gospel made an <em>exclusive <\/em>claim that required renunciation of other worldviews. It was all or nothing regarding salvation and the conduct of one\u2019s life.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This was the feature that provoked such persecution.\u00a0 Other religions coexisted, usually peacefully, within the Roman Empire, and were even willing to allow claims of godhood by the Roman emperor.\u00a0 The Christian faith necessarily declared other faiths false.<\/p>\n<p>The same tension and conflict persists today.\u00a0 Accordingly, \u2018tolerance\u2019 seems to be available for all other perspectives except Biblical Christianity.\u00a0 Since Christians and their faith are despised by false religionists, secularists, post-modernists, and everyone else under the sun, we may as well be bold and vocal about the TRUTH.\u00a0 There is no point in compromise.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"7\">\n<li>Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures valued dialogue, debate, and regularly entertained novel intellectual ideas. This opened the door for Christian missionaries to engage in the synagogues and marketplaces.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Open debate on serious issues wasn\u2019t always friendly, but it wasn\u2019t usually shocking.\u00a0 (Although there are notable exceptions in the book of Acts.)\u00a0 The culture valued listening to alternative points of view.\u00a0 We see this throughout the book of Acts, when Paul visited the synagogues to challenge the Jews and on Mars Hill where he engaged with the pagan intellectuals.<\/p>\n<p>Modern culture has shifted during my lifetime away from fair, intellectual debate.\u00a0 Emotions drive political and religious positions, making it more difficult to engage peacefully.\u00a0 <em>Nevertheless<\/em>, most of the world is still open to a Gospel witness, one-to-one, especially in America.\u00a0 Whenever you can separate individuals from the mob, you are likely to get a hearing.\u00a0 The response may be cold, but there are still souls open to truth, consciences still open to conviction.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"8\">\n<li>A successfully communicative network of house churches included five pillars: letters, travel, coworkers, reciprocal material support, and a culture of hospitality.\u00a0 The New Testament is rich with examples.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>In this culture true discipleship thrived.\u00a0 Every Christian had the opportunity and the obligation to evangelize the lost and to encourage the other believers, to develop gifts and to grow to spiritual maturity.\u00a0 You will search the New Testament in vain to find the names of megachurch pastors . . . which, unfortunately, are the focus of modern Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>The house church <em>system <\/em>(with its \u2018pillars\u2019) was designed by God to define church life until the Lord Jesus returns.\u00a0 But modern Christendom has despised God\u2019s design in favor of huge facilities with salaried clergy and scripted meetings.\u00a0 And so the worldly culture disintegrates and wickedness abounds because the Christians have not \u201cturned the world upside down\u201d (Acts 17:6) in this generation.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"9\">\n<li>Christians were both members in a local congregation, but also part of a worldwide fellowship of Christians. Regardless of station \u2013 slave or nobleman or tradesman \u2013 a traveling Christian would quickly find a group of believers to welcome him.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This is all the more remarkable considering the distances and time delays for communication between cities in ancient times.\u00a0 Yet the New Testament record is clear that genuine believers would quickly recognize each other and help those in need no matter the level of sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>In doing street evangelism I have often encountered Christians and had sweet fellowship, if only for a few minutes.\u00a0 I learned early on that it is not difficult to discern genuine believers from those who have a false religious hope.\u00a0 But I\u2019ve also been distressed to observe the isolation of church from church within a single community.\u00a0 Even churches located across the street from each other see themselves as competitors, not at all as part of a local network.\u00a0 This clearly hinders the Gospel and violates God\u2019s New Testament plan.\u00a0 The clergy in charge of megachurches or megachurch wannabes seem sadly motivated to acquire their own little empires and staffs and resources, even at the expense of \u2018competitor\u2019 churches.\u00a0 Personally, I\u2019ve found that Christians who are dedicated members of a given church have no interest in making friends of Christians who are not members of their church.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"10\">\n<li>The Christian ethic of love for God and for others \u2013 even enemies \u2013 stood apart from pagan culture.\u00a0 Startling was the acceptance of all classes into house church fellowships, and so multitudes from all classes became Christians and joined together.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The New Testament is clear and repetitive on this topic.\u00a0 It makes sense \u2013 we\u2019re all sinners who are saved the same way, by God\u2019s grace, contingent on our humble repentance and faith.\u00a0 All believers are born again as spiritual babes, including those rich and powerful in the world, and including those who are simple laborers or even impoverished.\u00a0 Joined together in the same spiritual family by the grace of God, we are obligated to encourage, help, and build up one another, both spiritually and temporally.<\/p>\n<p>Oh that Christians today would join together in the same spirit, facilitated by God\u2019s intended design of city-wide house church networks, multiplying the Gospel block by block throughout a region, with member-evangelists who are part of every societal niche.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"11\">\n<li>Baptism, the Lord\u2019s supper, and house church culture created strong bonds within each fellowship, amplified in the early days by miracles and the Holy Spirit moving in power throughout a community to validate Gospel truth.\u00a0 The bonds within and the openness to all those without made the Christian faith attractive to unbelievers.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>And so the Gospel spread quickly throughout the Greco-Roman world and beyond to cover the globe.\u00a0 It is clear from the Bible that God\u2019s plan has not changed, even if market-oriented and culture-empathetic Western church leaders think they can do better.\u00a0 It was far easier to distinguish the true from the false converts in ancient times under persecution;\u00a0 similarly for professing Christians under duress in parts of the world today.\u00a0 It is much harder to distinguish the wheat from the tares in the West today, yet the Bible is filled with warnings about this dichotomy, along with challenges to \u201cexamine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith\u201d (2 Cor 13:5).<\/p>\n<p>Persecution serves to purify and strengthen the bonds among believers.\u00a0 Where persecution is absent or light, as in the West, the \u201cglue\u201d that serves is the Great Commission, a shared purpose that is worthy of our devotion and that provokes prayer, study, mutual encouragement, training, and rejoicing together.\u00a0 If a church doesn\u2019t use this \u201cglue\u201d it will be devoid of Holy Spirit power.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"12\">\n<li>The Gospel accounts and the epistles introduced a new literature into the world, provoking discussion, study, and debate, along with a new perspective on the ancient Hebrew Scriptures \u2013 the Old Testament.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The themes included startling non-intuitive paradoxes . . . in death is life; the poor are rich; the oppressed will rule.\u00a0 Given the claim that the Old and New Testaments were the very word of God, these apparent paradoxes made sense, engendering hope and purpose that transcended the harsh realities of life, and yet provided practical guidelines for daily life.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout its history, the Christian faith has embraced study and open discussion, despite regular attempts to squash dissent from clergy-approved doctrines.\u00a0 Modern emotionally-driven movements (Pentecostalism, the emergent church, entertainment-oriented evangelicalism) also work to diminish or destroy Biblical discipleship \u2013 the root word is \u2018discipline\u2019 regarding study, thought, and discussion, which Christians must still strive for, despite whatever local church culture they find themselves in.\u00a0 See my \u2018church\u2019 essays in the Discipleship section of this site.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"13\">\n<li>Jesus wrote nothing himself.\u00a0 (The author cites similarity to Socrates and Pythagoras in this case, a trivializing note in my opinion.)\u00a0\u00a0 But the writings of the New Testament constrained the interpretation on Jesus\u2019 life and teachings.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Indeed.\u00a0 The Christian commits to the Bible as the Holy Spirit-inspired word of God, thereby constraining Christian doctrine to that delivered by God himself.\u00a0 Despite this, varied interpretations abounded but, I believe, only because people deliberately misinterpreted or allegorized or mixed pagan ideas with Scriptural truths.\u00a0 The New Testament is rich with warnings to hold fast to Scriptural doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>Consider my essay \u201cThe 10 Most Deadly Heresies Affecting American Churches in These Last Days,\u201d at <a href=\"http:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/?page_id=84\">http:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/?page_id=84<\/a><\/p>\n<p>I contend that the differences among \u201cChristian\u201d denominations and sects are easily resolved with a straightforward, but serious reading of the Bible.\u00a0 It\u2019s just not that hard to get the fundamentals right!<\/p>\n<ol start=\"14\">\n<li>The split into different movements \u2013 the author identifies the Jerusalem church, a \u201cJesus movement\u201d in Galilee, Antioch &amp; Paul, and a Johannine school \u2013 was crucial to survival in a dangerous political \/ religious climate.\u00a0 If one group were to be obliterated, Christianity would still survive.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>I think the author has missed this one completely.\u00a0 The emphasis was to evangelize and establish local churches <em>everywhere<\/em>.\u00a0 \u201cMovements\u201d with divergent doctrines or interpretations were problems, not solutions.\u00a0 The New Testament emphasis is to teach and to spread and to \u201cearnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints\u201d (Jude 3).\u00a0 Fragmentation into sects has consistently damaged the Gospel and turned multitudes into false converts.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"15\">\n<li>Christians had direct access to God \u2013 there was no priestly class.\u00a0 All believers are children of God, and see each other as brothers and sisters.\u00a0 Scriptural promises destroyed the capriciousness of fate and the fear of death, with a promise of personal resurrection because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The boldness of believers in the first few centuries, even at risk of martyrdom, speaks to their assured hope of resurrection and eternal life in a restored Kingdom of God.\u00a0 Martyrs around the world today prove the sincerity of their faith in God\u2019s promises.\u00a0 How much more should we in the West thank God for our liberties and resources by doing everything we can to share the Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A better analysis of what the 1<sup>st<\/sup> century was all about, why Jesus was born when he was, and where he was, and what led up to that event and what shook out from it, is delightfully expounded in J. Warner Wallace\u2019s 2021 book, <em>Person of Interest:\u00a0 Why Jesus Still Matters in a World that Rejects the Bible.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The book is outstanding and should be on every Christian\u2019s bookshelf \u2013 after a careful read.\u00a0 It\u2019s one of the best apologetics books ever written, serving both to encourage believers and to convince skeptics.\u00a0 I won\u2019t review the book on this site, but I do heartily endorse it.\u00a0 Wallace uses his career experience as a cold-case detective to weave the apologetics narrative in parallel with a cold case that he once solved.\u00a0 Fascinating!<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n179. The God Hypothesis<br \/>\nFebruary 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The naturalistic worldview denies anything beyond what we can observe in nature itself, namely matter and energy within space and time.\u00a0 Particles, quantum fields, and the \u201claws\u201d of physics . . . that\u2019s all there is, ever was, or ever will be, to paraphrase Carl Sagan.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to Big Bang cosmology, the reigning \u201cscientific\u201d view was of an eternal and infinite universe.\u00a0 Albert Einstein fudged his equations with a \u201ccosmological constant\u201d to support this idea and Fred Hoyle, with strictly ideological motivations, proposed a steady-state infinite universe.\u00a0 Sir Arthur Eddington confessed that he found the Big Bang idea \u201crepugnant.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>And so the Big Bang idea was resisted for some time because it allowed for a <em>cause<\/em>.\u00a0 There shouldn\u2019t be anything or, God forbid, <em>anyone <\/em>outside the universe that could bring it into existence.\u00a0 As Stephen Meyer points out in his 2021 book, <em>Return of the GOD Hypothesis:\u00a0 Three Scientific Discoveries that Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe<\/em>, since naturalism posits nothing outside the physical universe, therefore naturalism \u201cdoes not qualify as a <em>causally adequate <\/em>explanation for . . . the beginning of the universe.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Meyer would tell his students, \u201cIf you extrapolate back all the way to a singularity, you eventually reach a point where there is no matter left to do the causing.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In this essay I\u2019ll extract nuggets and comment (as usual).\u00a0 I do highly recommend the book, but only if you\u2019re already thoroughly grounded in young-earth creationism.\u00a0 You can use my essays and book on creation vs. evolution on this site to help, and take advantage of the wealth of materials on creation.com and answersingenesis.org.\u00a0 Meyer is firmly entrenched in the Intelligent Design camp and, accordingly, compromises on age of the earth and other historical issues within the first eleven chapters of Genesis.\u00a0 But his book <em>Return of the GOD Hypothesis<\/em> is a wonderful exposition of the history and sorry speculations of the naturalistic foundations of atheism.<\/p>\n<p>In particular, Meyer examines three major scientific discoveries that wreck any supposed rational faith in naturalism:\u00a0 (1) the material universe had a beginning; (2) the universe is finely tuned for life; and (3) the biosphere has experienced huge and discontinuous increases in functionally specified information.<\/p>\n<p>Let\u2019s do a bit of history first.\u00a0 Meyer quotes Oxford physicist \/ historian Peter E. Hodgson who wrote on \u201cthe material requirements for the growth of science.\u201d\u00a0 Specifically, there must be \u201ca fairly well-developed society, so that some of its members can spend most of their time just thinking about the world,\u201d without just scrabbling for the next meal.\u00a0 Simple technology must be available to conduct simple experiments.\u00a0 Mathematics are necessary for the systemization of experimental studies and a written language is required to communicate with other scientists to grow the collective knowledge base.<\/p>\n<p>Several historians note that science developed in Western civilization alone, because of the intellectual presuppositions of Judeo-Christian theology.\u00a0 In contrast, for example, Greek philosophers believed that order in nature derived from the <em>logos<\/em>, a self-existent logical principle, rather than from a divine mind.\u00a0 This led to an \u2018armchair\u2019 philosophizer approach, neglectful of careful observations.<\/p>\n<p>Robert Boyle, a founder of modern chemistry, insisted that the job of the natural philosopher (scientist) was not to ask what God must have done, but what God actually did.\u00a0 Boyle advocated an empirical, observational approach, not merely a deductive one.\u00a0 Newton, Galileo, Kepler, and Copernicus, Meyer notes, believed themselves to be called to find evidences of God in the world.<\/p>\n<p>Kepler wrote that God made it possible for us to discover God\u2019s natural laws \u201cby creating us after his own image so that we could share in his own thoughts.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Scientists with a biblical worldview embraced human <em>capability <\/em>based on our image-of-God nature, and exercised caution about our <em>fallibility <\/em>due to the Fall and our tendencies to sin.\u00a0 Thus, our experimental methods must be systematic and reviewed, even repeated by others.<\/p>\n<p>Nobel laureate (chemist) Melvin Calvin argued that the monotheistic worldview of the ancient Hebrews suggested a single coherent order in creation with a single, universal set of laws.\u00a0 Meyer notes in contrast that since animists, polytheists, and pantheists claim many spirits or gods interacting with nature in different ways, chaos and randomness would be more likely than uniformity and order.\u00a0 Accordingly, Melvin Calvin identified the biblical concept of God as \u201cthe historical foundation for modern science.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Isaac Newton viewed the order in creation as evidence of divine action.\u00a0 For example, he argued that the uncanny match between the optical properties of light and the structure of the mammalian eye suggested design.\u00a0 Newton also noted that the stability of the planetary orbits depended not only on the regularity of gravitational forces, but also upon the precise initial positioning of planets and comets with respect to the sun.<\/p>\n<p>Extrapolating, consider the observed universe of stars, roughly 100 billion stars in each of a trillion galaxies . . . at least.\u00a0 For galaxies to be stable and beautifully ordered, each star must have a suitable initial position and velocity.\u00a0 Note that aerospace engineers don\u2019t just fling artificial satellites up and hope for the best.\u00a0 Those communications and GPS satellites must be carefully launched and positioned with precise velocity vectors, or else they will either fall back to Earth or escape completely.<\/p>\n<p>Now, Meyer buys into Big Bang mythology completely, but hopes that people will believe that \u2018God did that.\u2019\u00a0 He cites the famous conclusion to the book, <em>God and the Astronomers<\/em>, by astrophysicist Robert Jastrow of NASA\u2019s Goddard Space Center, who wrote, \u201cFor the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream.\u00a0 He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about the conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ve written much else on this site regarding the Big Bang, so I\u2019ll be concise here.\u00a0 See also my two astronomy tracts at ThinkTracts.com for a brief summary of key issues.\u00a0\u00a0 The Big Bang idea derives from \u2018winding the clock back\u2019 from the currently observed expansion of the universe . . . which the Bible (perhaps) refers to at least 17 times as God \u2018stretching out\u2019 the heavens.\u00a0 There simply must have been a beginning, which greatly tormented many atheistic scientists of the 20<sup>th<\/sup> century who despised any fact that necessitated a Creator.\u00a0 But the Big Bang is not biblical!\u00a0 (See Genesis chapter 1.)\u00a0 And \u2018scientifically\u2019 the Big Bang and naturalistic cosmology explain nothing, not the formation of galaxies and stars and planets, not dark energy nor dark matter, and not those beautiful orbits that we see in our telescopes <em>everywhere<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>As I draft this in August 2022, the preliminary results from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) have shocked the cosmological establishment.\u00a0 The JWST is designed to see deeper into the infrared than other telescopes in order to find those \u2018proto-galaxies\u2019 that supposedly were forming just a few hundred million years after the Big Bang.\u00a0 But what they\u2019re finding is what creationists (including me) have predicted they would find . . . fully formed galaxies at the greatest distances.\u00a0 Big Bang doctrine is dogmatic against fully formed galaxies at the greatest observed distances!\u00a0 Furthermore, the spectra displays elements (other than hydrogen and helium) that shouldn\u2019t have been in the first generation of stars.\u00a0 And yet the ID camp remains in lockstep with the atheists in embrace of the Big Bang.<\/p>\n<p>Let\u2019s move on.\u00a0 Meyer reviews the history and variations of thought within the Big Bang community, and that\u2019s all interesting.\u00a0 The next key area to review, however, is <em>fine tuning<\/em>, \u201cthe discovery that many properties of the universe fall within extremely narrow and improbable ranges that turn out to be absolutely necessary for complex forms of life . . . to exist.\u201d\u00a0 The term \u201canthropic fine tuning\u201d\u00a0 is also used to emphasize that <em>we <\/em>wouldn\u2019t be here to marvel at these \u2018coincidences\u2019 if they hadn\u2019t worked out just right.\u00a0 Atheistic scientists sometimes call it \u201cthe fine-tuning <u>problem<\/u>.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In our \u201cGoldilocks universe\u201d the forces of physics have just the right strengths, the particles have just the right mass, and the initial distribution of matter and energy was organized just right.\u00a0 Stellar and planetary orbits, for example, although Big Bangers like Meyer believe that the initial sub-microscopic ball of mass and energy that expanded into our universe had to be arranged \u2018just right.\u2019<\/p>\n<p>One very particular example of fine-tuning is found in the wonderful properties and abundance of carbon, without which life as we know it would be impossible.\u00a0 Complex organic chemistry with its infinite variety of long, chain-like molecules enables storing and processing genetic information and the execution of all other cellular processes.\u00a0 No other element comes close as a potential substitute for carbon.\u00a0 Carbon\u2019s properties depend critically on its mass, the stability of its nucleus, the strength of the forces of physics at the atomic level, and its abundance in the earth\u2019s crust.<\/p>\n<p>Physicist Paul Davies on fine-tuning:\u00a0 \u201cThe impression of design is overwhelming.\u201d\u00a0 Astrophysicist Luke Barnes:\u00a0 \u201cFine tuning suggests that, at the deepest level that physics has reached, the Universe is well put-together . . . The whole system seems well thought out, something that someone planned and created.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The biblical creationist loves the fine-tuning arguments, but not exactly the same package.\u00a0 God created the universe fully-functioning, according to His brief outline in Genesis chapter 1.\u00a0 He did <em>not <\/em>create it via a fantastical fine-tuning of the mass\/energy in a Big Bang singularity.\u00a0 Roger Penrose calculated the odds against our well-balanced universe of solar systems and galaxies, whereas the by-far-most-likely result from a Big Bang would have been just one giant ball of mass which would collapse into one giant black hole, or at best a number of big black holes.\u00a0 The odds he calculated are 1 in 10 raised to the 10<sup>123<\/sup> power.\u00a0 Yes, the <em>exponent <\/em>is 10 raised to the power of 123.\u00a0 The number is inconceivable.\u00a0 There are \u201conly\u201d about 10<sup>80<\/sup> particles in the entire universe.<\/p>\n<p>The secularists call this a <em>fine-tuning problem<\/em>.\u00a0 No, I call it ridiculous . . . the Big Bang is a ridiculously bad theory.\u00a0 No, God created the planets, stars, and galaxies in a functioning initial state.<\/p>\n<p>Meyer devotes a large section of his book to intelligent design issues in biology.\u00a0 He\u2019s solid on all this, but I\u2019ve written much on this site, including essays on his two previous books, <em>Signature in the Cell<\/em> and <em>Darwin\u2019s Doubt.<\/em>\u00a0 For a brief look at the issues, see my tracts on DNA, Genetic Entropy, and the Fossil Record.<\/p>\n<p>Meyer appropriately comments that late 19<sup>th<\/sup> century scientists assumed that the universe\u2019s fundamental entitities are matter and energy.\u00a0 What has been discovered since then is that <em>information <\/em>is foundational to life, particularly the genetic code and all the brilliantly designed nanomachines that enable you and me and the hundred billion cells in our bodies to operate successfully 24-7-365.<\/p>\n<p>Of course, <em>information <\/em>comes only from a mind, with purpose and intent.<\/p>\n<p>As an ID but anti-creationist, Meyer tells a story of \u201cinformation explosions\u201d throughout history that produced today\u2019s panoply of life.\u00a0 But of course those \u201cinformation explosions\u201d all occurred within the week described in Genesis 1.\u00a0 So we\u2019ll move on again.<\/p>\n<p>Regarding the question of what <em>caused <\/em>the Big Bang, naturalists \/ atheists have suggested such ideas as eternal, chaotic inflation, supposing that our universe arose out of an already eternally existing multiverse or, somehow, an eternally preexistent set of conditions that allowed for a Big Bang beginning to ours.\u00a0 There are no evidences, of course, for a multiverse and there are foundational philosophical reasons to deny an infinitely eternal past, as elucidated by Christian philosophers J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig.<\/p>\n<p>The eternal past impossibility is defeated by biblical doctrine \u2013 God as described in the Bible is beyond space and time, since He created all that, and as a free agent with free will could \u201cinitiate a new chain of cause and effect without being compelled by any prior material conditions.\u201d\u00a0 Therefore, there is no \u201cinfinite regress of prior material states.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>A God with free will makes sense to most people, who live as if by their own free will.\u00a0 If you deny you have free will, as any serious materialist must, then to whom am I talking?\u00a0 Is it just brain chemistry making noise?\u00a0 Is there a <em>you<\/em> in there?\u00a0 Reason and rationality require free will.\u00a0 Meyer also notes that in pantheism, god is part of the universe and so cannot have caused it.<\/p>\n<p>Meyer critiques some assertions of naturalists, for example that everything we see simply derives, necessarily, from the laws of physics.\u00a0 But that cannot be true.\u00a0 The values of the physical constants (speed of light, gravitational constant, charge of the electron, Planck\u2019s constant) could have different values under the same set of laws (Maxwellian or quantum electrodynamics, Einsteinian gravity).\u00a0 Additionally, the initial conditions (number of stars and their orbits) are completely independent of the physical laws, as any freshman physics student comes to understand.<\/p>\n<p>Meyer also critiques theistic evolution, espoused by those who believe that evolution is true, but somehow in an undetectable way, God used evolution to generate life and guide it to the present day.\u00a0 This position is trivially refuted by a Bible-believing Christian, and is scientifically refuted by checking that mutations and natural selection are woefully inadequate for the generation of even miniscule amounts of the information content of life.\u00a0 (See my DNA tract and several of my essays in this area.)<\/p>\n<p>Some suggest a \u201cfront-loaded\u201d version of theistic evolution which posits that the Big Bang\u2019s initial conditions were so finely tuned that not only do we get all the stars and their orbits just right, but also the apparently random molecular conditions that resulted in the first cell and all of life after that.\u00a0 Wow!\u00a0 What faith might that entail!\u00a0 No, the 2<sup>nd<\/sup> law of thermodynamics and all of its implications (plus quantum indeterminacy) have been with us from the beginning and are evident in both laboratories and in life\u2019s experiences.\u00a0 To suggest a secret thread of molecular lottery winnings that are undetectable \u2013 in principle! \u2013 begs the question of why don\u2019t you just believe that God did it the way He said He did?<\/p>\n<p>Specifically, Meyer explains:\u00a0 \u201cThe second law of thermodynamics implies that any biologically relevant information-rich configurations of mass and energy present at the beginning of the universe would dissipate over time.\u201d\u00a0 He also mentions that Claude Shannon\u2019s tenth theorem indicates that only an external source of information or control could prevent that tendency . . . so God would have to be involved all along, once again.<\/p>\n<p>Meyer points out the obvious truth that there is no materialistic explanation to\u00a0 close the causal gap between a preexisting nothing and the existence of the universe.\u00a0 Physicists Stephen Hawking and Lawrence Krauss have suggested that the laws of physics can explain how everything came to be, but this is false on its face.\u00a0 The laws of physics are <em>descriptive <\/em>of what is observed in an already existing universe.\u00a0 These descriptors have no power to create or cause existence.<\/p>\n<p>Hawking:\u00a0 \u201cThe universe was spontaneously created out of nothing, according to the laws of science.\u201d\u00a0 Go ahead, Stephen, explain that . . . or are you just blustering for a popular readership?\u00a0 Hawking\u2019s dereliction in reasoning was motivated by his depressing atheism:\u00a0 \u201cI think belief in an afterlife is just wishful thinking . . . When we die, we return to dust.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, the laws of physics are woefully incomplete, requiring enormous extrinsic information about initial and boundary conditions, amounts and kinds of matter, etc.\u00a0 Furthermore, the initial or current conditions (orbits) are finely tuned with respect to the laws of physics.\u00a0 The whole system is finely tuned without any part of the system \u2018causing\u2019 any other part of the system.<\/p>\n<p>Atheists threaten us that a belief in God stops the advance of science.\u00a0 Historian Stephen Snobelen reports that Newton\u2019s belief in God and God\u2019s interaction with His creation informed rather than hindered Newton\u2019s work.\u00a0 Newton saw God as (1) the source and sustainer of the universe\u2019s mathematical order, and (2) the intelligent designer of the solar system.\u00a0 These ideas <em>inspired <\/em>Newton\u2019s science.\u00a0 Newton\u2019s treatise, <em>Principia<\/em>, was intended to bring glory to God and His genius.\u00a0 Sir Isaac Newton was arguably the greatest scientist in man\u2019s history.<\/p>\n<p>When Meyer began his teaching career he created a course called \u201cReasons for Faith,\u201d in response to challenges from a frustrated agnostic student who couldn\u2019t get satisfactory answers from his Christian classmates.\u00a0 The student was shocked to hear that Meyer thought that such evidences exist.\u00a0 Meyer cites a poll that two-thirds of atheists believe \u201cthe findings of science make the existence of God less probable.\u201d\u00a0 The evolution scam is the core underlying reason for such unbelief.\u00a0 That\u2019s why I have created so many Gospel tracts that target the evolution scam.<\/p>\n<p>As a junior in college Meyer ran into a thought from French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre:\u00a0 \u201cNo finite point has any meaning unless it has an infinite reference point.\u201d\u00a0 Without God there is no meaning in human life \u2013 our mortality means that anything we achieve will be forgotten.\u00a0 But with God as He reveals Himself in the Bible, there is an eternal and self-existent Creator, the \u201cI AM,\u201d who is both holy and loving and provides THE way for an eternal relationship with Him.\u00a0 <em>Everything we do then matters.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Lawrence Krauss seems to have an idea that we can fake meaning . . . \u201cWe make our own purpose.\u00a0 We make our own joy.\u00a0 We are here by a cosmic accident, as I\u2019ve tried to show, but it\u2019s a remarkable accident that\u2019s allowed you and I to be here to talk, to think and appreciate the beauty and splendor of the universe.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Sartre would have considered this inauthentic.\u00a0 He faced up to the consequences of the alleged \u201ccosmic accident\u201d and professed that without a transcendent God people are left in a state of \u201canguish, forlornness, and despair.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>However . . . when we authentically recognize that we are made in God\u2019s image, but our sins have condemned us, condemned us even in our own God-given conscience, and we see that we need forgiveness, it is supremely <em>rational <\/em>to repent, trust Christ for salvation, and live a life in touch with reality, mindful of eternity.<\/p>\n<p>Meyer concludes his book, encouragingly, \u201cBut since meaning can only be recognized and conferred by persons, and is arguably found best in relationship between persons, the return of the God hypothesis also revives a hopeful possibility \u2013 that our search for ultimate meaning need not end in vain.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Where Meyer falls disastrously short, though, is his neglect of an affirmation and exhortation that meaning is found only through salvation in the Lord Jesus Christ.\u00a0 It\u2019s not enough to be a theist \u2013 even Satan is a theist.\u00a0 You must be born again, via repentance and faith.\u00a0 How tragic for Meyer and any of his readers if they stop short of salvation, and spend an eternity of regret in the Lake of Fire.\u00a0 How tragic to suffer, possibly, ridicule from demons likewise condemned, who knew <em>of <\/em>God, but never knew God, never willing to humble themselves and enjoy the richness of both this creation and the renewed creation of the ages to come.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n180. Money, Greed, and God<br \/>\nMarch 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The heart of free enterprise is that we are individually made in the image of God.\u00a0 \u201cOur creative freedom reflects that divine image,\u201d writes Jay W. Richards in his 2019 edition of <em>Money, Greed, and God:\u00a0 The Christian Case for Free Enterprise.<\/em>\u00a0 Market economies feature competition, private property, and rational self-interest.\u00a0 But the <em>heart <\/em>\u00a0of free enterprise is our God-given capacity to create wealth, to defy zero-sum thinking whereby someone wins only if someone else loses.\u00a0 Poverty can only be overcome by the creation of wealth.<\/p>\n<p>So what is the source of material wealth?\u00a0 Richards argues that the source is spiritual.\u00a0 Free societies produce inventors, producers, problem solvers, and creators who use their imaginations to transform material resources into new and useful products and services.\u00a0 \u201cMan, not matter, is the ultimate resource.\u201d\u00a0 The more people in the free society, the more creators, the more the economy grows.\u00a0 Labor-saving devices are invented to increase individual productivity, which was described by philosopher Luis de Molina as \u201cthe fruit of our ingenuity.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It was more difficult for me than usual to pull out a few choice nuggets from Richards\u2019 book because there are just so many!\u00a0 But let\u2019s try.\u00a0 Do pick up this book and have your children read it, too, <em>before <\/em>they finish high school.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cMarxism has not only failed to promote human freedom, it has failed to produce food.\u201d\u00a0 &#8212; American novelist John Dos Passos<\/p>\n<p>Karl Marx had predicted that contradictions in capitalism would produce a workers\u2019 revolt, but that this would be a necessary step in social evolution.\u00a0 Then private property would be abolished and a just socialist state would be created, on the way to a communist utopia in which the state would \u201cwither away\u201d and we all would live in prosperity, peace, and freedom.<\/p>\n<p>Reality clashed with Marx\u2019s 19<sup>th<\/sup> century prophecies, even during his lifetime when workers\u2019 wages were rising.\u00a0 When the socialist \/ communist revolution finally did succeed in Russia in 1917, it was led by power-lusting intellectuals in an agrarian culture that had no association with either democracy or capitalism.<\/p>\n<p>Harvard historian Richard Pipes:\u00a0 \u201cCommunism did not come to Russia as the result of a popular uprising; it was imposed on her from above by a small minority hiding behind democratic slogans.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I see striking parallels in America and the rest of the West today.\u00a0 Today\u2019s political and corporate elites work hard to impose a socialist tyranny on the middle class whose hundreds of millions of people simply want to be left alone to live their lives in freedom.\u00a0 The socialists of today work to emulate Lenin who set up a one-party state that \u201cfilled every nook and cranny of Russian society.\u201d\u00a0 He politicized <em>everything.<\/em>\u00a0 Sound familiar?<\/p>\n<p>Lenin centralized most of the Russian economy, \u201cfrom industry and trade to education and transportation.\u00a0 This required secret police, a massive bureaucracy, and the widespread use of terror.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Productivity tanked.\u00a0 Industrial production in 1920 was 18% of the level in 1913, there were half as many workers employed, and living standards fell to one-third of their pre-war level.\u00a0 I won\u2019t go on regarding the economic disasters, slaughters, and famines of the Stalin period, but if you\u2019re not familiar with that history, you should shore up your education.\u00a0 Richards\u2019 overall conclusion in this historical section is that, against Marx\u2019s expectations, revolutions do not spring up in advanced industrial societies with a strong rule of law, but rather are enabled in poor agrarian cultures where despots can flourish.<\/p>\n<p>A group of scholars led by Stephane Courtois documented the communist death toll in a tome called <em>The Black Book of Communism<\/em>, published in 1999.\u00a0 As many as 100 million human beings died due to communist policies and atrocities during the 20<sup>th<\/sup> century.\u00a0 Richards:\u00a0 \u201cNever has an idea had such catastrophic consequences . . . Extreme moral passion minus reality equals mass death.\u201d\u00a0 Beware of such political leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Thomas Sowell:\u00a0 \u201cSocialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Richards mentions the experience of the early church in Jerusalem in Acts chapter 4, which is sometimes described as a communist experiment.\u00a0 It was no such thing, of course.\u00a0 The sharing was entirely voluntary and the state was nowhere in sight.\u00a0 (Other than in persecuting the new Christians who then responded with charitable sharing in order to survive.)<\/p>\n<p>When Ananias gets judged in Acts 5 it is clear that his sin was <em>lying.\u00a0 <\/em>\u00a0His property and its proceeds were his to keep or to give, in part or in whole.\u00a0 But he lied and the Holy Spirit needed an example to insure that His church started out on the right track.\u00a0 Furthermore, this early church experience was not normative for future church life.\u00a0 The circumstances (persecution) were special.<\/p>\n<p>Ronald Reagan:\u00a0 \u201cSocialism only works in heaven, where they don\u2019t need it, and in hell where they already have it.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Mao was the worst of the worst socialists in history.\u00a0 See my essays on both Mao and Stalin.\u00a0 Richards suggests Mao\u2019s communist dystopia \u201ctried to draw heaven down to earth.\u00a0 They brought up hell instead.\u201d\u00a0 In socialism, he points out, it\u2019s not that no one controls the property.\u00a0 Rather, it means the state must confiscate or control whatever property is held privately.\u00a0 This is what the <em>Great Reset<\/em> is about in today\u2019s world, illustrated by the efforts to squash the Canadian truckers and the Dutch farmers, and the generations-long American leftist efforts to monopolize education under the state, making war against Christian, private, and home schools.<\/p>\n<p>Richards describes the Nirvana Myth promoted by Marxists:\u00a0 \u201cIt\u2019s the delusion that we can build utopia if we try hard enough, and that every real society is intolerably wicked because it doesn\u2019t measure up to our ideal.\u201d\u00a0 And in the Marxist version, thou shalt never mention God, sin, Jesus, or an afterlife.\u00a0 Everything is here and now and politics is the only religion.<\/p>\n<p>And then there\u2019s \u201cThe Piety Myth\u201d which involves \u201cfocusing on our good intentions rather than on the real consequences of our actions.\u201d\u00a0 Richards applies this to foreign aid, citing Bob Geldof:\u00a0 \u201cSomething must be done, even if it doesn\u2019t work.\u201d\u00a0 (This anti-principle has broad applications, of course, from gun control laws to stimulus packages to racial hiring and school admission quotas, etc., etc.)<\/p>\n<p>In the foreign aid application, rich countries give all kinds of things to poor countries.\u00a0 For example, the US overproduces cotton because of subsidies that inflate the price.\u00a0 We have to dump the excess cotton somewhere, so we dump it on poor countries as \u201caid,\u201d but that drives cotton farmers in those countries out of business.<\/p>\n<p>Considerable \u201caid\u201d goes to prop up dictators who waste the money on projects that maximize their power.\u00a0 In one case refugees who had to flee from an \u201caided\u201d dictator were also awarded \u201caid,\u201d just to be fair.\u00a0 Analysis has shown <strong><em>no <\/em><\/strong>correlation between the \u201caid\u201d a country receives and its economic growth.<\/p>\n<p>The myth creates havoc inside our country as well.\u00a0 Peter Drucker once stated that by the 1960s \u201cit had become accepted doctrine in all Western countries that government is the appropriate agent for all social problems and all social tasks.\u201d\u00a0 Well, of course.\u00a0 Once you deny God\u2019s existence and the way He wired reality, government fills the moral vacuum.<\/p>\n<p>George Gilder wrote in <em>Wealth and Poverty,<\/em> \u201cIt is extremely difficult to transfer value to people in a way that actually helps them.\u00a0 Excessive welfare hurts its recipients, demoralizing them or reducing them to an addictive dependency that can ruin their lives.\u201d Taking the property or money from one group to prop up another is a lose-lose game.\u00a0 You coerce one and degrade the other.\u00a0 Urban America has been a disaster since the 1960s, when the welfare state began to destroy black communities.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God instructed the Jews to leave the leftover \u201cgleanings\u201d in the field at the end of the harvest to allow the poor or the sojourners to gather what they needed.\u00a0 Such charity is practical, gracious, and limited.\u00a0 You cannot grow widespread wealth in this manner.\u00a0 To grow wealth across a society you need property rights, the rule of law, trade, enterprise and <em>personal virtues <\/em>like diligence, thrift, and ingenuity.\u00a0 The culture must foster trust, delayed gratification, and a hopeful vision of the future.<\/p>\n<p>Most of these factors are moral and derive from biblical principles.\u00a0 The legal issues are for government to <em>get out of the way<\/em> and let people build their own businesses and their own lives.<\/p>\n<p>Richards cautions Christian ministries to treat people in impoverished lands as \u201cfully spiritual beings rather than mere mouths to feed.\u201d\u00a0 Instilling Christian values will transform the culture and reduce poverty far better than cool celebrity-led campaigns.<\/p>\n<p>It should also be obvious to Christians in ministry that when people are truly converted, the indwelling Holy Spirit will provide wisdom, courage, and strength and the new believer can get prayers answered!<\/p>\n<p><em>The Zero-Sum Game Myth . . . believing that trade requires a winner and a loser<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Richards does some short case studies to illustrate that free markets create new and bigger \u201cpies.\u201d\u00a0 (Life is not just about political fights that divvy up a constant pie.)<\/p>\n<p>In 1958 Leonard Read wrote an essay, \u201cI, Pencil.\u201d\u00a0 A pencil is not as simple as it might seem.\u00a0 Read explained (speaking as a pencil), \u201cnot a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me.\u201d\u00a0 What goes into a pencil includes cedar trees in California, with saws and trucks and ropes and other equipment built all over the country.\u00a0 There are trains to transport the wood, electricity from a dam to power the manufacturing plant, graphite from Sri Lanka, clay from Mississippi, other chemicals from who knows where, wax from Mexico, brass from copper mines to hold the eraser, factice from Indonesia and pumice from Italy to make the eraser.\u00a0 Nobody on earth has all the skills and knowledge to go out and make a pencil from scratch.<\/p>\n<p>The iPhone is the quintessential modern example.\u00a0 I won\u2019t go through the analogous description of its complexity and parts, not to mention the internet which facilitates a smartphone\u2019s function, and the associated computers, servers, fiber-optic cables, satellites, etc., etc.\u00a0 Millions of people are involved in the creation and production of smartphones.<\/p>\n<p>Smartphones wouldn\u2019t exist without free markets.\u00a0 \u201cWe hear a lot about the brutish, competitive nature of capitalism, about the one percent and ninety-nine percent, winners and losers, survival of the fittest, and all that.\u00a0 Some of us may even have downloaded a podcast on the subject right onto our iPhones.\u00a0 We hear far too little about the miracles of free cooperation and interdependence that free markets have made possible . . . We should take no critic seriously who does not first recognize this virtue.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Richards argues that the best way to get ahead for everyone is not by theft, fraud, and slavery, but by working to meet the needs and wants of customers.\u00a0 \u201cAnd everyone is a customer.\u00a0 The logic of competition . . . is about serving customers better than your competitors.\u201d\u00a0 No other scheme comes close in producing wealth and well-being for multitudes of people.<\/p>\n<p><em>The Materialist Myth . . . believing that wealth isn\u2019t created, it\u2019s simply transferred<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Winston Churchill:\u00a0 \u201cThe inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.\u201d\u00a0 Indeed, socialist cures are worse than the disease.\u00a0 America\u2019s tyrannical responses to COVID, for example, produced far more misery and death than did the virus.<\/p>\n<p>A nation\u2019s wealth is not a physical object to be divided up, Richards notes.\u00a0 Wealth can and does grow, if simple conditions are met.\u00a0 Compare what people have today with 100 or even 200 years ago.\u00a0 In 2011 a study was done concerning what 30 million \u201cpoor\u201d Americans (poor as classified by the U.S. Census Bureau) possessed:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A car, air conditioning, two color TVs, cable or satellite TV access, and a DVD player.<\/li>\n<li>They were not hungry and had access to medical care when needed.<\/li>\n<li>They had more living space in their homes than the average (non-poor) European.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Compared with America\u2019s upper class, they might be considered poor . . . relatively speaking.\u00a0 But <em>really poor <\/em>people suffer around the world today, living on a few dollars per day, many going hungry.\u00a0 About 11 million children die before they are five years old.\u00a0 The reasons include tyranny, tribal conflicts, corruption, no property rights, and no hope to change any of the above.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the complaining about the economy in America derives from envy about the <em>really wealthy <\/em>in their country.<\/p>\n<p>In America opportunities abound to increase personal or family wealth.\u00a0 Most people change their income class dramatically as they age.\u00a0 One legal factor mentioned before is property rights, that enable you to establish a home or a business.\u00a0 These rights are purely conceptual, represented by a title that establishes in the minds of others that you have exclusive rights over an asset.\u00a0 This gives you the freedom to invest and build without fear of arbitrary confiscation.\u00a0 \u201cIn general, the more a country protects private property, the more prosperous the citizens of that country will be.\u201d\u00a0 Property taxes work against this principle.\u00a0 If the taxes grow too onerous to pay, the government will foreclose, effectively making the government your landlord.\u00a0 With property taxes, no one really owns their own property.<\/p>\n<p>How fast can markets create wealth?\u00a0 Consider the inventions, innovations, and development around telephones, lightbulbs, jet aircraft, rockets, computers, MRIs, and antibiotics over the last century.\u00a0 The growth is exponential.<\/p>\n<p><em>The Greed Myth . . . believing that the essence of free enterprise is greed.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Free markets derive from the Golden Rule, Matthew 7:12.\u00a0 Our decisions must include care for others, but we are <em>most<\/em> responsible for our own family, our own neighbors, and our own community.\u00a0 We\u2019re not omniscient and so cannot agonize over everything, from a kitten thirsty for milk in Mumbai to an old lady needing help to cross the street in Buenos Aires.\u00a0 So we cannot predict the consequences of all our actions everywhere.\u00a0 The complexity of free markets might invoke the butterfly effect as much as weather forecasting does.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, we necessarily pursue \u201cself-interests\u201d due to limited knowledge.\u00a0 The success of free markets involves multitudes making rational and fair choices about value and prices.\u00a0 The \u2018analog computer\u2019 consisting of networks of billions of consumers and producers works best at generating wealth for the multitudes when most people do what seems right and just to them personally.<\/p>\n<p>Richards:\u00a0 \u201cAny system that requires everyone always to act selflessly is doomed to failure because it\u2019s utopian.\u00a0 People aren\u2019t like that.\u201d\u00a0 Socialism does not fit the human condition.\u00a0 It defies reality.<\/p>\n<p>Adam Smith\u2019s <em>invisible hand<\/em> is illustrated by the idea that even if the butcher is selfish, and that he would love to sell you spoiled meat in exchange for everything you own, he <em>cannot <\/em>make you buy his meat in a free economy.\u00a0 In his own self-interest he has to satisfy your desires if he wants to stay in business.\u00a0 Win-win.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast, when a government controls all health care, it is extremely expensive, you have no choice but to buy it (you pay the taxes), and the resulting monopoly inevitably provides poor service.\u00a0 Real people suffer and die unnecessarily.\u00a0 Dictating lockdowns and vaccine mandates have demonstrably caused economic suffering, health disasters, and increased death rates far beyond what would have ensued if people had been allowed to make their own informed choices.<\/p>\n<p>In free markets, entrepreneurs create in competition with other entrepreneurs to see who can best satisfy the needs and wants of real people in the market.\u00a0 They do it to make money, of course, but they only make money if they are in touch with what people want.\u00a0 This is simple stuff!\u00a0 And yet the elite in politics, industry, and academia strive for socialism, as long as they get to be in charge.<\/p>\n<p>Are people selfish in a free market?\u00a0 Richards cites statistics that free economies correlate with the most charitable giving and that the higher the taxes, the less people give.\u00a0 I\u2019ve always believed that if welfare programs were zeroed out and taxes were reduced accordingly, that charitable giving would more than make up for whatever safety net is needed.\u00a0 Furthermore, with more people working because they <em>can and must<\/em>, tax revenues would increase even as rates decline.\u00a0 This was demonstrated dramatically in the 1980s in the Reagan presidency, in the 1920s under Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, and in the 1960s under JFK.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible has a lot to say about private property and treating our neighbors honestly in business.\u00a0 The 10 commandments tell us not to lie, steal, or even covet what does not belong to us.\u00a0 Instructions in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the parables of Jesus speak to the virtues of honest and fair business dealings with others.\u00a0 If we obey God\u2019s commandments at the micro-scale, person-to-person, it is evident that He has designed human reality to work effectively at the macro-scale.\u00a0 At the macroscale, governments and nation-to-nation, God also has much to say, of course; for example in 2 Samuel 23:3, \u201cThe God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In summary, free markets built atop a just system of laws that assure private property ownership and punishment of theft and corruption, are the natural outcome of a biblical worldview.\u00a0 Richards\u2019 book concludes with, \u201cSeen in its proper light, the market order is as awe inspiring as a sunset or a perfect eclipse.\u00a0 It might not be enough to convince the skeptic that God exists, but surely the believer should see in it God\u2019s glory.\u00a0 At the very least, it should settle the question we started with:\u00a0 Can a Christian support free enterprise?\u00a0 The answer is surely yes.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>This is a book I believe should be in every Christian\u2019s library.\u00a0 Read it with your children and discuss it in light of the news of the day.\u00a0 It will help equip the young against the relentless and pervasive leftist indoctrination they will experience when they enter the fray.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212; <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n181. How Goes Your Quest?<br \/>\nApril 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Actor Marlon Brando reached the pinnacle of Hollywood fame and success, but near the end of his life said, \u201cLife is a mystery and an unsolvable one.\u00a0 You just simply live it through, and as you draw your last breath you say, &#8220;What was that all about?\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p>How pitiful, yet how reflective of a life without God, without hope, without meaning.\u00a0 The Brando quote is cited by Os Guinness in his 2022 book, <em>The Great Quest:\u00a0 Invitation to an Examined Life and a Sure Path to Meaning.<\/em>\u00a0 Guinness calls the reader to this great quest, a search for meaning as the key to make the most of life and find \u201cfulfillment in all you do.\u201d\u00a0 If you are not consciously on this quest, \u201cyou will always to some degree be sleepwalking through your existence.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The stakes are infinite because each life extends into eternity and eternity\u2019s destination depends, of course, on discovering the essence of reality, God\u2019s reality, and <strong>truth<\/strong> in the person of the Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ.\u00a0 Miss that . . . miss Jesus . . . and you\u2019ve missed everything.\u00a0 There is no greater tragedy.\u00a0 \u201cThe quest is existential because you are staking your very existence on the outcome of what you discover.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Some try to avoid the quest, but \u201cman cannot live on cynicism alone,\u201d Guinness observes.\u00a0 I\u2019ve run into some who pretend to, especially among college students.\u00a0 They love to criticize, to mock, to take shots at the Christian worldview, for example.\u00a0 They act as if they do not embrace a worldview of their own, that must be defended rationally if they would claim the intellectual high ground.\u00a0 Typically materialists, they fail to realize that rationality itself is excluded by materialism \u2013 if matter is everything then the next thing they say is derived from random brain chemistry.<\/p>\n<p>Some are cocky, living as if they were \u201cgodless self-gods\u201d who think they\u2019ve got it all figured out.\u00a0 After our global pandemic, though, who can really believe we control our own destiny?\u00a0 I\u2019ve met some of these, too.\u00a0 I ask them if they can, with their godlike powers, forego sleep and bowel movements for the next week.<\/p>\n<p>Many just don\u2019t think much at all about ultimate questions.\u00a0 Most unbelievers, when I ask them if they ever think about what will become of them when they die, they reply, \u201cAll the time.\u201d\u00a0 What they mean is that thoughts of their mortality intrude on them frequently, but they refuse to dwell on it, which is so easy to do in this generation which holds the internet literally in the palm of its hand.<\/p>\n<p>Life is filled with duties and chores and relationships, and whenever a moment of free time invades our consciousness, an entire world of news, entertainment, and endless distraction is a click away.\u00a0 Who wants to think deep thoughts, troubling thoughts?\u00a0 Blaise Pascal, the 17<sup>th<\/sup> century mathematician, concluded that most prefer not to think about death and so surround themselves with distractions.\u00a0 Guinness suggests that we moderns are not just surrounded by diversions; rather, \u201cwe are mesmerized by them, and we rarely lift our minds to think beyond them.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Guinness notes that \u201cwe lose the curiosity we had as children.\u201d\u00a0 Life is astonishing, from dewdrops, dandelions, and dogs, to the sun, moon, stars, and galaxies.\u00a0 So how did everything get here?\u00a0 Why am I here?\u00a0 To whom am I responsible?\u00a0 What\u2019s right, what\u2019s wrong, and how do I judge the difference?\u00a0 And then what?\u00a0 What happens when my life is snuffed out?<\/p>\n<p>There\u2019s a legend that a London cabbie asked the famous mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell what he thought was the meaning of life.\u00a0 Russell was flummoxed.\u00a0 He griped, \u201cOnly precise questions deserve precise answers.\u201d\u00a0 Finally, the best he had to offer was, \u201cThe universe is just there, and that\u2019s all.\u201d\u00a0 Pitiful.\u00a0 It\u2019s just giving up.\u00a0 He should have resigned his claim to be a philosopher, which implies a love of truth, a desire to understand.\u00a0 Socrates\u2019 challenge still stands:\u00a0 \u201cThe unexamined life is not worth living.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cMan cannot stand a meaningless life.\u201d\u00a0 <\/em>&#8212; Psychologist Carl Gustav Jung<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cThe drive to make sense out of experience, to give it form and order, is evidently as real and pressing as the more biological needs.\u201d\u00a0 <\/em>&#8212; Anthropologist Clifford Geertz<\/p>\n<p>This has certainly been true for me.\u00a0 As a young atheist I yearned for meaning, desperately, and this opened me up to the Gospel.\u00a0 (You can find my testimony on this site if you want the gory details.)\u00a0 Guinness is amazed that so many people are careless about pursuing and finding answers to the ultimate questions.\u00a0 I am, too.\u00a0 I don\u2019t identify at all with the careless metaphysical drifter, no matter how well educated, successful, and driven in worldly ways.\u00a0 Faced with the existential crisis of how to <em>live <\/em>day by day and how to face death and eternity, how is it possible to not care enough to find answers!?!<\/p>\n<p>Some engage in <em>bargaining<\/em>.\u00a0 We\u2019ll deal with the question later, we promise ourselves, after we\u2019ve graduated, or once we get a better job, or when we\u2019ve got more time, or, worst . . . after we\u2019ve retired.\u00a0 Jesus dealt with this issue, in part, in the parable we find in Luke 12:13-21, which includes the warning, \u201cThou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee:\u00a0 then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Guinness contrasts two modes of thinking that have shaped the West \u2013 the Greek and the Jewish.\u00a0 The Greeks tended to think that reason alone can be employed to investigate both the natural and supernatural realms.\u00a0 The Jews believed that truth about God and His creation must be found through narratives and experience.\u00a0 Both Jews and Christians saw God as personal and known through relationship.\u00a0 Knowing <em>about <\/em>God and <em>knowing <\/em>God are very different things.\u00a0 Both aspects are possible only if and as God reveals Himself to us.\u00a0 Thus, we have the Bible and the born again experience, followed by living life led by the Spirit of God, insofar as we allow Him to lead us.<\/p>\n<p>Now, Guinness is a Christian and so his thesis is that the only quest in touch with reality is the one that leads to <em>knowing <\/em>Jesus as Lord and Saviour.\u00a0 The Gospel is both motivation and solution in that, realizing we are sinners, we seek the one and only Saviour, who shed His blood on a cruel cross and raised Himself from the dead . . . a demonstration and a promise that we can share.\u00a0 We need forgiveness and we crave life, eternal life, and only Jesus has the technology to give us bodies that live in good health forever \u2013 resurrection bodies.<\/p>\n<p>Guinness contrasts conceptual truths where you can \u201ctake it or leave it,\u201d with existential truths on which you stake your life and your eternity.\u00a0 There are useful and useless methods to find truth.\u00a0 Bertrand Russell claimed that \u201cwhat science cannot discover, man cannot know.\u201d\u00a0 This is <em>scientism<\/em>, and is both preposterous and self-refuting.\u00a0 1<sup>st<\/sup>, self refuting:\u00a0 You cannot use the scientific method, for example (observing, counting, weighing, measuring, hypothesizing, testing), to prove that \u201cwhat science cannot discover, man cannot know.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>2<sup>nd<\/sup>, preposterous:\u00a0 Try to prove your love for your wife with math, logic, and scientific instruments.\u00a0 Faith, meaning, purpose, hope, love, integrity and all that is important to human life cannot be verified in test tubes or reduced to mathematical formulae.<\/p>\n<p>Guinness encourages us that to embark on the examined life, we cannot outsource the work and we cannot make a lackadaisical effort.\u00a0 We must do the work and the thinking and the emotional struggling.\u00a0 When I was confronted with the Gospel as a teenager, it took me a few months to figure out that it was <strong>true<\/strong>.\u00a0 Once I realized that Jesus is who He said He was, it took me less than a minute to decide to act on that truth.<\/p>\n<p>The author challenges us to use our <em>reason<\/em>, to be aware of our <em>conscience<\/em>, and to engage a living sense of <em>wonder<\/em>.\u00a0 No matter what is <strong>true <\/strong>about creation, human life, and our individual life and destiny, what is true will certainly be amazing.\u00a0 If we decide materialism is true and we derive from stardust, that would be amazing.\u00a0 If we realize we are made in the image of God and that God loves us and offers us redemption and eternal life, that is amazing.\u00a0 There is no neutral, mundane worldview that grapples with the wonder of what we see and experience.<\/p>\n<p>He cautions the young who are immersed in social media.\u00a0 Do not be content with the opinions of others.\u00a0 Don\u2019t go with the flow.\u00a0 Don\u2019t do a quick internet search . . . unless you find a truly insightful website, like truthreallymatters.com.<\/p>\n<p>Phase 1 of the search that Os outlines is <em>a time for questions.<\/em>\u00a0 Questions are vital for the quest.\u00a0 Few people, he claims, keep asking questions.\u00a0 I\u2019ve experienced this in that over the many years I have engaged in 1-2-1 evangelism, oh-so-rarely do I encounter a new question.\u00a0 Most of the time people don\u2019t have <em>any <\/em>questions that are forefront in their minds.\u00a0 No questions means they are content to drift along as they are.\u00a0 A good question, however, presents a challenge that cannot be ducked.\u00a0 When I was searching, I <em>had <\/em>to find answers.\u00a0 And answers were there to be found.\u00a0 God makes sure of that.<\/p>\n<p>To settle on a particular answer, you must be convinced it is objectively true, not just true for you, but true whether anyone else believes it or not.\u00a0 We live in a skeptical age, but also a \u201cspiritually and intellectually stunted\u201d age, cut off from not only the rich conversations and debates of previous generations, but also from a healthy culture that encourages or even allows open debates.\u00a0 Question the orthodoxy of the woke meme of the day at your own peril!<\/p>\n<p>How is it other than insane that the latest outrageous woke assertion cannot even be questioned?\u00a0 Can\u2019t I even ask someone to <em>explain<\/em> an idea that overturns thousands of years of wisdom and experience?<\/p>\n<p>Immanuel Kant suggested four big questions:\u00a0 \u201cWhat can we know?\u201d\u00a0 \u201cWhat must we do?\u201d\u00a0 \u201cWhat can we hope for?\u201d\u00a0 \u201cWhat is man?\u201d\u00a0 French artist Paul Gauguin summed it up in three:\u00a0 \u201cWhere do we come from?\u201d\u00a0 \u201cWhat are we?\u201d\u00a0 \u201cWhere are we going?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Everyone has some answers to these questions, ergo, everyone has a faith, a personal philosophy, a worldview.\u00a0 I discovered this by experience when I started knocking doors for my Sunday School bus route in the 1970s.\u00a0 From the most to the least educated, from the richest to the poorest, everyone had figured out, they thought, what it was all about, whether they spent anytime thinking about it or not.\u00a0 They bet their lives and eternities on faith, <em>some<\/em> faith, whether they had any good reasons or not.\u00a0 On such faiths, blind or sighted, people decide on identities and morality, and whether they have any hope for the future.<\/p>\n<p>Os tells the story of Charles Handy, an eminent British management guru, who was astonished as he attended his father\u2019s funeral.\u00a0 His apparently mundane, modest father had touched the lives of hundreds in profound ways.\u00a0 \u201cI had put my faith until that moment, in success, money, and family, probably in that order.\u00a0 I still think these things are important, but I hanker after a bigger frame in which to put them.\u201d\u00a0 He suddenly saw the difference, as David Brooks puts it, between the \u201cresume self\u201d and the \u201ceulogy self.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The crucial years, Os states, are from eighteen to twenty-five, the Big Seven, in which people think through their biggest decisions \u2013 who they are, which career, who to marry, which worldview.\u00a0 Accordingly, I find the most interesting and rewarding 121s are on or near college campuses.\u00a0 Just walk up to a college student, offer him a tract, and ask him if he has figured out what the purpose of life is.\u00a0 Generally, he\u2019ll talk to you.\u00a0 But a few years later he might well brush you off after his heart and mind have ossified on some false worldly philosophy.<\/p>\n<p>Some people have <em>signals <\/em>that puncture their complacency or awareness.\u00a0 Fyodor Dostoevsky was ecstatic after a last-minute reprieve from execution.\u00a0 He reexamined his life, all the wasted time, laziness, errors, etc., and set out on a new path.\u00a0 For Swiss sculptor Alberto Giacometti it was the death of a friend, \u201ca hole torn in life.\u201d\u00a0 For me it was a divine encounter with a Christian when I was at the absolute nadir of my atheistic lifepath.\u00a0 Even without a dramatic <em>signal<\/em>, though, everyone\u2019s life has elements of transcendence, if they are open to them.<\/p>\n<p>I had a moment about fifteen years ago that gave me a glimpse of Heaven.\u00a0 Families had gathered at our house at Christmastime.\u00a0 I was sitting on the living room floor with our daughter, Elizabeth, and our infant grandson Eli and . . . the moment was <em>perfect.<\/em>\u00a0 Everything was just right, just as it ought to be, a glimpse of <em>justrightness <\/em>that I\u2019m sure we\u2019ll experience in the ages to come.<\/p>\n<p>The second phase is <em>a time for answers<\/em>.\u00a0 There are countless answers, but only one will be \u201cilluminating and truly adequate.\u201d\u00a0 Now, this book by Os Guinness is not an apologetic discourse on why the Christian faith is the unique and soul-saving answer.\u00a0 He admits that.\u00a0 I\u2019ve written much and reviewed many books on this site that serve that purpose.\u00a0 What Os is attempting is to stir up the desire for the quest in the heart of the reader.\u00a0 He (and I) are confident that God has wired every one of His image-bearers to recognize the <strong>truth <\/strong>if they sincerely seek it.<\/p>\n<p>C.S. Lewis offers the heart of presuppositional apologetics when he writes, \u201cI believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.\u201d What I do not like about evidential apologetics is that is focuses on detailed evidences, and entrusts the rebel (unbeliever) to sit in the Judge\u2019s seat to decide whether the evidence is good enough.\u00a0 Alternatively, presuppositional apologetics starts with the presupposition that the Bible is true, and suggests that now you can see \/ understand everything important about life and creation.\u00a0 You can then toss in those detailed evidences.\u00a0 They will fit nicely. \u00a0But you\u2019re confronted with the entire life-changing Gospel-centered worldview.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0\u201cFor with thee is the fountain of life:\u00a0 in thy light shall we see light.\u201d <\/em>\u00a0Psalm 36:9<\/p>\n<p>Using this approach we can evaluate other religions, too.\u00a0 In Hinduism the universe is grounded in Atman, unchanging and impersonal.\u00a0 There is no supreme worth for individuals, resulting in a Dalit or \u201cuntouchable,\u201d for example.\u00a0 Pantheism and monism exclude individual worth and dignity.\u00a0 Our apparent individuality is illusion.\u00a0 You aspire for \u201c\u2018release\u2019\u201d \u2013 freedom from individuality, not freedom to be an individual.\u201d\u00a0 Does your conscience resonate with this?<\/p>\n<p>Similarly, atheism is adamant against the transcendent and everything else beyond the senses and the narrowly drawn scientific method \u2013 counting, weighing, measuring.\u00a0 Are you content to see your identity as merely a clump of molecules in motion?\u00a0 Do you deny your own personhood?\u00a0 Is morality just some odd brain chemistry?\u00a0 Is murder just molecules in collision or is it <em>wrong<\/em>? How about rape or torturing babies for fun?\u00a0 Do you actually live with no conscience?<\/p>\n<p>Apparently, Charles Darwin, late in life, admitted that he was less able to appreciate the music of Handel\u2019s <em>Messiah<\/em> that he had once loved.<\/p>\n<p>Guinness observes that the Christian view of the world gave rise to modern science.\u00a0 The Hindu did not and could not.<\/p>\n<p>What about other societal impacts?\u00a0 Human rights and dignity do not derive from either Eastern religions or atheism \/ secularism.\u00a0 The huge and shocking (for the better) societal changes due to the entry of Jesus into history are well documented in a book I plan to review a few months from now, <em>The Air We Breathe:\u00a0 How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality<\/em>, by Glen Scrivener.\u00a0 What we take for granted in \u201cWestern values,\u201d including individual rights, compassion, freedom, science, and progress was determinedly not characteristic of ancient cultures.<\/p>\n<p>Phase three is <em>a time for evidences<\/em>.\u00a0 Truth, real truth whether it feels good or not, \u00a0is despised in our postmodern culture . . . so get over it.\u00a0 Truth really matters!<\/p>\n<p>When someone says, \u201cThere is no such thing as absolute truth,\u201d take them at their word and don\u2019t believe them.\u00a0 Guinness:\u00a0 \u201cTruth is all about solid facts and reality.\u201d\u00a0 The opposites of truth include lies, deceptions, delusions, mistrust, fake news, misinformation, and suspicion.\u00a0 The world is filled with attacks on truth.\u00a0 Your life depends on persevering against the \u201cfather of lies,\u201d as Jesus described Satan.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe Christian faith claims to be true in the sense that it fully aligns with reality.\u00a0 It is true in the sense that, if it is true, it would still be true even if no one believed it; and if it is false, it would still be false even if everyone believed it.\u201d\u00a0 All questions are open.\u00a0 When Nathanael scoffed to Philip whether or not Jesus was worth checking out, Philip replied, \u201cCome and see.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Biblical Christianity is tied to reality.\u00a0 <em>Real <\/em>reality simply cannot go out of fashion.\u00a0 Reality and trust in reality are essential for countless human endeavors such as business, science, journalism, politics, and personal relationships.\u00a0 Christianity is tied to history and to human experience.\u00a0 It welcomes examination.\u00a0 Christians themselves may, and are, found wanting quite often, but the Bible is clear that <em>that<\/em> will be the case, too.<\/p>\n<p>The big questions on which to examine the veracity of biblical truth include what we see in creation, the nanotechnology of living creatures, flood geology, fulfilled prophecy, the behavior of man (sin \/ virtue \/ morality), the logic and experiences of redemption and the new birth, and the resonance of <strong>hope <\/strong>in the human soul.\u00a0 A Christian life philosophy welds together realism and hope, optimism and pessimism.<\/p>\n<p>C.S. Lewis at first tried to read the Gospel accounts as a literary critic and was shaken to his core. \u201cWhat are we to make of Jesus Christ?\u201d he asked, including how to reconcile two aspects of His life \u2013 the \u201cdepth and sanity of His moral teaching\u201d and \u201cthe quite appalling nature of this man\u2019s theological remarks.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In short, no great moral teacher ever claimed to be God and that was what Jesus claimed repeatedly, even to the point of crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Lewis:\u00a0 \u201cLet us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great moral teacher.\u00a0 He has not left that open to us.\u00a0 He did not intend to.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The fourth and final phase of the quest is \u201c<em>a time for commitment<\/em>.\u201d\u00a0 This is a step of faith, not a leap of faith, a step fully rational and grounded on the conviction that what we see in the Bible is true.\u00a0 It is a warranted belief.\u00a0 If true, you must respond, all in or all out.\u00a0 This is a matter of heart, will, and mind.\u00a0 It\u2019s personal.<\/p>\n<p>In deciding for Christ, you necessarily repent from all other worldviews, which are demonstrably irrational, in accord with the type of examples mentioned before.<\/p>\n<p>Your warranted belief naturally includes <em>conviction<\/em>, which leads to <em>trust.\u00a0 <\/em>Your entire person commits to a Person, the Lord Jesus.\u00a0 Now, I wish that Os was more complete in his discussion here, because the conviction and trust that produces a born again conversion necessitates a humility and an admission of sins that need forgiveness, which is why the Cross and the Resurrection occurred.\u00a0 Repentance from your actual personal sins and trust in the Person of Jesus Christ are the elements that complete the quest . . . the new birth into the family of God.<\/p>\n<p>Which starts a new quest.\u00a0 The Christian life extends from this point, \u201ca new creature\u201d (2 Cor 5:17), through eternity.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a quest, too, to search for us, pictured in Luke 15 as a shepherd searching for a lost sheep, a woman searching for a lost coin, and a father waiting for a lost son to come home.<\/p>\n<p>Once we come home, once we are born again into God\u2019s family, our new quest is to follow in Jesus\u2019 work \u2013 to seek and to save that which was lost.\u00a0 At this point in my life \u2013 I\u2019m 70 now, easily fatigued, and have several health issues \u2013 I don\u2019t have much ambition or the capacity to fulfill new ambitions, but it is still clear to me that as long as I can walk and talk I can share the Gospel with lost people, both verbally and by tract.\u00a0 We hand out about 400 tracts per week, I knock doors with my grandsons, and I find interesting ways to reach out to people I would not normally cross paths with.<\/p>\n<p>I don\u2019t do as much as I used to, but I am <em>very <\/em>grateful that the Lord still has some service for me to perform.<\/p>\n<p>I highly recommend Os Guinness\u2019 book.\u00a0 He concludes with some beautiful thoughts:\u00a0 \u201c. . . for a seeker to find Jesus is not the end of all searching, but the beginning of the greatest quest of all . . . to know God better and better, which is the climax and soul of human existence . . . It never ends, not because of the infinity of options and the impossibility of choosing, but because of the infinity and inexhaustibility of the One in whom we have found our answer.\u201d<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212; <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n182. Progressive Christianity: Old-Fashioned Apostasy<br \/>\nMay 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>My wife, Bonnie, who has written much of her own perspectives on this site, was raised in a variety of Methodist, Congregational, and Presbyterian churches, as her dad\u2019s army career moved him around the country.\u00a0 But she wasn\u2019t saved until after we were married, listening and processing the teaching we heard in a conservative, Bible-believing Baptist church.<\/p>\n<p>She had never properly understood that <em>she <\/em>was a lost sinner, that <em>she personally <\/em>must humble herself, admit her lost condition, <em>repent <\/em>from her sins, and trust Christ, depending on Him and Him alone for salvation, as a gift not to be earned.<\/p>\n<p>We would now call those churches <em>progressive<\/em>, but even then a faithful Bible believer would recognize what they taught as old-fashioned apostasy.\u00a0 The apostle Paul called out such soul-damning apostasy in his letters, the one to the churches in Galatia, for example.\u00a0 The\u00a0 apostle Peter called out false teachers quite explicitly in his second letter, as did Jude in his part in Scripture.\u00a0 In fact, much of the New Testament consists of warnings against the kind of false teachers who \u201ccompass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.\u201d\u00a0 (Matthew 23:15)<\/p>\n<p>When I taught engineering in Michigan\u2019s UP, I often ate lunch at a local Taco Bell, and would leave a Chick tract on my seat when I left.\u00a0 Months after I started doing that I got to know a fellow in another department who mentioned that his wife had just gotten saved.\u00a0 She had been raised Lutheran.\u00a0 She had found the tract, brought it home, read it, and became deeply disturbed.\u00a0 She confessed to her husband that she had never understood the Gospel before and suddenly realized that she was lost.<\/p>\n<p>As I knock doors (in Louisiana now) and share the Gospel with America\u2019s religious lost, I marvel at how the simplicity of the Gospel has been perverted so thoroughly that somehow, lifelong churchgoers believe that their lives are sufficiently righteous to warrant a ticket to Heaven.\u00a0 Yes, the Devil provokes a fair number in the West to atheism, pantheism, and the occult, but his best strategy is to build his own churches, so-called Christian churches, that teach that the Christian life is about being <em>nice, charitable, tolerant, affirming, and everyone goes to Heaven when they die.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>I just read Michael J. Kruger\u2019s 2019 book, <em>The Ten Commandments of Progressive Christianity<\/em>, just 55 pages, a wonderful summary of Satan\u2019s doctrinal strategy for western churches.\u00a0 Kruger cites <em>Christianity and Liberalism,<\/em> J. Gresham Machen\u2019s 1923 book in response to the rise of liberalism in the mainline denominations of his day.\u00a0 He argued that \u2018liberal\u2019 Christianity was not just a variant version, but an entirely different religion.\u00a0 \u201cPut simply, liberal Christianity is not Christianity.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>As Solomon wrote, \u201cThe thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done:\u00a0 and there is no new thing under the sun.\u201d\u00a0 (Ecclesiastes 1:9)<\/p>\n<p>The names may change \u2013 \u201cemerging,\u201d \u201cprogressive\u201d \u2013 as the newest false prophets pretend that they have discovered . . . after <em>all <\/em>this time . . . something new, \u201cbut it is simply a rehash of the same well-worn system that has been around for generations.\u201d\u00a0 Indeed, since Satan first challenged the authenticity of God\u2019s words in the garden.<\/p>\n<p>Kruger was inspired to respond to ten principles gleaned from a devotional by Richard Rohr, principles in turn drawn from a book by Philip Gulley, <em>If the Church Were Christian:\u00a0 Rediscovering the Values of Jesus.<\/em>\u00a0 Kruger declares \u201cthey are, in effect, a Ten Commandments for progressive Christianity.\u201d\u00a0 Kruger\u2019s book is then a critique of these principles.\u00a0 He notes that these apostate principles are partially true, half-truths so to speak.\u00a0 As Benjamin Franklin quipped, \u201cHalf the truth is often a great lie.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I heartily endorse Kruger\u2019s book.\u00a0 It should be on your shelf for quick reference.\u00a0 Let\u2019s briefly summarize some of his points.<\/p>\n<p>1<sup>st<\/sup> commandment:\u00a0 <em>Jesus is a model for living more than an object for worship.<\/em>\u00a0 The priority about Jesus is his moral example.\u00a0 The implication is a rejection of His deity.\u00a0 A lot of modern churches won\u2019t explicitly deny the deity of Christ.\u00a0 But they neglect this truth so consistently that the typical lost churchgoer sees \u2018the faith\u2019 as merely a preferred set of moral, social, and political choices.<\/p>\n<p>I won\u2019t belabor the Scriptural support for the deity of Christ.\u00a0 It\u2019s everywhere.\u00a0 If you\u2019re unsure about this, read the Gospel of John (in the KJV).\u00a0 Jesus\u2019 deity shows up pretty quick.<\/p>\n<p>Kruger observes the oddity of progressives highlighting the moral example of Jesus at the expense of His deity.\u00a0 \u201cIf Jesus is just an ordinary man, why would we think his particular moral code is any better than anyone else\u2019s?\u00a0 Why should we think his moral code matters at all?\u201d\u00a0 Further, aren\u2019t the progressives the ones who despise people who make absolute moral claims?\u00a0 Isn\u2019t morality fluid and culturally determined?\u00a0 \u201cDon\u2019t push <em>your <\/em>morality on me!\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Kruger cites Matthew 19:5-6 regarding Jesus\u2019 teaching that marriage is one man and one woman, and John 14:6 that He is the only way of salvation.\u00a0 Are progressives willing to follow\u00a0 those teachings?<\/p>\n<p>No, the Christian faith isn\u2019t a pick-and-choose behavioral code; rather it\u2019s about eternal life, beginning now, by trusting in the only One who can save us, by grace.\u00a0 In our trust, then, we should be humble enough to follow what the Creator, the Lord Jesus, says about how to live.\u00a0 (Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 3:5-8)<\/p>\n<p><em>2. Affirming people\u2019s potential is more important than reminding them of their brokenness<\/em>. The issue of <strong>sin<\/strong> is a big divide between progressives and born again Bible believers.\u00a0 Yes, people have potential.\u00a0 But the potential to live a life that glorifies God and helps others <em>begins <\/em>with forgiveness of the sins that condemn us, that separate us from a holy God, and that hurt ourselves and others.<\/p>\n<p>The Cross and the Resurrection conquered sin and death, but we must seek God on His terms to access His grace.\u00a0 The Holy Spirit indwells the born again member of God\u2019s family and enables him to fulfill the potential that God designs him for.<\/p>\n<p>Kruger notes that Gulley argues that churches are guilty of \u2018spiritual abuse\u2019 when they teach that people are sinners.\u00a0 Gulley grew up \u201cin a tradition that emphasized sin and the need for salvation, hadn\u2019t found it helpful, and had resolved to leave it behind.\u201d\u00a0 Gulley denies that Adam and Eve were real people and denies the historicity of the Genesis creation account.\u00a0 He even laments hymns like \u201cAmazing Grace.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>If you\u2019re in a church that resonates with Gulley\u2019s perspective, that denies the truth of 1 Timothy 1:15 \u2013 \u201c. . . that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners . . .\u201d \u2013 then you are lost, in need of the Savior.<\/p>\n<p>3.<em> The<\/em> <em>work of reconciliation should be valued over making judgments.<\/em> We mustn\u2019t judge each other.\u00a0 We should just be helping each other.\u00a0 Don\u2019t worry about how people relate to God; it\u2019s all about people helping each other.<\/p>\n<p>Doesn\u2019t Scripture tell us to admonish each other on occasion?\u00a0 Yes.\u00a0 See Matthew 18:15, Galatians 6:1, and James 5:19-20, for instances.\u00a0 Ironically, those that condemn judging are judging, too, declaring \u2018judging\u2019 to be bad behavior.\u00a0 Ironic, also, is that the progressive wokists who dominate our culture are the most dogmatic and judgmental in history.\u00a0 Also, unforgiving.\u00a0 There is no mercy or grace in cancel culture.\u00a0 In the last generation, the Christians have been told not to judge, while all the anti-Christians have moved past the \u2018tolerance movement\u2019 to gleefully engage in hair-trigger anger, judging, and public humiliation.<\/p>\n<p>If progressives really want reconciliation, they can have it, but only under Biblical principles, \u201cwhen wrongs are acknowledged, owned, and repented of.\u00a0 And in order for that to happen, judgments must be made about people\u2019s behavior.\u201d\u00a0 Right and wrong aren\u2019t arbitrary, either;\u00a0 the Bible must be the standard.\u00a0 Reconciliation necessarily includes forgiveness, restoration, and love . . . ideas foreign to progressives.<\/p>\n<p><em>4. Gracious behavior is more important than right belief.<\/em> Really?\u00a0 This one is too easy.\u00a0 Just a couple of points . . . Should you just be sweet and understanding and \u2018affirming\u2019 as your teenage daughter immerses herself in drugs and immorality? \u00a0Or insists she wants surgery to change her sex?\u00a0 How about your atheist or Muslim neighbor?\u00a0\u00a0 Perhaps if you\u2019re simply polite and nice and avoid any controversy, somehow they will miss Hell and wind up in Heaven.<\/p>\n<p><em>5. Inviting questions is more valuable than supplying answers.<\/em> The idea is to present yourself as humble and inquisitive.\u00a0 You\u2019re just a pleasant seeker; it\u2019s the other side who are mean, entrenched know-it-alls.\u00a0 (Like those Bible-thumping fundamentalists.)<\/p>\n<p>But sometimes \u201cI don\u2019t know\u201d is not the right answer because it is possible to know some things, especially if God has revealed truth to us . . . like . . . in a book called the Bible.\u00a0 Kruger suggests that it is a false intellectual humility to answer \u201cI don\u2019t know\u201d if a friend asks, \u201cDid Abraham Lincoln sign the Emancipation Proclamation?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The progressive would agree \u2013 of course we know that Lincoln signed that!\u00a0 But somehow they don\u2019t <em>know <\/em>that Jesus rose from the dead.\u00a0 But you <em>don\u2019t know<\/em> the Resurrection is true only if you <em>do know <\/em>that the Bible is not the reliable word of God.\u00a0 Well, how do they know that?<\/p>\n<p>On same-sex marriage, progressives claim to know that it\u2019s right and Bible-believers are <em>wrong <\/em>to say it\u2019s wrong.\u00a0 Those progressives are so dogmatic!<\/p>\n<p>Back to basics, though \u2013 the stakes of this life are infinite, Heaven vs. Hell.\u00a0 To survive the Great White Throne Judgment, you\u2019ve got to <em>know <\/em>some things and act on them, dogmatically and deliberately.\u00a0 If you know how to be saved, you also know that you need to tell others precisely how they can know that, too.<\/p>\n<p><em>6. Encouraging the personal search is more important than group uniformity<\/em>. Gulley\u2019s concern is about \u2018free thinkers\u2019 who are disfellowshipped or shunned, kicked out of churches for certain behaviors or beliefs.\u00a0 \u201cThey were just trying to think for themselves!\u201d\u00a0 The main thing is the spiritual \u201cjourney.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>According to progressives, everything is in flux.\u00a0 But not according to God, who has become incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ and has revealed His explicit will for us, including how to live this life and how to be saved for eternity.\u00a0 On the big stuff there are plenty of answers!\u00a0 Those who reject Biblical answers don\u2019t belong in fellowship, week by week, with believers in prayer meetings, Bible studies, evangelistic outreaches, and other spiritual activities.<\/p>\n<p>I (and other Christians) certainly want to answer the questions that skeptics and seekers have. \u00a0That\u2019s what this web site is all about! \u00a0But then they\u2019ve got to decide whether they like the answers that the Bible explicitly offers.\u00a0 If they don\u2019t, that\u2019s all right, but they don\u2019t get to be part of the family.\u00a0 \u201cA man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.\u201d (Titus 3:10-11)<\/p>\n<p><em>7. Meeting actual needs is more important than maintaining institutions.<\/em> You can see the plausibility of such a statement.\u00a0 But the underlying thesis is to despise the church and its primary mission \u2013 the Great Commission.\u00a0 Progressive churches tend to act like secular charities, at the expense of preaching the Gospel and saving sinners.\u00a0 So, are you really helping\u00a0 the homeless when you give him a cheeseburger without sharing the Gospel?\u00a0 He\u2019s a little more comfortable on the road to Hell and, in fact, he\u2019s a little more inoculated <em>against <\/em>his need for salvation because the \u2018Christians\u2019 who gave him the cheeseburger counted that as the important thing.<\/p>\n<p><em>8. Peacemaking is more important than power. <\/em>Well, who could disagree with that?\u00a0 Gulley is ranting about dysfunctional leadership in churches, and there is plenty of that to go around!\u00a0 I\u2019ve written much on the subject in the \u2018church\u2019 articles in the Discipleship section of this site.<\/p>\n<p>The bigger issue for Gulley is that the churches should promote pacifism and peace among nations.\u00a0 Ok, good luck with that.\u00a0 See what the Bible has to say about prophecy, the end times.\u00a0 What <em>is <\/em>in the wheelhouse of local churches is to promote peace between individuals, within families, within communities.\u00a0 But that starts with the Gospel.\u00a0 Two individuals who have peace with God, their sins forgiven, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and with strong desire to do God\u2019s will, are lined up in the same direction, because they\u2019re both oriented toward God.\u00a0 <em>That <\/em>is the basis for peace between those two individuals.\u00a0 They have the same worldview and the same desire and the same God.<\/p>\n<p>Kruger says it this way:\u00a0 \u201c<em>Horizontal<\/em> peace (between man and man) begins first with recognizing our need for <em>vertical <\/em>peace (between God and man).\u00a0 And only Jesus can provide such vertical peace with God.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em>9. We should care more about love and less about sex.<\/em> Kruger\u2019s summary on this point is that progressives believe \u201cyou can maintain any questionable sexual activity even as you congratulate yourself on your moral superiority.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Gulley\u2019s arguments for complete sexual \u2018freedom\u2019 include examples of nice people who engage in all kinds of sexual sins, but they still have \u2018wonderful\u2019 lives.\u00a0 Example:\u00a0 \u201cThe home they created was one of deep love and mutual respect . . . nothing about any of that <em>felt <\/em>like sin to me.\u201d\u00a0 Q.E.D., apparently.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is only sin when committed by unpleasant people.<\/p>\n<p>Another argument from Gulley is that God has bigger things to worry about.\u00a0 Ok, as long as Gulley <em>knows <\/em>that, I guess everything goes.<\/p>\n<p>A big point from Kruger is that sin harms people.\u00a0 Sin is addictive and destructive.\u00a0 It is loving to confront sin.\u00a0 See again James 5:19-20.<\/p>\n<p><em>10. Life in this world is more important than the afterlife.<\/em> \u201cLet\u2019s not worry ourselves about what happens after death, we are told, because no one really knows anyway.\u00a0 All that matters is helping the poor, feeding the hungry, and relieving human suffering.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ve asked multitudes in 1-2-1 evangelism if they ever think about life, death, Heaven, Hell, etc. and what do they believe will happen to them if they die today.\u00a0 Almost everyone confesses that they \u201cthink about it all the time.\u201d\u00a0 But what they mean is that thoughts of eternity intrude, but they quickly push them aside.\u00a0 The years go by, death inevitably pounces, and then it\u2019s too late.<\/p>\n<p>Progressive churches major in avoiding thoughts of death and judgment.\u00a0 They are Satan\u2019s principal means of damning westerners to Hell.<\/p>\n<p>Gulley mocks the church\u2019s \u201cpreoccupation\u201d and \u201coveremphasis\u201d on the afterlife and how \u201cfortunes are spent saving people from the imaginary dangers of imaginary places.\u201d\u00a0 Hell isn\u2019t real, so don\u2019t worry about it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was a bit preoccupied, though:\u00a0 \u201cFor what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?\u201d\u00a0 (Mark 8:36)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Finally, <\/strong>I\u2019ll offer a specific takeaway . . . You and I cross paths with members of progressive (to some degree) churches every day.\u00a0 Recognize that you\u2019re dealing with lost people.\u00a0 They don\u2019t just need the Gospel.\u00a0 They need to <em>realize<\/em> that they need the Gospel. \u00a0So give it to them.\u00a0 At least via tract.\u00a0 And if they hesitate at all, ask them a question, \u201cSo where do you think you\u2019ll be one minute after you die?\u201d\u00a0 If they can\u2019t give you a definite answer and back it up with a definite and Biblical testimony, then tell them what you <em>know<\/em>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n183. Scientism is not Science<br \/>\nJune 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>According to the philosophy of <em>scientism<\/em>, science is the core, the very quintessence of truth and rationality.\u00a0 The <em>strong <\/em>form of scientism is that knowledge is valid or something specific is true <u>if and only if<\/u> it has been tested by an accepted scientific method.\u00a0 Outside such testing, you cannot <em>know <\/em>anything.\u00a0 <em>Weak <\/em>scientism is not so strict, allowing some other forms of knowledge, but only in a secondary status, certainly not in the class of scientific truth!<\/p>\n<p>Scientism is self-refuting, however.\u00a0 The claim that science is the only valid basis for knowledge has not been validated by any scientific method.\u00a0 Furthermore, making the claim necessitates more foundational elements such as consciousness, rationality, and logic.\u00a0 Scientism is integrally woven with atheistic materialism which posits that all that ever was in the universe was matter, energy, and forces.\u00a0 Somehow, conscious beings evolved out of this, introducing for the first time thoughts, desires, and rational discourse.\u00a0 But there is nothing in the particles of matter or in the laws of physics that describe how they interact, that explains consciousness . . . which must include a free will to allow philosophical choices such as, \u2018Is scientism right?\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 How can free will and therefore rational thought occur if \u2018you\u2019 are simply the sum of your deterministic brain chemistry?<\/p>\n<p>Consciousness simply does not fit in a naturalistic worldview, explains J. P. Moreland in his book <em>Scientism and Secularism:\u00a0 Learning to Respond to a Dangerous Ideology<\/em>, 2018.\u00a0 Moreland cites the naturalist philosopher Colin McGinn:\u00a0 \u201cHow can mere matter originate consciousness?\u00a0 How did evolution convert the water of biological tissue into the wine of consciousness?\u00a0 Consciousness seems like a radical novelty in the universe, not prefigured by the after-effects of the Big Bang; so how did it contrive to spring into being from what preceded it?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Indeed.\u00a0 In fact he mustn\u2019t gloss over the wonder of \u2018biological tissue.\u2019\u00a0 I\u2019ve expounded much on this web site regarding the physical and mathematical impossibilities attached to any naturalistic scheme for the origin of even the simplest building blocks of biology, protein and DNA molecules, for example.<\/p>\n<p>Let\u2019s pull some nuggets from Moreland\u2019s book.\u00a0 He emphasizes the importance of the issue, citing research that links the dominance of scientism in education and in the culture as a primary cause for children rejecting the Christian faith over the last few generations.\u00a0 He makes the case that scientism is <em>not <\/em>science, rather it undermines science, provoking people to misuse science in support of ideologies or politics.\u00a0 Evolution, of course, is the most pervasive anti-evidence, anti-logic, and destructive element of public school education in every generation since Darwin, but we\u2019ve seen even more dramatic misuse of so-called scientific claims since the onset of COVID.\u00a0 (Unfortunately, Moreland published his book before COVID, or he would have had a wealth of recent notable illustrations.)<\/p>\n<p>Moreland relates a wonderful anecdote about a senior engineer challenging him after he had spoken at an evangelistic conference.\u00a0 This engineer was just finishing up a late-in-life PhD in physics\u00a0 at Johns Hopkins U.\u00a0 He started by confessing that when he was young and immature he enjoyed reading philosophy, but he\u2019s outgrown that, since the only possible knowledge of reality is what can be quantified scientifically in a laboratory.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland let the fellow go on for two to three minutes, then responded with apparent surprise:\u00a0 \u201cSir, you have made thirty to forty assertions in the last few minutes, and as far as I can tell, not one of them can be quantified, measured, and scientifically tested in the laboratory . . . By your own standards, all you have been doing in our conversation is spouting your private opinions and idle speculation.\u00a0 Given this, I am wondering why I or anyone else ought to give you the time of day or think a single thing you said is knowably true.\u201d\u00a0 The fellow turned red and changed the subject.<\/p>\n<p>A generation ago, in 1989, the state of California issued guidance to science teachers on how to deal with students who resisted evolutionary ideas because of their \u201creligious or philosophical beliefs.\u201d\u00a0 Teachers were offered a script:\u00a0 \u201cI understand that you may have personal reservations about accepting this scientific evidence, but it is scientific knowledge about which there is no reasonable doubt among scientists in their field, and it is my responsibility to teach it because it is part of our common intellectual heritage.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The language is loaded with assertions and appeals to authority.\u00a0 We must not dare to question scientists, who have \u201cno reasonable doubt.\u201d\u00a0 That should settle it!\u00a0 I also find it curious that the priests of evolutionary faith love to use the word \u2018evidence\u2019, but never cite any, nor do they discuss validity or counter-evidence.\u00a0 See my free ebook on the subject of evolution in the free ebookstore on this site.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout my lifetime I have been distressed by the lack of apologetics teaching and training in the churches.\u00a0 Because Christians cannot defend <em>the truth <\/em>of biblical history, the Gospel has too often been packaged in a form to appeal to an individual\u2019s felt needs and a promise that Jesus can make your life better.\u00a0 This is a false Gospel.\u00a0 It produces multitudes of false converts who <em>try out <\/em>Jesus, but fall away when life gets difficult \u2013 See the parable of the seed and the sower, Matthew 13.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel is the <em>good news<\/em> that overcomes the reality of the <em>bad news<\/em>, that you and I are sinners, justly condemned, in desperate need of the one and only Saviour, Jesus Christ, who shed His blood on a cruel cross, raised Himself from the dead, and promises eternal life to those who thoroughly repent from their sins and trust in Him, and follow Him, demonstrating a spiritual new birth that changes everything about one\u2019s life.\u00a0 This Gospel is grounded in the history of all of creation that starts in Genesis 1:1 and is traced for 4,000 years until the long-promised arrival of the Messiah who, in future prophetically documented history, will come again to establish His kingdom . . . and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel is <strong>so much more <\/strong>than an antidote for sadness, loneliness, etc.\u00a0 It\u2019s not about finding something to make life \u2018work\u2019 better.\u00a0 The Gospel is rooted in true history and reality.\u00a0 Such truth is the enemy of all unbelieving philosophies, including scientism . . . which cannot even account for consciousness and rational thought.\u00a0 (The Christian worldview can so account!\u00a0 Our consciousness is a necessary quality of <em>personhood<\/em>, derived from the person of God, who created us as image-bearers, able to think rationally, and morally, and discerningly with respect to what is really true.)<\/p>\n<p>Moreland:\u00a0 \u201cGiven scientism, moral knowledge is impossible.\u201d\u00a0 At the most basic level, if our actions are strictly the consequences of brain chemistry, there is no right or wrong, there just is what happens.\u00a0 But if <em>ought <\/em>exists, then free will exists and it matters how we treat others.\u00a0 Secularists talk and act as if they have <em>freedom <\/em>to do whatever they want to do, as if they have free will to choose.\u00a0 But in their materialism they have already negated morality, and so they justify the most vile sins, even those that work against their own conscience.\u00a0 Western societies are now entering the end game, suffering the normalization of abortions up to and beyond birth, the normalization of pedophilia, and the outright promotion of so-called \u201cgender transition\u201d surgeries for children.\u00a0 Homosexual behavior and gay marriage have become old-fashioned, uncontroversial.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical freedom, however, is a freedom to do right by others, in accord with God\u2019s laws, which are rooted in reality.\u00a0 God conveyed His laws to us for our peace and prosperity, which include prohibitions on murder, theft, adultery, lying, coveting, etc., knowing that people cannot live happily without moral boundaries.\u00a0 Declared positively, Jesus sums up the law in two parts:\u00a0 love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself.\u00a0 Just practice those positives and you don\u2019t need to remember the prohibitions.<\/p>\n<p>I was surprised to see Moreland, an establishment seminary professor, make a pointed criticism of current evangelical church culture.\u00a0 In neglecting to provide its members with firm reasons for Christian beliefs, \u201cthe church has become its own \u2018gravedigger.\u2019\u00a0 The methods and policies of modern church growth produce a church that is anemic and marginalized.\u201d\u00a0 Megachurches grow via \u201cwatered-down, intellectually vacuous, simplistic preaching that is always applied to a parishioner\u2019s private life,\u201d while neglecting the most pressing doctrinal and cultural battles of the day.<\/p>\n<p>He doesn\u2019t mind the use of what he calls \u201cgood Christian music\u201d \u2013 I don\u2019t agree that it\u2019s \u201cgood.\u201d\u00a0 He likes the small group emphasis \u2013 if only there were substance designed in, which I\u2019ve rarely found.\u00a0 But he points out that <u>absent<\/u> in a church\u2019s weekly life is the opportunity to stretch minds, to train in defending the faith, to develop \u201cgodly, intelligent ambassadors for Christ.\u201d\u00a0 Amen.\u00a0 He observes that when challenged by unbelievers, Christians get defensive, whereas knowledge promotes authority and courage.<\/p>\n<p>I recall an adult Sunday School class in which a middle-aged couple told of JW visitors who had knocked on their door that week.\u00a0 They, <em>of course<\/em>, shooed them away.\u00a0 Everyone else in the class nodded, knowingly.\u00a0 I was aghast and decided to speak up.\u00a0 \u201cWhy didn\u2019t you see this as an opportunity to share the Gospel with them?\u00a0 They\u2019re just lost people, after all, and came to your door looking for conversation on spiritual matters.\u201d\u00a0 My query was met with an aggravated silence.\u00a0 In a class of 30 adult, seasoned Christians, no one spoke up.\u00a0 (Nobody invited us out to lunch afterward.)<\/p>\n<p>Christians should understand, Moreland notes, that scientism is the <em>enemy <\/em>of science.\u00a0 The conclusions of science are built upon presuppositions, which are inherently philosophical.\u00a0 Such presuppositions include:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>The \u201cworld\u201d exists out there, independent of mind, language, or theory.\u00a0 Eastern religions deny this, claiming the \u201cworld\u201d is illusion.<\/li>\n<li>The world\u2019s nature is orderly with a deep structure (atoms, laws of physics) underlying the macroscopic world we see and touch. Furthermore, this structure is reliable, consistent.<\/li>\n<li>Objective truth exists.<\/li>\n<li>Rationality exists \u2013 our sensory and cognitive faculties can discern objective reality. Furthermore, we can make valid, logical inferences not driven purely by brain chemistry.<\/li>\n<li>Values and \u201coughts\u201d exist. Morality is part of reality.<\/li>\n<li>The laws of logic and mathematics exist.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Science is built on top of these foundational layers.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland entitles a chapter, \u201cWhy Weak Scientism Is No Better Than Strong Scientism.\u201d\u00a0 In our culture when claims conflict, theologic vs. scientific for example, which claim gets more traction?\u00a0 Under COVID, the mere pronouncements of government scientists and scientist \/ bureaucrats were deemed equivalent to <strong>SCIENCE<\/strong>!\u00a0 Those who disagreed were punished and \/ or cancelled.<\/p>\n<p>Too often Christians have compromised or caved when atheistic scientists make pronouncements that contradict Scripture, even if no evidence is on the table.\u00a0 The subject is enormously relevant to creation vs. evolution, which I have covered extensively on this site, so I\u2019ll move on.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland spends some time discussing the uncertainties of scientific theories.\u00a0 Historically, theories come and go.\u00a0 Often there are competing theories for a phenomenon.\u00a0 There are certainly criteria and methods to find a \u2018winner,\u2019 a best theory.<\/p>\n<p>Math and logic are different.\u00a0 They involve <em>necessary truths<\/em>.\u00a0 \u201cEven God could not create a world in which 2 + 2 = 57.68.\u201d\u00a0 Nor could He create a world in which something is both true and false at the same time in the same way . . . ie., it is raining and not raining at a specific location and time.<\/p>\n<p>What about conscious states?\u00a0 A neuroscientist with appropriate sensors may say something definitive about what is happening in my brain, but cannot know with certainty what is going on in my mind.\u00a0 Introspection is the only way one can know what is going on, and that only in his own mind.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland explores the question, How do we explain things?\u00a0 When we say that one event causes another, that\u2019s called <em>event-event causation<\/em>.\u00a0 A <em>covering law <\/em>model of event-event causation has two features:\u00a0\u00a0 (1) a universal or statistical law of nature, and (2) some initial causal conditions.\u00a0 For example:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>All metal rods expand if heated.<\/li>\n<li>Metal rod X was heated.<\/li>\n<li>Therefore, metal rod X expanded.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Another covering law explanation is associated with the ideal gas law:\u00a0 PV = nRT<\/p>\n<p>When an ideal gas has a temperature \u201cT\u201d, contains \u201cn\u201d moles, and is enclosed within a volume \u201cV\u201d, with \u201cR\u201d being the gas constant, then the pressure will certainly be measured as \u201cP.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>But no scientist is satisfied at the level of the ideal gas law.\u00a0 \u201cWhy\u201d is it true?\u00a0 We need an underlying model of atoms and molecules and mechanics that predicts the ideal gas law.\u00a0 We want to understand the <em>mechanisms <\/em>involved that relate pressure to temperature.<\/p>\n<p>Now, <em>personal explanations <\/em>are quite different from scientific explanations.\u00a0 For example, Judy sets a dinner table in such a way to provide an enjoyable dinner for her neighbors.\u00a0 Why is the dinner table arranged this way?\u00a0 Judy has both the intention and the basic power to do so.\u00a0 An agent brings about a result by exercising a power to fulfill an intention.<\/p>\n<p>In a murder trial, intention (motive) is vital.\u00a0 The jury seeks personal explanations and assurance that the agent (accused) has the means and opportunity (basic power) to convict the defendant of the result (crime).\u00a0 The detailed physical laws are not usually relevant, like the frictional interaction of the bullets with air molecules or the enthalpy of the gunpowder\u2019s explosive reaction.<\/p>\n<p>The important issues are properties of persons \u2013 intentions and willful actions.\u00a0 In a materialistic worldview, we\u2019re all just clumps of molecules in motion.\u00a0 But our entire legal systems are built on <em>personhood.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>According to scientism, though, the entire history of the universe is completely described by the physical interactions of particles via the laws of physics . . . wherever they came from.\u00a0 Consciousness makes complete nonsense of that worldview.\u00a0 Everything important about human life transcends the merely physical, not only legal justice, as above, but also morality, integrity, love, hope, meaning, and life\u2019s purpose for every made-in-the-image-of-God person.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland lists five things that science cannot, in principle, explain . . . but theism can.\u00a0 First, science cannot explain the origin of the universe.\u00a0 Briefly, there had to be a beginning.\u00a0 The universe cannot be infinitely old.\u00a0 Just as you cannot count to a positive infinity because you\u2019ll never get there, so also the universe cannot extend backward to a negative infinite age, because you could never reach the present moment.\u00a0 Think about it.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, science cannot explain the origin of the universe and its physical laws and particles because <em>science <\/em>is defined only by the methods we employ in the universe that already exists, with its forces and particles.\u00a0 Science presupposes an existing universe.\u00a0 There is no other kind of science.<\/p>\n<p>Secondly, science cannot explain the physical laws of nature.\u00a0 Physics is simply how we describe what we see, what happens.\u00a0 We discover these laws and apply them.\u00a0 No one has any clue <em>why <\/em>they are what they are.\u00a0 Science presupposes the physical laws we know about.\u00a0 There is no other kind of science.<\/p>\n<p>Third, science cannot explain the universe\u2019s fine-tuning.\u00a0 The precise value of the gravitational constant, the fine structure constant, the speed of light, Planck\u2019s constant, and others enable life to exist.\u00a0 Just tiny variations would make impossible the very existence of our sun, our solar system, and the biochemistry of life.\u00a0 This is a big subject, well explored by other authors so I\u2019ll leave it there.\u00a0 In a Christian worldview, fine-tuning makes perfect sense from a design perspective.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, science cannot explain the existence of consciousness.\u00a0 Briefly, on a naturalistic explanation we have particles and forces for billions of years and then we get something from nothing.\u00a0 \u201cIn general, physicochemical reactions do not generate consciousness \u2013 not even one little bit . . . The appearance of mind is therefore utterly unpredictable and inexplicable.\u201d\u00a0 Mental states are different from physical states.\u00a0 The sweetness of sugar, the blueness of blue, the hurt of pain, the guilt of sin, the self-awaress of \u201cI\u201d \u2013 you cannot get there from analytical brain chemistry.<\/p>\n<p>Naturalists often talk of consciousness as an \u201cemergent property\u201d of complex matter.\u00a0 <em>Emergent <\/em>is just a mystery word, a place-holder for \u201cwe don\u2019t have a clue.\u201d\u00a0 Moreland asks us to imagine such a complex structure (a brain, for example) composed of billions and billions of molecules.\u00a0 Now, remove one molecule.\u00a0 Would consciousness still be there?\u00a0 Surely it would.\u00a0 So remove another molecule, etc.\u00a0 At some point, with just four atoms remaining, perhaps, you would not have enough complexity for consciousness.\u00a0 Therefore, somewhere along the way, removing just one atom, a small cause indeed, would prevent consciousness, a huge metaphysical effect!\u00a0 We see that the \u201cemergent property\u201d idea has no explanatory power at all.<\/p>\n<p>Fifth, science cannot explain moral or rational or aesthetic laws, nor the intrinsic value of what humans hold dear.\u00a0 A moral example is, \u201cIt is wrong to torture babies for fun.\u201d\u00a0 And, \u201cOne ought to pursue love and kindness and avoid racist bigotry.\u201d\u00a0 But on a naturalistic worldview . . . why?\u00a0 In short, science at best is merely descriptive.\u00a0 There is no \u201cought\u201d in science.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>Moreland, originally trained as a chemist, has five decades of experience in teaching theology at the graduate level and reading widely on the philosophy of science.\u00a0 He concludes that <em>about 95% of science and theology are cognitively irrelevant to each other.\u00a0 <\/em>For example, a theologian cares not whether a methane molecule has four or forty atoms of hydrogen.\u00a0 And a non-Christian chemist cares not about spiritual gifts.\u00a0 But in that other 5% there is relevance, including the obvious intelligent design inherent to the information content of DNA, archaeological confirmation of Scriptural history, and psychological discoveries on the flourishing of a human life.<\/p>\n<p>Now, Moreland is <em>not <\/em>a young-earth creationist and so worries that Genesis 1-11 facilitates conflict between science and biblical history.\u00a0 He is a progressive creationist, allowing for billions of years of Earth history, with God intervening with creation of species at key times.\u00a0 As I\u2019ve written much on this subject, I\u2019ll just mention that it is only Moreland\u2019s compromised position that generates his worries.\u00a0 Accordingly, with a proper view of the inerrancy of Scripture and with close attendance to rational views of the fossil record and evidence for a young Earth, it\u2019s easy to see the Bible as overwhelmingly consistent with physical discoveries and with rational philosophical analysis.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland appropriately cites the late Cornell professor of biology, William Provine, for the baseless hyperbole typically offered up by evolutionists when they claim authoritative knowledge apart from scientific methodology:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind.\u00a0 There is no life after death.\u00a0 When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead.\u00a0 That\u2019s the end for me.\u00a0 There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>So why should I listen to the ravings that result from mere brain chemistry?\u00a0 Did he not have a purpose in publishing his thoughts, which he certainly believed were freely constructed?\u00a0 Didn\u2019t he perceive a moral duty in writing what he thought was truth?\u00a0 Sadly, though, Provine has discovered his errors, alas, too late.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland discerns that the underlying motivation for academic evolutionists is to kick God out of science, out of history, out of everyone\u2019s life.\u00a0 Groupthink dominates and dissenters\u00a0 get cancelled.\u00a0 It\u2019s not about evidence \u2013 the evidence for this is that counter-arguments are not allowed in classrooms or textbooks.\u00a0 No discussion is permitted.\u00a0 In contrast, the Christian apologist is willing, even enthusiastic to discuss and to debate.<\/p>\n<p>Moreland concludes with a plea to adults to insure that their children and grandchildren understand these issues.\u00a0 If Christian parents are so negligent as to let their children suffer the indoctrination of a public school, they must at least provide counter-cultural re-education of their own, in parallel.\u00a0 A child\u2019s very soul is at stake and, if they are converted, their Gospel witness must be founded on a biblical worldview, sharply contrasted with scientism and all other unbelieving philosophies.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211; <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n184. Against the Flow<br \/>\nJuly 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The current cultural dominance of identity issues derive from an ancient question, \u201cWho am I, really?\u201d\u00a0 Psychologist Nola Passmore writes, \u201cThe heart cry of the human race is for meaning and purpose, a sense of belonging when human relationships fail to satisfy, a need to know we are unconditionally loved in spite of our circumstances, a need to know that we are not an accident of chance but people of design, a need to know that we have a future and a hope even when everything around us seems to be falling apart.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Regular readers of this site will note that this theme of purpose and meaning is central to my Christian worldview and my interests.\u00a0 One might object, \u201cBut what about the vast numbers of people who don\u2019t think like that, who respond with a contemptuous \u2018Whatever,\u2019 when challenged about the point of their lives?\u201d\u00a0 Well, I simply don\u2019t know how to reach the \u2018whatever\u2019 crowd.\u00a0 Apathy is a killer, an eternal killer.\u00a0 I can only hope to persuade those who care at least somewhat about life, death, Heaven, Hell, God, and eternity.<\/p>\n<p>I pulled the Passmore quote from John Lennox\u2019s 2015 book, <em>Against the Flow:\u00a0 The Inspiration of Daniel in an Age of Relativism.<\/em> \u00a0As per usual in this essay, I\u2019ll pull some nuggets from the book that I found intriguing.\u00a0 I do recommend the book, along with everything else that Lennox writes.\u00a0 My principal caveat on Lennox:\u00a0 He\u2019s a compromiser on Genesis 1-11, firmly in the Intelligent Design camp, neither a friend to creationists nor to literal Biblical history before Abraham.\u00a0 Clearly, though, he does embrace the history and prophetic verities of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Lennox, a professor of mathematics at Oxford, once gave a lecture on the relationship of science to theology.\u00a0 He was asked by a physicist how he could possibly be a mathematical scientist in the 21<sup>st<\/sup> century and hold to Christian beliefs, for example, that Jesus was simultaneously human and God.<\/p>\n<p>Lennox replied that he would be delighted to respond if the physicist could answer an easier scientific question first.<\/p>\n<p>Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cWhat is consciousness?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Physicist:\u00a0 \u201cI don\u2019t know.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cNever mind, Let\u2019s think of something easier.\u00a0 What is energy?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Physicist:\u00a0 \u201cWell, we can measure it and write down the equations governing its conservation.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cYes, I know, but that was not my question.\u00a0 My question was:\u00a0 what is it?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Physicist:\u00a0 \u201cWe don\u2019t know, and I think you were aware of that.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cYes, like you I have read Feynman and he says that no one knows what energy is.\u00a0 That brings me to my main point.\u00a0 Would I be right in thinking that you were about to dismiss me (and my belief in God) if I failed to explain the divine and human nature of Christ?\u201d\u00a0 With no response from the physicist, he continued, \u201cWell, by the same token, would you be happy if I now dismiss you and all your knowledge of physics because you cannot explain to me the nature of energy?\u00a0 After all, energy is surely much less complex than the God who created it.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Physicist:\u00a0 \u201cPlease don\u2019t!\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Lennox:\u00a0 \u201c. . . (so) why do you believe in the concepts of consciousness and energy, even though you do not understand them fully?\u00a0 Is it not because of the explanatory power of those concepts?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Physicist:\u00a0 \u201cI see what you are driving at.\u00a0 You believe that Jesus Christ is God and man because that is the only explanation that has the power to make sense of what we know of him.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cExactly.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em>Against the Flow <\/em>is primarily a commentary on the book of Daniel.\u00a0 Lennox brings in a significant amount of historical insight.\u00a0 In Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s Babylon, the temple priests enjoyed enormous power and property.\u00a0 At the Spring festival, the emperor submitted to a ritual public humiliation by the priests, whereby they slapped him hard enough to bring tears.\u00a0 The people were reminded that the priests were the power behind the throne, and only then could the great banquet begin.\u00a0 Such a spectacle would certainly bring spice to American politics!<\/p>\n<p>Babylon\u2019s progenitor, Babel, was led by a people who demanded to \u201clet us make a name\u201d for themselves (Gen 11:4).\u00a0 In contrast, Abraham was willing to let God rename him and determine his identity and significance.\u00a0 Abraham trusted God and God marked Abraham as the archetype of faith . . . and faith is the foundation principle of God\u2019s New Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl believed that the primary human motivational force is the search for meaning, and that the greatest thing we can do for others is to give them hope for the future.\u00a0 God gave Abraham hope and then fulfilled His promises.\u00a0 Abraham left Mesopotamia at God\u2019s call and traveled to the land that became named after his grandson, Israel (Jacob).\u00a0 Daniel, in contrast, was taken forcibly from the land of promise back to the land that Abraham left.\u00a0 Daniel\u2019s call was to live his faith in God, publicly, in a wicked land.\u00a0 And so we have the many lessons from Daniel\u2019s life for us in the godless West today.<\/p>\n<p>The emperor forced name changes on Daniel and his three peers, working to erase their Hebrew identities.\u00a0 They had to learn the Chaldean language and communicate publicly only in that language.\u00a0 Today\u2019s culture attempts to force certain words and concepts into and out of our language, and will <em>cancel <\/em>those who do not comply.<\/p>\n<p>Lennox contrasts ancient Greek theology with the Hebrew faith.\u00a0 The Greek gods were <em>inside <\/em>the world.\u00a0 Jehovah wasn\u2019t just about monotheism, but that He is external to the world, creating it and defining its meaning by His will.\u00a0 God gives meaning to the world, but in the pagan system, the meaning of the system cannot be found inside the system.<\/p>\n<p>A popular atheist objection to Christians goes like this:\u00a0 \u201cYou are atheists with respect to Artemis, Baal, Diana, Wotan, Zeus, and thousands of other gods just like we are.\u00a0 We just go one god more.\u201d\u00a0 This is a fallacious argument, because God is not just a part of the system.\u00a0 He created the universe and sustains it each moment.\u00a0 In paganism matter is eternal and began in formless chaos.\u00a0 Some gods \u2018arose\u2019 out of the chaos (evolution), but these gods are still part of the stuff; \u201cand so, in some sense, everything is god.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>God as revealed in the Bible is not made of matter-stuff.\u00a0 He is self-existent, eternal, and Spirit.\u00a0 God was first.\u00a0 Everything derives from Him.<\/p>\n<p>Physicist Paul Davies, considering the apparent fine-tuning of the physical laws and constants of the universe famously said, \u201cThe impression of design is overwhelming.\u201d\u00a0 But asked about the nature of said intelligence, he suggests it may be superhuman, but not supernatural.\u00a0 Davies may well be in sync with Babylonian theology.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream explores the relationship between reason and revelation.\u00a0 Atheists often try to pit these two concepts against each other.\u00a0 But they are not in the same category.\u00a0 The Babylonian advisors were quite eager to employ their reason on the data available, but the emperor would not reveal the dream.\u00a0 Unaided reason was helpless.\u00a0 Daniel, though, understood that God knew both the dream and the meaning and could choose to reveal the data.\u00a0 Daniel never suspended his reason, but employed it to interpret the meaning of the dream\u2019s symbology in the Chaldean language.<\/p>\n<p>Lennox mentions the fictional detective Hercule Poirot who uses his \u201clittle grey cells\u201d to find patterns in the evidence.\u00a0 Poirot acquires his data by interviewing people who provide him with invaluable <em>revelations<\/em> of what occurred before the detective arrived on the scene.\u00a0 Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cTo say that reason and revelation are antithetic does not even rise to the dignity of being false.\u00a0 It simply doesn\u2019t make sense \u2013 it is a confusion of categories, as the philosophers say.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>When young Daniel, in his early 20s, was brought before the throne of Earth\u2019s mightiest emperor, he was likely confronted with live lions chained to each side, adding to the intimidation. He confessed that no man had the power to know and reveal the secrets of the king\u2019s dream, \u201cBut there is a God in heaven that reveals secrets . . . But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have . . .\u201d (Daniel 2:28, 30), but that it is God\u2019s will to make known to Nebuchadnezzar and his generation what God would do in future history.<\/p>\n<p>Lennox points out that the Jews had failed in their task to witness to the Gentiles, but then there were individuals, like Daniel, who still served faithfully.\u00a0 The case is analogous today.\u00a0 Western Christians have singularly failed to preach the Gospel boldly, faithfully, and Scripturally to the last several generations.\u00a0 But any one of us, individually, may choose to be faithful.\u00a0 All the gods and worldviews of this age are just as impotent as the pagan religions of Daniel\u2019s day, yet God is the same God as He always has been . . . commanding us to proclaim His message.<\/p>\n<p>In Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream there is a stone cut out of a mountain without hands, that smashes the statue representing the coming kingdoms of man, and then fills the Earth.\u00a0 This speaks against false eschatologies, amillennialism and postmillennialism.\u00a0 Man\u2019s kingdoms are not God\u2019s kingdoms.\u00a0 Jesus will come in His own power to establish His own kingdom.\u00a0 Our mission is not about power or politics, but to prepare born again children to enter His kingdom by preaching the Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Whether through the Holy Roman Empire or Marxist utopias or an American social gospel, man\u2019s futility is relentless in ignoring the Great Commission.\u00a0 There will be no paradise on Earth through man\u2019s efforts.\u00a0 Utopian attempts produce only carnage, poverty, and tyranny, as we see in Western politics right through to the present day.\u00a0 I believe that if Christians in America would fulfill their responsibilities under the Great Commission diligently, God might just grant us some political freedoms and peace within which to do the job He gave us.\u00a0 But there is no danger of that, and judgments are falling quickly on our nation.<\/p>\n<p>Last century, <em>The Times <\/em>newspaper of London asked its readers to answer the question, \u201cWhat is wrong with the world?\u201d\u00a0 G.K. Chesterton wrote in:<\/p>\n<p><em>Dear Sir,<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>I am.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>Yours faithfully,<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>G.K. Chesterton<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Our problem is us; no, not those dastardly skeptics and heretics and cultists and Democrats and Marxists.\u00a0 It\u2019s us . . . us Christians.\u00a0 We might just trigger the power of God to turn things around, if we really want to.\u00a0 But I see <u>no<\/u> indication of a coming revival in the West, despite the continual hype that infests evangelicalism and pentecostalism.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar decided to take that vision and glorify himself.\u00a0 That idolatry cost him dearly.\u00a0 The philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach (1804\u201372) had a great influence on Karl Marx.\u00a0 Feuerbach declared, \u201cThe beginning, middle, and end of religion is MAN.\u201d\u00a0 Also, \u201cMAN is man\u2019s god.\u201d\u00a0 Pure idolatry.<\/p>\n<p>A declaration was made at the 1961 Communist Party Congress:\u00a0 \u201cUntil we remove bourgeois moral principles, roots and all, train men in the spirit of communist morality and renew that spiritually and morally, it will not be possible to build a communist society.\u201d\u00a0 Well, over the last sixty years they have succeeded by a total corruption of the public education system and entertainment media.\u00a0 I recall conservatives back in the 1960s warning about encroaching immorality and secular humanism in American culture.\u00a0 Such warnings were typically scoffed at.<\/p>\n<p>By the way, communist morality is the subjugation of every individual to the dictates of the state, absolute conformity, and enmity to any principle or practice with Christian roots.\u00a0 How is it going?<\/p>\n<p>When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to bow down before the king\u2019s idol, Nebachudnezzar was shocked.\u00a0 Surely they didn\u2019t value their religion above their lives?\u00a0 <em>But he could not force them to bow down.<\/em>\u00a0 He could kill them, but the mightiest king on Earth had no power over their conscience or will.\u00a0 His fury and frustration were pegged.<\/p>\n<p>The additional shock was not that God delivered them <em>from <\/em>the fire, but that He delivered them <em>in <\/em>the fire.\u00a0 The three did not know what God would do, but they knew that they would be in His hands, whether by surviving the furnace or by entering Paradise.\u00a0 We have similar choices, although not usually of lethal consequences.\u00a0 Life is not complicated . . . just do right.\u00a0 And do right again.<\/p>\n<p>All genuine Christians will confess that <em>Jesus Christ is Lord<\/em>.\u00a0 Daniel chapter 3 is about how seriously we take it.\u00a0 We\u2019ll get to meet Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah someday.\u00a0 We\u2019ll doubtless have some appreciative things to say about their story.\u00a0 When they ask about our story, will we have something to say?<\/p>\n<p>The law of the Medes and Persians plays a role in Daniel\u2019s life (Daniel chapter 6).\u00a0 Secular histories give undue credit to the Mesopotamians for the origins of legal codes and the principle of equality under the law.\u00a0 Properly, though, such codes and the principle of equality go back to Moses and God\u2019s exposition of His laws.\u00a0 In Deuteronomy 17:18-20 we see that the king is subject to God\u2019s laws, just like everyone else, ultimately because we all are made in the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel 7 looks forward to coming judgments from God.\u00a0 Most people see judgment as all negative, but for those whose trust is in God, judgment is a cause for joy.\u00a0 Lennox:\u00a0 \u201cWhen you are suffering unfairness, discrimination, harassment, or outright persecution, the uppermost thought on your mind is:\u00a0 how long is this going to last?\u00a0 And will anything ever be done about it?\u201d\u00a0 The New Testament is filled with hope for persecuted saints . . . see 2 Thessalonians chapter 1 for Paul\u2019s comforting promises of judgment for those afflicting the saints at Thessalonica.<\/p>\n<p>We long for justice, but ultimate justice is not seen in our lifetime.\u00a0 God keeps perfect records and perfect justice will come.\u00a0 The Judge will be the Son of Man . . . one of us while also God in the flesh.\u00a0 He has walked in our shoes.\u00a0 There are no excuses that can deceive Him.<\/p>\n<p>Only the future world government under the Lord Jesus will see justice properly done in day-to-day life.\u00a0 The world\u2019s elites desperately want to establish their own world government with man at the helm.\u00a0 They are merely setting themselves up for the Antichrist, whose kingdom will be short and quickly destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Albert Einstein yearned for peace via a global government under man:\u00a0 \u201cA world government must be created which is able to solve conflicts between nations by judicial decision.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>This is not a new idea.\u00a0 In the middle ages the poet and statesman Danti Alighiere (1265-1321) argued that war could be eliminated if \u201cthe whole earth and all that humans possess be a monarchy, that is, one government under one ruler . . . he would hold kings contentedly within the borders of their kingdoms, and keep peace among them.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Philosopher Immaniuel Kant preferred a federal union of free and independent states because he feared that a single power would degenerate into a soulless despotism and crush \u201cthe germs of goodness.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Lennox observes that Daniel 7 is projecting an end-time global tyranny that \u201cwill lead inexorably to the greatest state-orchestrated hostility to God that the world has ever seen.\u201d\u00a0 We see such hostilities breaking out today all over the world.<\/p>\n<p>Friedrich Nietzsche, an atheist, saw the \u201cdeath of God\u201d as a threat to human freedom and an open door to nihilism and the loss of meaning.<\/p>\n<p>All these issues provide topics for the Christian evangelist.\u00a0 Everything in the news is connected to unfolding prophecy and the need for lost sinners to find the Saviour.\u00a0 Only born again children of God will be His co-inheritors when His kingdom is established.\u00a0 We can challenge unbelievers that they have only two teams to choose from.\u00a0 One of those teams will rule; the other will be damned.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel 8 predicts the coming rule of Antiochus IV, who ruled over the Jews from 175-164 BC.\u00a0 He took the title <em>Epiphanes<\/em>, a claim to divinity meaning \u201cGod manifest.\u201d\u00a0 He was clearly a type of the yet-future Antichrist.<\/p>\n<p>Antiochus shared a difficulty with other emperors, unifying a diverse collection of peoples and religions.\u00a0 The Jews, in particular, were centered on their Scripture-based God.\u00a0 Antiochus raged at the recalcitrant Jews, desecrating the temple, and robbing the golden altar and lampstand, along with many golden vessels.<\/p>\n<p>Later he attacked Jerusalem and slaughtered many Jews.\u00a0 Determined to break their spirit he wrote laws that contradicted vital Jewish religious practices, for example, mandating the sacrifice of pigs and making circumcision illegal.\u00a0 The temple was rededicated to Zeus.\u00a0 For the Jews this was abomination upon abomination.<\/p>\n<p>The Maccabean Revolt, led by Judas Maccabeus, led to the recapture of Jerusalem.\u00a0 The festival of Hanukkah celebrates the victory to this day.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus arrived on the scene two centuries later, called by His followers <em>Immanuel<\/em>, \u201cGod with us,\u201d along with declaring, \u201cI and my Father are one,\u201d it shocked the Jews.\u00a0 Was this Antiochus all over again?\u00a0 Either it was blasphemy or it was true.\u00a0 They attempted to stone Him and then succeeded in crucifying Him.\u00a0 In a future day, perhaps not far from now, the temple will be rebuilt and the Antichrist himself will defile it, but Jesus will come in power to establish His righteous kingdom.\u00a0 It would be best to discern whose side to be on through all these events.<\/p>\n<p>It is noteworthy that in the last century (+ a little), there has been more death and state-sponsored anti-God tyranny than in all of previous history.\u00a0 It is remarkably consistent how lethally anti-Christian are the tyrannies of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and the Kim family, along with local hate-driven persecution all over the world from anti-Christian religions including Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism.\u00a0 (Subscribe to the monthly newsletter from <em>Voice of the Martyrs<\/em> to read story after story of how Christians persevere all over the world today.)<\/p>\n<p>Antiochus was just representative of what Satan attempts to do every time he can get one of his minions into power.\u00a0 Consider the Kim family, notably North Korea\u2019s first despot, Kim Il Sung.\u00a0\u00a0 <em>Juche<\/em>, the official state ideology of North Korea, embraces the core principle that \u201cman is the master of everything and decides everything.\u201d\u00a0 Kim is seen as a Messianic liberator of all humankind.\u00a0 His birthplace and life events are commemorated by shrines, requiring pilgrimages by the North Korean people.\u00a0 Kim\u2019s portrait is in every household and people begin every day by reading his words.\u00a0 \u2018Reflection\u2019 meetings are held wherein people repent of wrong actions and wrong thoughts.<\/p>\n<p>The devil is warming up in preparation for his Antichrist.<\/p>\n<p>We ought to be busy about the Great Commission.\u00a0 That never changes.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ll end here.\u00a0 Lennox\u2019s commentary and insights are voluminous and rich.\u00a0 You ought to have his book on your shelf of commentaries . . . and I believe you\u2019ll simply enjoy reading it through.\u00a0 The main thing about prophecy is that it motivates us to be about the Lord\u2019s work in this present age while souls are so much at stake.\u00a0 Jesus is coming soon.\u00a0 Let\u2019s finish strong.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>185. Why bother believing?<br \/>\nAugust 1, 2023\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cAm I claiming that the tragedy of human existence is evidence that God exists?\u00a0 No.\u00a0 Instead, I am claiming that the tragedy of human existence absolutely and finally strips us of any claimed right to apathy.\u201d\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n<p>So argues Neil Shenvi in his 2022 book, <em>Why Believe?\u00a0 A Reasoned Approach to Christianity<\/em>.\u00a0 The world is, and always has been, filled with injustice, corruption, disease, poverty, misery, and . . . and certain death, sooner or later, for everyone who draws a breath from Earth\u2019s air.\u00a0 Accordingly, the truth claims of the Christian faith, with a frightening judgment for lost sinners who reject the Gospel, and eternal life on a New Earth for those who\u00a0 humble themselves and find forgiveness in Christ, are awesome in their import.\u00a0 It is irrational to say, \u201cChristianity might be true or it might not be, but it doesn\u2019t really matter to me.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>This is not Pascal\u2019s wager, which suggests that it is far better to believe, since the consequences of unbelief are tragic and the consequences of belief are infinitely rewarding if the Bible is true, but if the Bible is false, then nothing is lost.\u00a0 Frankly, you <em>cannot <\/em>become a born again child of God by playing the odds and hoping for the best.\u00a0 Salvation requires sincerity and genuine humility, repentance, and trust.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ve met many unbelievers with the \u201cWhatever\u201d attitude.\u00a0 Spiritual zombies.\u00a0 Walking dead men and women.\u00a0 There is far more hope for the argumentative anti-theist.\u00a0 At least there you might have a conversation and a discussion about evidence and moral realities.<\/p>\n<p>C.S. Lewis:\u00a0 \u201cChristianity . . ., if false, is of <em>no<\/em> importance, and, if true, of infinite importance.\u00a0 The one thing it cannot be is moderately important.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The existence of God, the biblical God, is \u201ca question of death and life,\u201d Shenvi asserts.\u00a0 We are dying men and women, justly condemned for our willful sins which manifest throughout the corrupt world we see around us, yet we are offered not only forgiveness and a resurrection body (eternal life), but also sonship in God\u2019s family.\u00a0 \u201cIf this claim is even possibly true, we ought to take it very seriously.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Secular philosophies, including those of political parties, sell hope through reformed educational systems, \u2018better\u2019 government, social activism, or therapy.\u00a0 Religions offer redemption through good deeds, moral codes, prayers, and ritual practices.\u00a0 The common deceit is that we can fix ourselves.<\/p>\n<p>In stark contrast, the Gospel claims that we need a Saviour, a Rescuer, and there is <em>nothing <\/em>we can do to please God apart from Him \u2013 the Lord Jesus Christ.\u00a0 But if we come His way, then we\u2019ll be aligned with others pointed in the same direction, and we can actually live productive lives.\u00a0 The Bible provides details on how to relate to God and to others.\u00a0 Becoming a Christian is not a \u201cbare intellectual exercise.\u201d\u00a0 \u201cJesus is a real Saviour for people desperately in need of rescue . . . people like us.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi\u2019s book includes a variety of arguments from traditional apologetics, but also some less traditional.\u00a0 Consider the field of <em>onomastics<\/em> \u2013 the study of the history and origin of names.\u00a0 For example, the most popular name for a Jewish boy in 1<sup>st<\/sup> century Israel was Simon; for girls the favorite was Mary.\u00a0 A study of names found in the first five books of the New Testament shows a strong correlation with historical records, including names found on ossuaries.<\/p>\n<p>Why does this support the historical validity of the Gospel accounts?\u00a0 Shenvi suggests you enlist four different American authors to write novellettes set in Honduras during the Vietnam War, involving about twenty characters.\u00a0 What are the chances that the names chosen by the authors would match statistically the name frequencies of actual Hondurans during the 1970s?\u00a0 Apart from the internet (a <em>very <\/em>recent invention), \u201chow accessible are foreign census records from a half century ago?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi encourages skeptics to read the Gospel accounts carefully.\u00a0 They might be in for a surprise.\u00a0 The modern view of Jesus is shaped by Renaissance art (he would <em>not<\/em> have had long hair), TV preachers (most of which are not actually born again Christians), dim recollections from youth of Sunday School (watered-down lessons), and pop culture (Jesus is love, Jesus is cool).\u00a0 Read the Gospel accounts and yes, you will find Jesus to be compassionate and gentle, but also speaking with power and authority.\u00a0 He publicly and loudly condemned religious hypocrisy.\u00a0 He embraced outcasts, caring for their souls \u2013 not for their social standing.\u00a0 He warned of God\u2019s wrath, teaching more about Hell than anyone else throughout the Bible.\u00a0 Jesus simply did not fit conventional stereotypes.\u00a0 \u201cNever man spake like this man,\u201d reported the soldiers who had been ordered to arrest Jesus, but came back empty-handed.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself is the ultimate challenge to the skeptic, because these matters are spiritual and God\u2019s word is designed to touch the spirit of man.\u00a0 John 20:31 \u2013 \u201cBut these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In his chapter on the Resurrection, Shenvi makes the evidential case, and deals with the various naturalistic explanations that have been offered.\u00a0 Interestingly, he cites atheist Jeff Lowder who cautions Christians that \u201c. . . apologists need to recognize that, <em>until atheists are shown that theism is plausible, <\/em>atheists will continue to regard the resurrection as a highly implausible event.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In short, the rejection of the resurrection by atheists is a simple consequence of their belief that God does not exist.\u00a0 The resurrection is not the preeminent miracle (intervention by God) reported in the Bible.\u00a0 Rather, the prime event is Genesis 1:1, the fiat creation of everything.\u00a0 Given Genesis 1:1, the resurrection is no stretch at all.\u00a0 Shenvi:\u00a0 \u201cThe most common reason that people reject the resurrection . . . is a commitment to naturalism.\u201d\u00a0 Under naturalism, miracles are impossible, not just unlikely.\u00a0 (I have designed a tract for the committed atheist, entitled \u201cWho are you?\u201d, which you can find on <a href=\"http:\/\/www.thinktracts.com\/\">ThinkTracts.com<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi observes that many people ask why God doesn\u2019t prove Himself by miraculous signs?\u00a0 What if He has?\u00a0 In the middle of human history, the resurrection of Jesus validated His person, His ministry, and His mission.\u00a0 Everything changed for His crushed and defeated followers, and for all history to follow, when He raised Himself from the dead.\u00a0 Raising yourself from the dead \u2013 that\u2019s credibility!\u00a0 Many have studied the circumstances and history around that single historical event and have been transformed from skeptics to Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi suggests that if the message \u201cGod exists\u201d were scrawled across the moon in fiery letters, some skeptics might turn to theism, but there would be nothing to tell us what God is like or what He expects of us.\u00a0 I would guess that skeptics would more likely invoke an alien visitation.<\/p>\n<p>But if Jesus was intended by God to be God\u2019s personal revelation to humanity, then His resurrection and the biblical record serve just fine, thank you, for provoking a worldview-changing response . . . if the skeptic can get past his \u201cWhatever\u201d attitude.<\/p>\n<p>I do recommend Shenvi\u2019s book, but have a cautionary note:\u00a0 He\u2019s a Big-Banger.\u00a0 He argues, logically, that if all space, matter, and time came into being with the Big Bang, then the cause must be outside of nature.\u00a0 Christians, Jews, and Muslims assert that this cause is God.\u00a0 He cites the famous quote by astronomer Robert Jastrow who closes his book <em>God and the Astronomers:<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cFor the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream.\u00a0 He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<p>He goes on to discuss fine-tuning arguments in a conventional way.\u00a0 More interestingly, he mentions the \u201cweirdness\u201d objection to theism, that it\u2019s \u201cabsurd\u201d to imagine an immaterial Mind who designed and created the universe when it is simpler and more \u201cplausible\u201d to embrace the idea that nothing is \u201cthere\u201d except what we can see, hear, and touch.<\/p>\n<p>I would use the word \u201coutrageous\u201d to describe the Christian \/ theist\u2019s position. Also that the atheist \/ evolutionist\u2019s worldview is \u201coutrageous\u201d \u2013 that nothing became everything and that everything is ordered into spiral galaxies and planets in stable orbits around stars and that our planet is filled with an ecosystem that is based on outrageously brilliant nanotechnology.<\/p>\n<p>The point is that whatever you decide to believe, it is <em>outrageous.<\/em>\u00a0 But <em>something <\/em>is true, so get over it and figure out what makes the most sense.\u00a0 That leads directly and with overwhelming evidence and logic to biblical Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>By the way, as a PhD-educated physicist, I can attest to the weirdness \/ outrageousness of relativity and quantum mechanics, which describe how the universe works at the most basic level, yet don\u2019t connect to common-sense experience in many ways.\u00a0 As Shenvi notes, \u201cWe balk at the existence of immaterial realities but seem curiously unconcerned with the proliferation of ten-dimensional strings, parallel universes, closed-time loops, and nonlocal entanglement.\u201d*\u00a0 Also, \u201cThe presence of actual angels or ghosts in <em>Star Trek<\/em> would be exceptionally jarring, even in a fictional account.\u00a0 But if the captain announces that a \u2018hyperdimensional tachyon-based life-form has materialized on the bridge,\u201d we can suspend our disbelief.<\/p>\n<p>*Note:\u00a0 All but the last are purely speculative ideas, yet are believed \u2018real\u2019 by many scientists, while the last item seems real, but nobody understands it.<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi writes a thoughtful chapter on morality as evidence for God as revealed in the Bible.\u00a0 A typical atheistic position was voiced by Bertrand Russell:\u00a0 \u201cThe question whether a [moral] code is good or bad is the same as the question whether or not it promotes human happiness.\u201d\u00a0 Similarly, Sam Harris:\u00a0 \u201cQuestions of right and wrong are really questions about the happiness and suffering of sentient creatures.\u00a0 If we are in a position to affect the happiness or suffering of others, we have ethical responsibilities toward them.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>What is the foundation for morality in a materialistic universe?\u00a0 Russell and Harris suggest a calculus that measures net happiness as a determinant for moral policy.\u00a0 The devil is in the details, though.\u00a0 Would the suffering of one fellow outweigh the flourishing of a hundred?\u00a0 Is slavery or organ harvesting justified if it brings pleasure to enough people?\u00a0 Perhaps it\u2019s the \u2018important people\u2019 whose happiness is most valued.<\/p>\n<p>Why are humans valuable at all?\u00a0 Materialistically \u2013 atheistically \u2013 we are just bags of chemicals moving about, interacting with other bags.\u00a0 Besides, who am \u201cI\u201d and who are \u201cyou\u201d if your alleged thoughts and observed actions are merely the results of random brain chemistry?\u00a0 Personhood requires a soul, a spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Atheist French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre was honest about all this:\u00a0 \u201cGod does not exist and all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him . . . Everything is permissible if God does not exist.\u201d\u00a0 Sartre lived accordingly, self-centered and mistreating the women in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In his 2010 essay, \u201cAn Amoral Manifesto (Part 1),\u201d atheist philosopher Joel Marks clarifies:\u00a0 \u201cA \u2018soft atheist\u2019 would hold that one could be an atheist and still believe in morality, but the religious fundamentalists are correct:\u00a0 without God, there is no morality.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>If human beings are <em>persons <\/em>with free will and rationality, made in the image of God and accountable to Him and to others, well, that changes everything, doesn\u2019t it?<\/p>\n<p>Since postmodernism began to dominate the culture and the institutions about 30 years ago, <em>ethical subjectivism<\/em> holds sway in the minds and hearts of many.\u00a0 Briefly, everyone sets his own moral standards.\u00a0 It matters not how evil you think are the actions of another; if he asserts his actions are moral, you have no ground for criticism.\u00a0 Identity chaos in politics and sexuality is built on the same quicksand.\u00a0 In ethical subjectivism the laws and standards of a community or a nation are determined by who can amass power and enforce his preferences.\u00a0 Yes, it\u2019s ultimately all about power.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, Shenvi notes, no one actually lives consistently as a moral relativist.\u00a0 It\u2019s <em>wrong <\/em>to molest babies for fun.\u00a0 It\u2019s <em>wrong <\/em>for my spouse to cheat on me.\u00a0 It\u2019s <em>wrong <\/em>for someone to steal from me.\u00a0 I\u2019ve observed over the years that the most despicably evil political leaders tend to avoid bragging about the wrong that they do.\u00a0 Instead, they cover up or lie about what they did, knowing that the vast majority of people will judge them evil if they are forthright about their relativistic \u2018moral\u2019 code.<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi observes that skeptics often use the very\u00a0 existence of evil in the world, whether caused by natural events or by people, as an argument against God.\u00a0 Rather, he argues, the despair caused by evil in the world is an argument <em>for <\/em>God.\u00a0 If the world is strictly materialistic, why is there any distinction between evil and good?\u00a0 It\u2019s all just molecules in motion.\u00a0 There is no \u2018justice\u2019 in clumps of molecules that collide with each other.\u00a0 That\u2019s just physics.<\/p>\n<p>But if we are all <em>persons,<\/em> image-bearers, then justice and tragedy have meaning.\u00a0 Biblically, evil occurs in the world because this world is currently in a fallen state due to sin.\u00a0 The Fall accounts both for natural evil and for man\u2019s crimes against man.\u00a0 The Christian has an assured hope that this will change.\u00a0 A judgment is on the horizon for everyone and everything.\u00a0 A New Heaven and a New Earth await the redeemed, wherein dwelleth righteousness.\u00a0 In materialism, of course, there is no hope.\u00a0 None.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, but secondarily, some of the evil, particularly the trials of life, serve to produce character and dependence on God.\u00a0 Shenvi:\u00a0 \u201cBut if God is less interested in our physical comfort and more interested in producing in us a certain kind of character, then it makes much more sense that we face trials, hardships, and suffering that can produce in us forbearance, bravery, mercy, and compassion \u2013 virtues that wouldn\u2019t exist . . .\u201d, if God made the present Earth into a \u201ca sunny beach with an endless supply of snacks and free WiFi.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The Bible has much to say about how to walk with God and endure the trouble we all experience in this life.\u00a0 The biggest trouble, by far, is death, of course.\u00a0 Death overwhelms all other troubles.\u00a0 What is the materialist\u2019s answer for those who face death?\u00a0 Facing that question does not <em>prove <\/em>the Christian faith, but it certainly highlights the infinite stakes attached to whatever reality is.\u00a0 By the way, what lies beyond death for the materialist is far, far worse than he imagines.<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi poses a poignant challenge to the skeptic.\u00a0 Suppose that Jesus visited you, performed miracles in your presence, and proved to you that He is who He says He is.\u00a0 Let\u2019s say you are convinced now that the Bible is true and Jesus is Lord and Saviour.\u00a0 So how do you feel about Him?\u00a0 Will you now choose to be His disciple, to seek His will in all your big decisions?\u00a0 Will you repent from the cherished sins in your life?\u00a0 Will you submit to God\u2019s standards for sex, marriage, business, relationships?\u00a0 Will you make your life\u2019s mission one of telling others about Him, warning them of a coming judgment, pleading with them to repent and trust Christ to become born again children of God?<\/p>\n<p>Will you do and be all that?\u00a0 Shenvi:\u00a0 \u201cGod\u2019s purpose is to change hearts, not merely to change minds.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In evangelism we must not miss this emphasis.\u00a0 Avoid the sidetrack of evidential apologetics when the real problems are heart problems, when the real reason that skeptics avoid Jesus is their love for their favorite sins.\u00a0 Yes, sometimes an evidential or historical or scientific or philosophical issue is a genuine stumbling block.\u00a0 Then by all means use, gently, the best apologetics arguments to help tear that barrier down.\u00a0 But the main thing is to preach law, sin, judgment, repentance, faith, the cross and the resurrection, and the new birth.\u00a0 The main thing is the heart.<\/p>\n<p>Preaching the Gospel and making the conditions for salvation personal is the ultimate apologetic, as Shenvi argues in his final chapters.\u00a0 There is a compelling moral logic in the obvious sinfulness of everyone and the fouled-up consequences we can all see around us . . . and especially in our own lives.\u00a0 Sin is a violation of the moral order God designed into us.\u00a0 There is a moral logic and a soul-deep relief in the Gospel message, that we need a Rescuer and should be fearful of the ultimate Judge.\u00a0 That salvation is a gift not to be earned is glorious news, not a feature of any other religion or philosophy on Earth.\u00a0 That the price for this gift was paid by God Himself, who became one of us(!) is so familiar that we\u2019ve forgotten how incredible this truth is.\u00a0 That in a moment of time you can pass from death to life, from damnation to salvation, from lost to a born again child of the King of the universe . . . There is no competition to these truths from any other philosophy or narrative throughout human history.\u00a0 There are no other players in the ballpark.\u00a0 Game over.\u00a0 Choose victory and glory or choose death.<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi reviews other religions to compare their messages and promises.\u00a0 Nicely done.\u00a0 Only the Christian faith is honest about the reality of the human condition and realistic about the solution.\u00a0 It\u2019s just not hard to figure this out.<\/p>\n<p>Shenvi:\u00a0 \u201cAccording to the Bible, our primary problem is not a lack of self-affirmation, a bad environment, or even material poverty; our primary problem is our sin.\u201d\u00a0 Contrast this point with everything you hear in the culture and from politicians.\u00a0 They will identify as problems (for which only they have the solutions) everything under the sun . . . except sin!\u00a0 The only solution for sin \u2013 which by individual choice afflicts everyone \u2013 is repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.\u00a0 The new birth changes not just your eternal destination, but your hope and attitude and actions for every day of this life.\u00a0 No politician or media pundit or academic is going to go there!<\/p>\n<p>Neil Shenvi\u2019s book is both informative and encouraging, especially the last few chapters.\u00a0 It\u2019s worth having.\u00a0 I\u2019ll close with one of his final thoughts:\u00a0 \u201cIf Christianity is true, what is the only rational response to a God like this?\u00a0 Worship.\u00a0 Utter delight, awe, praise, and amazement.\u00a0 A repentant heart supremely values this infinitely good God not merely because He commands it, but also because He is so consummately worthy of it.\u00a0 In contrast, an unrepentant heart is not merely wicked; it is irrational.\u00a0 Anyone who would trade the eternal, certain, and infinite pleasure of knowing and delighting in God for the fleeting, uncertain, finite pleasures of this life is a madman.\u201d<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212; <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n186. Identity, History, Reality<br \/>\nSeptember 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The ideas, intuitions, and philosophies that dominate the attention of today\u2019s culture did not spring forth suddenly, nor did they arise by chance.\u00a0 In particular, the identity and gender claims that were once so counterintuitive \u2013 \u201cI am a woman trapped in a man\u2019s body\u201d \u2013 seem reasonable to so many because of the penetration of critical theory and poststructuralism in the schools and other institutions.\u00a0 History matters and has led inexorably to where we are today.<\/p>\n<p>This is the theme of Carl Trueman\u2019s excellent 2020 book, <em>The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self:\u00a0 Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution<\/em>.\u00a0 While Trueman\u2019s treatment is sweeping and insightful, he neglects the invisible roots of all societal degradations \u2013 the spiritual war in which Satan schemes to destroy families, corrupt children, and damn souls.\u00a0 What Trueman does masterfully is to analyze the human and historical instruments Satan uses to infest culture, education, media, and politics.<\/p>\n<p>The cultural changes in the West have moved with startling rapidity.\u00a0 Twenty years ago a majority was basically opposed to gay marriage, and most of the laws were consistent with that opposition.\u00a0 Today gay marriage is uncontroversial and trans ideology is dogmatically embraced by all the institutions.<\/p>\n<p>Key historical figures played pivotal roles in what has become a tsunami of moral change.\u00a0 Trueman notes that Sigmund Freud was key to the sexual revolution by shifting the understanding of <em>self<\/em>:\u00a0 \u201cThe self must first be psychologized; psychology must then be sexualized; and sex must be politicized.\u201d\u00a0 Sex used to be for procreation and recreation.\u00a0 Freud reinterpreted sex to define \u201cwho we are, as individuals, as societies, and as a species.\u201d\u00a0 To Freud we are fundamentally sexual beings from infancy on.\u00a0 Our sexual desires define who we are.\u00a0 (What a pitiful contrast to the biblical view of individuals created in God\u2019s image!)<\/p>\n<p>Karl Marx laid the foundation to make sex political.\u00a0 In Marx\u2019s day oppression was about economics or legal \/ class distinctions.\u00a0 Now oppression has been psychologized.\u00a0 Freud\u2019s ideas were combined with Marx\u2019s by leftists like Wilhelm Reich and Herbert Marcuse.\u00a0 Politics is now internal and subjective.\u00a0 Nobody is allowed to tell you that you\u2019re <em>wrong<\/em>.\u00a0 Evidence is irrelevant.\u00a0 And so is reality.\u00a0 <em>You <\/em>define reality.\u00a0 <em>You <\/em>are the god of your identity.<\/p>\n<p>Trueman observes that (what I recall growing up in the 1960s as) the sexual revolution has gone far beyond a relaxing of boundaries or a higher incidence of moral transgressions.\u00a0 Rather, the intent and the practice has been to abolish moral codes entirely.\u00a0 Furthermore, anyone that clings to traditional or, worse, biblical morals is evil and should be punished.\u00a0 We live in the culture described by the prophet Isaiah, \u201cWoe unto them that call evil good, and good evil . . .\u201d (Isaiah 5:20-23).\u00a0 Anyone that isn\u2019t happy in the new Wild West of sexual immorality becomes a political enemy.<\/p>\n<p>May we debate these issues, perhaps on the campuses of our institutions of higher learning?\u00a0 Karl Marx offered advice on how to use criticism to defeat the enemies of the revolution:\u00a0 \u201cIts essential sentiment is <em>indignation<\/em>; its essential activity is <em>denunciation.<\/em>\u201d\u00a0 And so we see no dialogoues, no debates.\u00a0 What matters is power and the squashing of opposition, with as much prejudice as possible.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, the language has been transformed to deligitimize dissent.\u00a0 Say anything negative about homosexual behavior and you are guilty of <em>homophobia<\/em>.\u00a0 The term <em>phobia<\/em> puts you into the realm of the irrational and stigmatizes you as bigoted.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, of course, this is a worldview battle at the intellectual level and a spiritual battle at its foundation.\u00a0 Trueman observes that Nietzsche, Marx, and Darwin destroyed teleology (meaning, purpose) for generations to follow.\u00a0 No God, no meaning \u2013 therefore, no morality.\u00a0 What you can do and what you can get others to do is up to you and whether you have the power to make it happen.\u00a0 Morals are just a matter of taste.\u00a0 All this groundwork, Trueman asserts, is laid by the end of the 19<sup>th<\/sup> century.<\/p>\n<p>Trueman describes the worldview battle in terms highlighted by Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor, <em>mimesis <\/em>and <em>poiesis<\/em>.\u00a0 A mimetic view sees the world as ordered and external; it\u2019s up to us to discover how it works.\u00a0 A poietic view sees the world as raw material that can be fashioned by the individual; it\u2019s up to us to create meaning and purpose as we like.<\/p>\n<p>It is no surprise that from ancient times most people take the mimetic view.\u00a0 Trueman considers medieval Europe, a mostly agrarian society.\u00a0 Farming was dependent on geography, seasons, and weather, and the farmer had to cope with what was available in soils and seeds.\u00a0 He was at the mercy of an external environment.\u00a0 \u201cThe world was what it was, and the individual needed to conform to it.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Technology shifted the perspective.\u00a0 Irrigation allowed water to move or to be stored, fertilizers and pesticides increased yield, genetic engineering allowed more variety (or less) and more immunity to pests.\u00a0 Such innovations shift the way we think about the world.\u00a0 Childbirth is not so risky.\u00a0 Transportation and communication developments allow us to live and work in ways never dreamed of centuries ago.\u00a0 With online games and with virtual reality you can pretend to be somebody else!<\/p>\n<p>In short, reality seems to be manipulatable.\u00a0 So, back to \u201cI am a woman trapped in a man\u2019s body\u201d . . . why can\u2019t I use technology to do something about that!\u00a0 Well, for one thing, the nanotechnology of life is far beyond human science.\u00a0 Surgeries and chemicals do not actually transform a man into a woman, not at the genetic level, nor at the physiological level, and not even at the functional level.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the medical establishment is eager to make huge profits by <em>doing something <\/em>to pretend that the impossible was achieved.<\/p>\n<p>We hate limits, don\u2019t we?\u00a0 We enjoy our creativity, we have a free will that yearns for more than life typically allows . . . hey, can\u2019t we be like gods?\u00a0 These desires aren\u2019t new.\u00a0 See Genesis chapter 3 for how that worked the first time people tried it.<\/p>\n<p>Trueman\u2019s grandfather left school at fifteen and worked for decades as a sheet metal worker in a Birmingham factory.\u00a0 If you had asked him about job satisfaction he might not have understood the question \u2013 he did not belong to \u201cpsychological man\u2019s\u201d world.\u00a0 But he certainly embraced the need for the job to put food on his family\u2019s table and shoes on the kids\u2019 feet.\u00a0 So yeah, the job was satisfying.\u00a0 In the \u2018old days\u2019 the key to self-esteem was about production and taking care of others around you.\u00a0 The key to self is outward directed.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast, for Trueman, a university professor, and for his students, fulfillment comes from the pleasure of teaching, learning new concepts, growing intellectually.\u00a0 Feelings are central; the focus is inward.\u00a0 Modern life has many options.<\/p>\n<p>Counseling and therapy have changed in modern times.\u00a0 Historically, it was about helping someone to understand their community and environment so they could adapt, fit in, even conform to the \u201ccanons and protocols of society.\u201d\u00a0 Now it\u2019s about you, about your feelings.<\/p>\n<p>Trueman summarizes history in an interesting way.\u00a0 \u201cThe ancient Athenian was committed to the assembly, the medieval Christian to his church, and the 20<sup>th<\/sup> century factory worker to his trade union and working-man\u2019s club.\u201d\u00a0 A man\u2019s purpose necessitated commitment to something outside himself.\u00a0 Today\u2019s psychological man, though, is committed first and foremost to self.<\/p>\n<p>Thus we see schools and churches as places \u201cto perform, not to be formed.\u201d\u00a0 Churches strive to be seeker-sensitive.\u00a0 If we \u2018don\u2019t like it,\u2019 we try another.\u00a0 Schools work to assure and reassure; they don\u2019t examine, challenge, and confront a spectrum of beliefs.\u00a0 The phenomenon of \u2018snowflakes\u2019 is the result of the psychologizing of self and the inward-directed focus of therapy.\u00a0 It\u2019s all about me and if I run into anything that challenges my comfort, I\u2019m proudly and loudly triggered.<\/p>\n<p>I have a right to psychological happiness.\u00a0 If anyone says something I can perceive as racially or sexually offensive, I\u2019m thrilled; oops, I mean <em>outraged<\/em> because I\u2019ve been oppressed.\u00a0 I\u2019m a glorious victim.\u00a0 Words are now more important than violence; rather, words are violence.<\/p>\n<p>Freedom of speech is dead.<\/p>\n<p>Yet it is not enough to avoid offense.\u00a0 Everyone must affirm and celebrate what they used to call sin.\u00a0 If you object to homosexual behavior or trans ideology you are attacking \u2013 <em>violently <\/em>\u2013 the identity of people.<\/p>\n<p>Alasdair MacIntyre defines <em>emotivism<\/em> as the doctrine that all moral judgments are <em>nothing but <\/em>expressions of preference, attitude, or feeling.\u00a0 Thus, saying <em>Homosexual behavior is wrong<\/em> means <em>I personally disapprove of it and you should do likewise.<\/em>\u00a0 Trouble comes when the emotivists in favor of homosexual behavior, sodomy, or trans surgeries for children achieve political power.\u00a0 At that point, their personal preference becomes dogmatic truth enforced by law.\u00a0 All of the new moralities, which were evil immoralities for thousands of years, become universal moral imperatives <em>and you must conform instantly and enthusiastically.<\/em>\u00a0 If you weren\u2019t aware that everything had changed, that\u2019s tough.\u00a0 You can\u2019t ask questions.<\/p>\n<p>Conservative Christians, who believe in a transcendent God who defines reality and has declared moral laws that are wired into the reality of human persons, have no common ground on which to debate such matters, since the cultural consensus equates each psychologized man as his own god with no higher authority.<\/p>\n<p>But is that true?\u00a0 Is there no common ground?\u00a0 The Bible teaches us that God has wired into each of us a conscience that discerns right and wrong.\u00a0 The biblical pattern is to declare truth boldly and compassionately, because God has written His law into our hearts.\u00a0 Since Trueman is a professing Christian I think he shouldn\u2019t miss this point.\u00a0 The spiritual war must be fought with spiritual weapons.\u00a0 Share the Gospel, hand out Gospel tracts, speak truth even and especially when it is counter-cultural.\u00a0 Trust the Holy Spirit to bring fruit where the seed finds good soil, even if we see no evidence of results.\u00a0 God gave us our job to do.\u00a0 He\u2019ll do His job.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel was born into a wicked, pagan culture.\u00a0 Living the open and honest Christian life was not easy then.\u00a0 Why should it be easy now?\u00a0 Apart from the West, the Christian life in this world entails suffering and, often, death.\u00a0 Above all, the Christian life, as Jesus summarized as the two greatest commandments, is to love God and to love others.<\/p>\n<p>Today\u2019s non-Christian world owes its philosophy, in part, to 18<sup>th<\/sup> century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who professed his perspective in his autobiography:\u00a0 \u201cIt is the history of my soul that I promised . . . all I need do, as I have done up until now, is to look inside myself.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>To Rousseau and to the modern anti-Christian culture, the essence of a person is the inner psychological life.\u00a0 Thus, the young Rousseau explains away his crime of petty theft as the result of social pressure.\u00a0 Additional vices afflicted him because others treated him badly, and so he became lazy and started lying.\u00a0 When his father punished him that <em>made him <\/em>manipulative and covetous.\u00a0 All Rousseau\u2019s problems were the fault of others.\u00a0 He was a victim!\u00a0 But this is just childishness!\u00a0 Do we not live in a culture in which all the kids have never grown up?<\/p>\n<p>20<sup>th<\/sup> century sociology was fascinated by primitive cultures.\u00a0 Many concluded that the only way to be <em>authentic <\/em>was to become a hypothetical savage, unencumbered by society\u2019s expectations.\u00a0 To fit into modern culture requires suppression of <em>natural <\/em>instincts.\u00a0 Far better to be \u201ctrue to one\u2019s inner (real) self.\u201d\u00a0 Accordingly, let\u2019s deconstruct Christian morality and let everyone\u2019s inner self out for fully authentic expression.<\/p>\n<p>Tragically, as the 21<sup>st<\/sup> century dawned and Western culture had disemboweled Christianity, it was replaced by woke culture, which demands absolute conformity and whose principles are viciously dogmatic and inauthentic with regard to reality.\u00a0 I\u2019ve noticed lately some debate in the media about how to define <em>wokism<\/em>.\u00a0 That\u2019s easy if you\u2019re willing to be blunt.\u00a0 Wokism stands for everything the Christian faith stands against, and stands against everything virtuous the Bible teaches.\u00a0 Just go through the list regarding woke dogma on marriage, sexuality, abortion, transgenderism, freedom of thought and speech, mercy and forgiveness, civility, honesty in debate and dialogue, racism, free markets, responsibility, hard work, rewards based on merit, law and order, crime and punishment . . . the list is actually much longer.<\/p>\n<p>Rousseau\u2019s inner construction of the authentic self, unconstrained by others, \u201cis the necessary philosophical precondition for modern identity politics,\u201d including sexual politics, Trueman concludes.\u00a0 With trans ideology the inner voice is freed \u201ceven from chromosomes and the primary sexual characteristics of the physical body.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Moderns have imagined they have become little gods, fulfilling the promise of Satan to Eve in the garden.\u00a0 Even the secular conservative pundit Tucker Carlson has pointed out that there is no compromise with Christianity in this.\u00a0 The Christian faith and trans ideology are antagonists and in collision.<\/p>\n<p>Poet Percy Bysshe Shelley was representative of radical thought at the beginning of the 19<sup>th<\/sup> century.\u00a0 Shelley advocated sexual freedom.\u00a0 Christian morality hindered such freedom, especially regarding marriage.\u00a0 Shelley also despised the commercial marketplace, seeing it somehow as preventing people from being truly free, since everything must have its price and prices are governed by the forces of the market.\u00a0 His sentiments here anticipated Karl Marx later in the century.<\/p>\n<p>Modern consumerism promises that you can be transformed, or at least feel better, with the swipe of a card.\u00a0 Now you have that car or fridge or purse or suit that will fulfill you.\u00a0 But just wait a little while and you must have the newest model or upgrade.\u00a0 Trueman:\u00a0 \u201cThe\u00a0 underlying dynamic of the consumer marketplace is that desires can never be fully satisfied.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Reality \u2013 individual limitations \u2013 intervene when trying to reinvent ourselves.\u00a0 I might desire to be the #1 tennis player in the world, but at age 71 it would be foolish to try.\u00a0 I might yearn to explore, in person, Jupiter\u2019s moons or the Andromeda galaxy, but the technology and resources simply don\u2019t exist . . . yet.\u00a0 (I\u2019m hoping that during the Millennium, or beyond, what is impossible now . . .)<\/p>\n<p>I don\u2019t want to become a woman, but if I did, the medical science and technology do not come close.\u00a0 I could just \u2018say\u2019 I\u2019m a woman, but what would that even mean?\u00a0 Our newest Supreme Court Justice, apparently a woman because the President insisted on appointing a woman, could not explain in open hearings just what a woman is.<\/p>\n<p>Reality matters.\u00a0 Trueman reprints Nietzsche\u2019s \u201cGod is dead\u201d passage from <em>The Gay Science<\/em> to point out that once they have killed God, there is no foundation upon which the townspeople can build their stable, comfortable lives.\u00a0 The nonexistence of God is not like that of unicorns or centaurs.\u00a0 Nothing is built on that mythology.\u00a0 But, Trueman writes, \u201cTo dispense with God, however, is to destroy the very foundations on which a whole world of metaphysics and morality has been constructed and depends.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Of course, Nietzsche was content with the supposed death of God; what he wanted was to reexamine and reinvent science, logic, and morality in light of a naturalistic worldview.\u00a0\u00a0 Well, how\u2019s it going?\u00a0 The Christian faith has been deconstructed in the West.\u00a0 What is taking its place?\u00a0 Chaos, confusion, and misery.\u00a0 Just one data point:\u00a0 In the last generation, for the first time in history, most Americans don\u2019t want to have children.\u00a0 In the U.S. the replacement birth rate is 1.6.\u00a0 You need 2.1 to break even.\u00a0 Most of the rest of the West is even worse than America.\u00a0 This reflects self-absorption and hopelessness.<\/p>\n<p>What Darwin accomplished was to provide a pseudo-scientific foundation for atheism, an intellectual excuse to banish God despite the utter lack of evidence to support evolution.\u00a0 (See my free ebook on the subject.)\u00a0 With the Christian worldview gone, we are no longer image-bearers, we are not accountable to anyone higher than ourselves, and we can make any rules we like, including rules defining identity.<\/p>\n<p>Back to Nietzsche . . . no God means no ultimate future.\u00a0 Only the present matters and what pleasure and personal satisfaction you can find.\u00a0 This certainly reflects our present age.<\/p>\n<p>With man focused on himself and how he can make others conform, Marx provides strategies for power.\u00a0 History is about oppression and in politics, economics, and cultural ideas, you can imagine powerful groups marginalizing others.\u00a0 All social organizations become political until all of life is about political power.\u00a0 Trueman:\u00a0 \u201cEverything \u2013 from the Boy Scouts to Hollywood movies to cake baking \u2013 has become politicized.\u201d\u00a0 Play the game well enough and your group can be on top, oppressing others.<\/p>\n<p>You can see this in modern politics and culture.\u00a0 Oppression of others is supposedly evil, but when leftists use tactics to accuse and denigrate their opponents, and then cancel or oppress or even prosecute them, it\u2019s apparently a righteous act.<\/p>\n<p>Nietzsche, Marx, and Darwin, along with their philosophical heirs, hate Christianity above all.\u00a0 That\u2019s strange, isn\u2019t it?\u00a0 Shouldn\u2019t they despise Islam above all, considering its history, present collection of Islamic tyrannies, and its treatment of women, even in the West?<\/p>\n<p>The superficial complaint has always been that Christianity hinders people from freedom and happiness, although history dramatically shows the reverse to be true.\u00a0 Anti-Christian tyrannies have always been and are still today, along with Islamic states, destroyers of personal freedom and well-being, except for their privileged elites.<\/p>\n<p>The facts of history are embarrassing, though, and so history must be erased, textbooks rewritten, statues smashed.\u00a0 Trueman extends the thought to transgenderism,\u00a0 which must erase the individual\u2019s history, and rewrite not only science, but simple common sense.<\/p>\n<p>Freud was so focused on sex that he redefined true happiness as sexual satisfaction.\u00a0 Trueman:\u00a0 \u201cThe way to be happy is to engage in behavior that leads one to be sexually satisfied.\u201d\u00a0 This necessarily starts, according to Freud, in childhood, even in infancy.\u00a0 You can see the genesis of today\u2019s dystopian efforts to sexualize children, even if that seems best served by confusing them and coercing them into mutilating surgeries.<\/p>\n<p>Contemporary education follows Freud, especially in government-controlled schools, in their efforts to liberate the sexual instincts of children and separating them from any Christian influence.<\/p>\n<p>Freud\u2019s committed focus led him to despise Christianity, of course.\u00a0 He concluded that \u201cscientifically,\u201d religious belief correlated with mental deficiency or emotional immaturity.\u00a0 This attitude has taken hold of our culture and legal system.\u00a0 Yet Freud was concerned about loosing the boundaries that Christianity provided to restrain the dark and violent tendencies in man.\u00a0 His alternative?\u00a0 Psychoanalysis!\u00a0 A professional class of psychologists will surely guide mankind toward a golden age.<\/p>\n<p>Wilhelm Reich\u2019s writings in the 1930s combined ideas from Marx and Freud to argue for abolishing the nuclear family to enable political liberation.\u00a0 Reich argued that the family is the totalitarian state in miniature, producing compliant youth.\u00a0 Reich was trying to explain the rise of Fascism and Nazism.\u00a0 At the core of Reich\u2019s strategy was sex education and sexual freedom for children.\u00a0 Parents were enemies and obstacles to overcome.\u00a0 The state should be used to punish parents who resist.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1960s Herbert Marcuse encouraged \u2018free love\u2019 and \u2018untrammeled sexual experimentation\u2019 as vital factors in the revolutionary liberation of society.\u00a0 Marcuse equated sexual freedom with political freedom and sought to shatter the heterosexual norms.\u00a0 Marcuse saw the need for speech to be regulated to foster the right political consciousness across society and to insure proper outcomes.\u00a0 Bad words and bad ideas inflict psychological damage and oppression, so the language must be deconstructed.\u00a0 Only the elites on the Left are qualified to make such changes.<\/p>\n<p>Jean-Paul Sartre\u2019s companion, Simone de Beauvoir, published her text on feminist theory, <em>The Second Sex<\/em>, in 1949.\u00a0 She laid the foundation for the trans movement when she wrote, \u201cThe female is a woman, insofar as she feels herself as such.\u201d\u00a0 The body itself is less important.\u00a0 Now, the medical establishment pretends they can use technology to transform the body from male to female or vice versa.\u00a0 It\u2019s a crude con.<\/p>\n<p>Trueman cites Joanne Herman who asks why so many who claim to be trans seek surgery and hormone treatments.\u00a0 If gender is merely a social construct, then the body is not important for gender identity.\u00a0 I would extend the thought:\u00a0 Why not insist the medical establishment guarantee full functionality and performance in the new physical gender?\u00a0 Let an impartial panel judge whether they can measure any differences between your new body and one born in that physical gender.\u00a0 Let the guarantee be indemnified by a ten million dollar bond, because if the transition fails, a life is wrecked . . . as many indeed do testify.<\/p>\n<p>The famous feminist Germaine Greer, in <em>The Female Eunuch <\/em>(1971) wrote, \u201cNo so-called sex change has ever begged for a uterus-and-ovaries transplant; if uterus-and-ovaries transplants were made mandatory for wannabe women they would disappear overnight.\u201d\u00a0 And then, Trueman observes, there is menstruation and pregnancy.\u00a0 Trueman reports that Greer believes that men who claim they have transitioned to women are simply trying to conform themselves to what they, as males, think women should be.\u00a0 Is not this the ultimate in <em>mansplaining<\/em>?<\/p>\n<p>From the Christian \/ biblical \/ reality point of view, cleaving gender from sex or expanding the definition of marriage is to deny and destroy what God wired into the world.\u00a0 Beneath the political and cultural battles is a spiritual war waged by a relentless enemy \u2013 Satan.\u00a0 Christians should grieve for those duped by the culture into gender dysphoria.\u00a0 It\u2019s become a \u2018fad\u2019 amplified by social media and a complicit educational establishment, although the word \u2018fad\u2019 seems too trivial for the human tragedies sweeping the West.<\/p>\n<p>The only answer for individuals who have been caught up in these social movements and Satanic ideologies is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.\u00a0 Repentance and trust in the Savior generates the new birth, a truly transformed spiritual creature, who can tap God\u2019s strength and power to live a constructive and fruitful life.\u00a0 If you\u2019re a Christian who has been obedient to share the Gospel regularly, consistently, then keep at it, graciously and boldly.\u00a0 You may just save a soul and a life.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211; <\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><br \/>\n187. The Miraculous Cell<br \/>\nOctober 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>About one-fifth of the atoms of the Periodic Table are vitally employed in life, specifically in the machinery of the cell.\u00a0 The \u201cmutual fitness\u201d of these atoms, \u201cprovides more convincing evidence of design in nature and purpose in the universe.\u201d\u00a0 Michael Denton, in his 2020 book, <em>The Miracle of the Cell<\/em>, views the fine tuning of the design of carbon and the other key elements as \u201cirresistible\u201d evidence that the fundamental atomic building blocks of the universe were contrived to enable life.<\/p>\n<p>Michael Denton is a Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute, a nexus for the Intelligent Design movement, and holds the PhD in biochemistry.\u00a0 I have essayed previously on two of his previous books, <em>Evolution:\u00a0 A Theory in Crisis <\/em>and <em>Natures\u2019s Destiny.<\/em>\u00a0 <em>The Miracle of the Cell <\/em>is a marvelous exposition of some of the technological wonders of cellular life and would be a worthy addition to your personal library.\u00a0 A cautionary note, though, which I\u2019ll amplify at the end of this essay:\u00a0 Denton is <em>not<\/em> a biblical creationist; rather, he is firmly ensconced in the ID camp.\u00a0 Accordingly, he wobbles in his conclusions, rather than decisively identifying the Designer of life as the Lord Jesus Christ.\u00a0 Converting the reader to support for ID is woefully short of saving a soul.\u00a0 Clearly, Denton has not experienced this salvation himself.\u00a0 But let\u2019s pull some nuggets from this scientifically illuminating book!<\/p>\n<p>Denton cites Erica Hayden who writes in the journal <em>Nature<\/em> about how research continues to reveal layers of complexity in the design of life:\u00a0 \u201cDelving into it has been like zooming into a Mandelbrot set . . . that reveals ever more intricate patterns as one peers closer at its boundary.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Denton himself observes that life\u2019s complexity is akin to a third realm of infinity, the first as the infinite reaches of the cosmos, and the second as the realm of the infinitely small subatomic realm.\u00a0 As for a third realm:\u00a0 \u201cThe cell feels <em>infinitely complex<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The basic design of the cell is adapted to a seemingly infinite variety of functions.\u00a0 Consider, he suggests, contrasting a neuron with a red blood cell, a liver cell with a skin cell, a leukocyte with a muscle cell.\u00a0 All fill vital functions within the human body, which is a coordinated complex of about 100 trillion cells.\u00a0 Cells build humans and whales and butterflies and redwoods.\u00a0 But then we find a vast diversity of independent, single-celled protozoans and radiolarians \u2013 look up photos of these creatures and the shells they produce.<\/p>\n<p>Cellular movement is diverse, too.\u00a0 Some travel via their flagellum\u2019s propeller-like action, a system far superior to any human technology.\u00a0 Some move via cilia action.\u00a0 Some crawl and some exude pseudopedia to grab onto objects in their path.\u00a0 Some have internal clocks and some can usefully sense electric or magnetic fields or chemical signals.\u00a0 <em>All <\/em>can replicate, a technological feat also far beyond human tech.<\/p>\n<p>Cells are not stupid.\u00a0 Observing amoebas, behaviorist Herbert Jennings commented, \u201cIf Amoeba were a large animal . . . its behavior would at once call forth the attribution to it of states of pleasure and pain, of hunger, desire, and the like, on precisely the same basis as we attribute these things to the dog.\u201d\u00a0 Jennings wondered whether the amoeba might just be sentient.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate building blocks for cellular design are atoms, of course.\u00a0 Carbon stands alone in its capacity to form a vast array of complex organic compounds with diversely useful properties.\u00a0 The number of known carbon compounds is about ten million, far more than the total of all other non-carbon compounds.<\/p>\n<p>The strength of carbon bonds is \u2018just right.\u2019\u00a0 The bond must be strong enough to survive molecular collisions, but must be weak enough to allow enzymes to deform and break the bond during cellular processes.\u00a0 The careful control and regulation of chemical processes within the cell enables life.\u00a0 In short, biochemistry is possible because carbon compounds are uniquely <em>metastable<\/em> in the temperature range of life.\u00a0 No other atom compares.<\/p>\n<p>The key structural components of life, like amino acids, nucleotides, and sugars, involving many types of atoms, employ covalent bonds, the sharing of electrons.\u00a0 Yet the higher-order structure of proteins (how they fold into 3-D shapes) and DNA (the double-helix), depend on van der Waals forces, electrostatic interactions about ten to twenty times weaker than covalent bonds.\u00a0 Especially in DNA, this \u2018weakness\u2019 is vital to allow the strands to separate during replication and transcription, and then to reattach afterwards . . . and all very quickly!<\/p>\n<p>This principle of optimal weakness also applies to the attachment of an enzyme to its substrate.\u00a0 Enzymes enable the hundreds of specialized metabolic reactions to occur quickly at body temperatures.\u00a0 Enzymes speed up metabolic reactions by factors of millions to trillions.\u00a0 Namely, the reactions of life could not occur without just the right structure and just the right weak-bond interactions.<\/p>\n<p>Denton notes that if the weak bonds were just ten times stronger, then the biochemistry essential to cellular life would be impossible.\u00a0 But they can\u2019t be much weaker without being disrupted by simple molecular collisions.<\/p>\n<p>Carbon works together with hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen to form cell membrances and to fold proteins.\u00a0 The charge asymmetry of oxygen-hydrogen bonds leads to the hydrophobic (water-fearing) force, both to clump hydrocarbons into membranes and to clump particular amino acids into the center of protein molecules, determining the functional shape of the protein.\u00a0 Alternatively, the symmetry of carbon-hydrogen bonds gives long hydrocarbon chains their hydrophobic, water-avoiding behavior.<\/p>\n<p>Cell membranes are electrical insulators, and so a charge can be built up across the membrane.\u00a0 This enables the transmission of nerve impulses along the axons of neurons (nerve cells).\u00a0 Nerve impulse speeds up to one hundred meters per second involve the sudden influx of millions of sodium ions (Na+) into a cell in less than a millisecond.\u00a0 The precise values of the charges and insulating potentials of these systems enable the very possibility of large beings like ourselves.\u00a0 Typing, playing the piano, judo . . . we couldn\u2019t do these things without extremely efficient intercellular communication systems.<\/p>\n<p>Life is a continual process of acquiring energy, storing energy, and using energy for a wide variety of tasks.\u00a0 The ATP molecule (adenosine triphosphate) plays the central role.\u00a0 An early researcher wrote, \u201cIt is no exaggeration to say \u2018without phosphorus:\u00a0 no life.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Denton explains that the phosphate bond\u2019s energy levels are well-matched to enable cellular chemical processes.\u00a0 He cites Rob Phillips, who likens ATP to a 20 dollar bill.\u00a0 Spending cash in $100 increments is clumsy because the bill is hard to break.\u00a0 Spending $1 bills is annoying because it takes so many of them to buy something useful.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, Denton then pays homage to evolution \u2013 \u201cIn four billion years of evolution, the many forms of life on Earth have repeatedly testified to what chemists have recently affirmed:\u00a0 phosphate radicals are the best means of storing and transferring energy for the activities of the cell.\u201d\u00a0 Idiot.\u00a0 What evidence does Denton have that evolution ever happened?\u00a0 He invests his authorship in several books that <em>scream <\/em>design, but then he doesn\u2019t want to be so controversial as to avoid kneeling at Darwin\u2019s feet, after all.\u00a0 Yuk.<\/p>\n<p>Back to the good stuff . . . ATP is synthesized by using food energy to pump protons across cell membranes.\u00a0 Denton cites Nick Lane who describes just one part of the process:\u00a0 \u201cProtons are passed from one water molecule to another through dynamic clefts, opening and closing in swift succession, a perilous route through the protein that slams closed instantly after the passage of the proton, preventing its retreat. . . . All that power, all that ingenuity, all the vast protein structures, all of that is dedicated to pumping protons across the inner mitochondrial membrane.\u201d\u00a0 Each cell has these mitochondria, power plants to drive the energy-demanding processes of the rest of the cell.\u00a0 Our 40 trillion cells hold about a quadrillion mitochondria, with a total surface area equal to about four football fields.\u00a0 About 10<sup>21<\/sup> protons are pumped across these membranes every second, nearly as many protons as there are stars in the universe.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps not taught in high school biology is the importance of metal ions in cellular life.\u00a0 About 1\/3 of all enzymes employ a metal ion in an essential way.\u00a0 Iron and copper are part of ATP synthesis.\u00a0 In respiration, iron atoms are used to bind oxygen to hemoglobin, allowing us to breathe.\u00a0 Some metal ions are used in a chain to draw electrons along, as if on a wire, to enable other processes.\u00a0 The spacing of the ions is critical, typically 15 Angstroms apart so electrons can hop from one ion to another without getting lost.\u00a0 (Lost electrons produce unwanted negative ions which can damage the cell.)<\/p>\n<p>Denton cites Robert Williams and J.J.R. Frausto da Silva:\u00a0 \u201cMan makes his wires from metals such as copper; biology makes hop conductors from metal ions embedded in proteins.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>We know of at least ten different metal atoms essential to life, and therefore essential parts of your diet:\u00a0 sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, cobalt, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, and zinc.<\/p>\n<p>Sodium and potassium bind weakly and so are mobile and can move to maintain charge balance across membranes.\u00a0 Their mobility is also unmatched to enable nerve impulse transmissions.\u00a0 Magnesium is a key part of chlorophyll, which converts photons from sunlight into energy for plant metabolism.\u00a0 Peter Atkins:\u00a0 \u201cWithout chlorophyll, the world would be a damp warm rock instead of the softly green haven of life that we know, for chlorophyll holds its magnesium eye to the sun and captures the energy of sunlight, in the first step of photosynthesis.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I recently watched a debate between atheist Peter Atkins and John Lennox on the existence of God.\u00a0 To so appreciate the brilliance of creation and yet to deny the Creator . . . how foolish!<\/p>\n<p>Denton states that the reversible binding we see in the attachment of oxygen to hemoglobin (when we breathe) \u201cis close to a miracle.\u201d\u00a0 Indeed.\u00a0 When you look superficially at the structures and process involved in binding and transporting oxygen from the lungs to all of the tissues, it might seem more complex than necessary.\u00a0 The challenge, though, is that the incredibly useful oxygen atom binds tightly in its compounds.\u00a0 To extract oxygen, for example, from H<sub>2<\/sub>O, CO<sub>2<\/sub>, or Fe<sub>2<\/sub>O<sub>3<\/sub> (iron oxide), requires extreme physical or chemical procedures.\u00a0 Whereas oxygen is bound delicately to hemoglobin and then \u201ccomes off effortlessly in the tissues merely because of a drop in the concentration of O<sub>2<\/sub> molecules.\u201d\u00a0 And so we can breathe.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ll note that the hemoglobin protein (like any protein molecule) is ridiculously too complex to arise from random, spontaneous chemistry . . . even if you filled the universe with amino acids and bound them repeatedly and rapidly in chains, desperately hoping to hit on the right sequence.\u00a0 Similarly, any protein is far too complex to arise from random mutations from one generation to another, no matter how many billions or trillions of years you imagine the age of the universe to be.\u00a0 Evolution, therefore, is sunk without a trace.\u00a0 (See my book on Creation \/ Evolution in the free ebookstore on this site.)<\/p>\n<p>Molybdenum is part of four key enzymes in our bodies.\u00a0 It\u2019s also part of the enzyme nitrogenase which \u2018fixes\u2019 nitrogen in the soil for plants to use.\u00a0 Nitrogenase breaks the N<sub>2<\/sub> bond in atmospheric nitrogen, resulting in ammonia, NH<sub>3<\/sub>.\u00a0 That\u2019s fertilizer!<\/p>\n<p>The different metal atoms are designed for different, but vital cellular processes.\u00a0 God designed the elements of the Periodic Table specifically with life in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Denton makes the case that the most staggeringly complex process in creation is the development of the human embryo, as cells divide and relocate, sensing each other and communicating electrically and chemically.\u00a0 This involves precisely timed expression of particular genes and \u201cexquisitely ordered movements of actin filaments, molecular motors, and microtubules, which act together to generate continual changes in the cells\u2019 architecture.\u201d\u00a0 At the end of the process we see neurons, red blood cells, photoreceptors, muscle cells, etc., all arranged into tissues and organized into a single fully functional creature.<\/p>\n<p>Construction of a supercomputer is trivial in comparison.\u00a0 For one thing, your growth from fertilized egg to adult human did not require continuous intelligent oversight and hands-on craftmanship.\u00a0 The awesomely brilliant intelligent design and craftmanship was \u2018programmed in\u2019 way back in Genesis chapter 1.\u00a0 Also, life is integrated nanotechnology, far advanced from the microtechnology of human-designed high tech.<\/p>\n<p>There are innumerable other design issues for life.\u00a0 The size of cells, the maximum possible size, is constrained by the diffusion rate of molecules in water.\u00a0 (We are made mostly of water by weight.)\u00a0\u00a0 Oxygen, for example, diffuses quickly (enough) in cells, but if the cells were larger, it wouldn\u2019t work at all.\u00a0 Diffusion times increase with the square of the distance, and required quantities with the cube.\u00a0 And so the physics of diffusion tightly constrains cell design.\u00a0 \u201cIf diffusion rates were ten times less than they are, then maintaining the same oxygen consumption would required the volume of a roughly spherical cell to shrink by a thousand-fold.\u201d\u00a0 A much tinier cell could not contain all the other necessary machinery.<\/p>\n<p>Denton spends some time talking about the uniqueness of water, the solvent which enables the interaction of the huge number of biomolecules that are essential to life.\u00a0 Water is such a good solvent that it is very difficult to find pure samples and it takes considerable effort to artificially produce pure quantities.\u00a0 No other liquid comes close to water\u2019s performance as a universal solvent.<\/p>\n<p>And yet, oil and water don\u2019t mix.\u00a0 Oil forms a layer on the surface of water.\u00a0 Oils have long hydrocarbon chains, electrically non-polar \u2013 electrons are distributed uniformly so that you don\u2019t have \u2018hot\u2019 positively or negatively charged regions around the neutral molecule.\u00a0 Accordingly, water molecules don\u2019t bond; rather, they \u2018bead\u2019 away.\u00a0 This exception to water\u2019s solvent skills enables membranes to form and proteins to fold.\u00a0 Perfect exceptions!<\/p>\n<p>Something I had not run across before . . . Proton pumping for cellular energetics makes use of water\u2019s hydrogen-bonding character \u2013 adjacent water molecules tend to line up, the hydrogen side of one (positive) attracted to the oxygen side of the next (negative).\u00a0 Whereas electrons have to move physically to transport themselves, a proton attaches to one end of a water-based \u2018proton wire,\u2019 and in a split second, each of the hydrogen bonds spin in sequence and a proton drops off the water molecule at the other end of the \u2018wire.\u2019\u00a0 The initial proton has not traveled, but its charge and energy have been transferred off the other end.<\/p>\n<p>As Denton works his way toward philosophical conclusions, he admits, \u201cThe origin of life remains as arguably the biggest unsolved problem in science.\u201d\u00a0 That is only because he and those committed to materialistic \/ atheistic evolution reject the eyewitness account of the Creator himself in Genesis.\u00a0 I would rather insist that science, with vast theoretical constructs and enormous resources invested in chemical and physical experiments, has proven that life <em>cannot <\/em>arise without top-down design and omnipotent creative action.\u00a0 It is obvious and even axiomatic that information can be produced only by the action of a mind.\u00a0 Life is the ultimate example of information, coded not just in the DNA of billions of living creatures, but also in the 3-D structure of specialized cells and the incredibly complex machinery wired into cell membranes . . . the latter two systems coding more information than is found in DNA.\u00a0 But I\u2019ve already written much on this for this site.<\/p>\n<p>Denton confesses his own position:\u00a0 \u201c. . . there are new laws, or novel properties of matter yet to be discovered, which enabled the path from chemistry to the cell.\u201d\u00a0 But this is just blind faith, a blind faith that says that we don\u2019t understand the science of chemistry much at all.\u00a0 Baloney.\u00a0 We do understand chemistry and mechanics extremely well, well enough to know definitely that the complex systems in life\u2019s nanotech machines require design.\u00a0 You\u2019ve got to be very stubborn to deny what is so obvious.<\/p>\n<p>Denton cites Robert Shapiro, who has researched and written much on the supposed naturalistic origin of life:\u00a0 \u201cSelf-replicating systems capable of Darwinian evolution appear too complex to have arisen suddenly from a prebiotic soup.\u00a0 This conclusion applies to both nucleic acid systems and to hypothetical protein-based genetic systems.\u00a0 Another evolutionary principle is needed to take us across the gap from mixtures of simple natural chemicals to the first effective replicator.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Denton cites several other atheistic evolutionary scientists who profess a blind hope to discover entirely new physical principles.\u00a0 Namely, that all we know about the relevant science must be trashed.<\/p>\n<p>Interestingly, he cites a paper by a team led by Tommaso Bellini that characterizes the traditional Darwinian ideas as \u201cfantastic luck theories.\u201d\u00a0 (I\u2019ll note that Darwinism is <em>not <\/em>presented to school kids as a \u201cfantastic luck theory.\u201d)\u00a0 Their hope is that something mysterious is woven into the deep structure of Nature (yes, they capitalize \u2018Nature\u2019).<\/p>\n<p>Anything but God will do.<\/p>\n<p>Denton does allow for some vague possibility of God when he concludes, \u201cOnly someone committed to rejecting out of hand all evidence of teleology (purpose) in nature could fail to see in these ensembles of fitness and in this elegent parsimony evidence of design.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>He also concludes, naively, that if \u201cit is eventually established that there is no natural path across the great gulf from non-life to life, and that only the additional exertion of an intelligent agent could have assembled the first cell on Earth, that will be equally a watershed in human thought.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The satanic, atheistic worldview will <em>never <\/em>admit there is <em>no way <\/em>to explain life without God.\u00a0 Fellows like Denton are already doing just that when they dream of a physics and chemistry yet undiscovered.\u00a0 No, the evidence is already in.<\/p>\n<p>Rather than start with science, which requires and therefore is built <em>atop <\/em>rationality and personhood \u2013 namely, we humans are more than just clods of molecules and our thoughts are more than just materialistic brain chemistry \u2013 we should start with the Bible and see if that makes sense of biology, geology, astronomy, and the human experience which includes logic, rationality, integrity, love, and other aspects of nonmaterial personhood.<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, it does.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212; <\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><br \/>\n188. The Air We Breathe<br \/>\nNovember 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>For many generations now, most people share a common understanding of concepts like <em>humanity, history, freedom, progress, kindness, <\/em>and <em>equality.<\/em>\u00a0 These concepts are grounded in the Christian worldview, although they are embraced by most non-Christians, too.<\/p>\n<p>This is the thesis of Glen Scrivener\u2019s 2022 book, <em>The Air We Breathe:\u00a0 Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>For example, <em>equality:<\/em>\u00a0 For most of human history, rigid moral hierarchies (with graded privileges) were the norm.\u00a0 Now we want to root out inequalities everywhere.<\/p>\n<p><em>Compassion<\/em> for the poor or disabled was once considered to be weakness, but now a virtue.\u00a0 <em>Consent <\/em>(sexually) used to be irrelevant.\u00a0 Powerful men possessed those whom they pleased; now, that\u2019s abuse.\u00a0 Education was a luxury, now a necessity.\u00a0 <em>Freedom <\/em>has historically been for the privileged few, with slavery widespread and multitudes restricted by class.\u00a0 Freedom now is an unalienable right.<\/p>\n<p>Scrivener:\u00a0 \u201cAn older goldfish swishes past a couple of small fry.\u00a0 \u201cHow\u2019s the water, boys?\u201d he enquires.\u00a0 \u201cWater,\u201d they ask.\u00a0 \u201cWhat\u2019s water?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In the West, the author argues, Christianity is the water in which we swim, or rather, Christianity is the air we breathe, unseen and all-pervasive.\u00a0 Our values, our goals, our hopes and dreams, have been distinctively shaped or at least influenced by what Jesus of Nazareth did, and continues to do through His followers.<\/p>\n<p>Even if someone is not a Christian, in the West he is constrained by the Christian view of <em>equality:<\/em>\u00a0 each individual has equal moral standing, regardless of race, gender, wealth, etc.\u00a0 This is a Christian view grounded in man\u2019s creation in the image of God.\u00a0 Men, women, slaves, free, rich, poor . . . we all stand accountable before God in need of salvation through Jesus Christ.\u00a0 As sinners, our attitudes should begin with humility.<\/p>\n<p>Joseph Henrich coined the acronym W.E.I.R.D. to describe modern Western values:\u00a0 Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic.\u00a0 The roots are Christian.\u00a0 Most of the world, through most of history would heartily agree that \u2018weird\u2019 is the right term.<\/p>\n<p>Consider the roots of the Gospel.\u00a0 We see the cross as a symbol of redemption and salvation even for the lowly.\u00a0 Its inventors, though, the Romans, saw the cross as degradation, worthlessness, torture, and unrecoverable loss.\u00a0 Tacitus called it \u201cthe extreme penalty.\u201d\u00a0 The crucified body was tossed away as garbage, to be eaten by dogs and birds.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixions were public spectacles, like hangings were in more recent eras.\u00a0 Crucifixions were offered as \u2018half-time\u2019 entertainment in gladiatorial games.\u00a0 A crucifixion was an \u2018un-person-ing\u2019 and a warning:\u00a0 <em>Do not go the way of this wretch.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A Gospel \u2013 \u201cgood news\u201d \u2013 that put the Creator on a cross willingly, guiltless, sinless, and as a substitute for our justly deserved judgment . . . that was ridiculous, <em>foolish<\/em>, as Paul put it.\u00a0 That each of us, then and now, deserved what Jesus suffered \u2013 and <em>more<\/em> because the wrath of God was more than physical \u2013 required awesome humility and repentance.\u00a0 Every <em>sinner<\/em> must see his just reward as on the cross that the Lord Jesus took in our place.\u00a0 Righteousness could only be imputed, it could not be earned.\u00a0 This was incredibly radical stuff!<\/p>\n<p>In a typical Roman\u2019s eyes, or to most of the Greeks on Mars Hill, Christ was necessarily a loser, \u201chis worshippers fools and his religion a perversity.\u00a0 If Roman citizens could not bear to have the name of the cross on their lips, what sort of God would show up as its victim?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>On the matter of <em>justice<\/em>, Scrivener observes, ancients believed that justice was the enforcement of inequality.\u00a0 Of course the nobles and the wealthy should not be held accountable to the same standards as the peasants and the slaves!\u00a0 This is precisely the reverse of our modern concept of justice, which derives from our moral equality under God\u2019s laws.<\/p>\n<p>Slavery in ancient times was woven into the economy, politics, and religion.\u00a0 But the New Testament equates slave and free in God\u2019s eyes, and in each other\u2019s eyes, too.\u00a0 Over the next few centuries after the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, minds and hearts changed, cultures changed, everything changed.\u00a0 Yes, history is still messy and \u2018Christianity\u2019 was warped and derailed in many ways . . . it still is . . . but the moral air we breathe has been transformed dramatically.<\/p>\n<p>As Scrivener relates, \u201cNow the idea of humble sacrifice has gone from shameful to glorious.\u00a0 Now we consider equality, compassion, freedom, and all the WEIRD values this book explores as obvious.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>During COVID, former UK Supreme Court Justice Lord Sumption declared, \u201cI don\u2019t accept that all lives are of equal value.\u201d\u00a0 It was a TV debate regarding the damage lockdowns would do to the young, in contrast with the elderly\u2019s risk to viral exposure.\u00a0 Well, outrage ensued.\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cWho are you to put a value on life?\u201d asked an opponent.<\/p>\n<p>Now, if Plato had heard Sumption\u2019s declaration, he might have thought, \u201cJust what is the debate about exactly?\u201d\u00a0 The father of Western philosophy would think it trivially obvious that lives are of unequal value.\u00a0 Women, men, Greeks, barbarians, free, slaves, rich, poor, wise, foolish . . . of course some are more valuable than others and so should enjoy proportionate privileges!<\/p>\n<p>Logically, from a secular viewpoint, you can make a strong case for Plato\u2019s view.\u00a0 Only under the Christian perspective, with each man, woman, child, slave, etc., made an eternal soul in the image of God, is equality of a life\u2019s value a moral imperative.<\/p>\n<p>Scrivener:\u00a0 \u201cWhat we <em>see<\/em> are differences.\u00a0 What we <em>seek <\/em>is equality.\u201d\u00a0 But you cannot find the equality your conscience yearns for in DNA sequences or IQ tests, or in anything physically measurable.<\/p>\n<p>How are we to be valued?\u00a0 By the chemicals that comprise our bodies?\u00a0 By our projected life\u2019s wages?\u00a0 We <em>know <\/em>that our worth must transcend the physical, the economic.\u00a0 We <em>know <\/em>this because God, the God described in the Bible, is real and is the Personal Foundation for our present being and for our eternity.\u00a0 It is frankly impossible for one to imagine how he might cease to exist some day.\u00a0 No, we <em>know <\/em>that we are souls that transcend our fragile bodies and we yearn for our heavenly Father to welcome us home.\u00a0 At age 71, such thoughts rise in poignancy.<\/p>\n<p>Ancients would choke on the idea that male and female are both and equally made in God\u2019s image, and will reign in God\u2019s restored world.\u00a0 Maybe a king might be so destined.\u00a0 But a peasant (born again) in India?\u00a0 A factory worker (born again) in Milwaukee?\u00a0 Indeed.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, consider our accountability.\u00a0 Our world is messed up and deteriorating rapidly.\u00a0 The Bible is clear \u2013 that\u2019s our fault!\u00a0 Our willful and heinous sins, from Adam to you and me, are the root cause of Earth\u2019s fallenness, the earthquakes and hurricanes, the diseases and wars, the crimes and the broken families.\u00a0 We are to blame . . . but . . . God delivered the Gospel, the ultimate good news, for sinners, from Adam to you and me.\u00a0 Upon individual and willful repentance and faith in Jesus, we are reborn into God\u2019s family, and He is preparing a new home for us, New Jerusalem, and eventually a New Earth for us to enjoy dominion over, \u2018wherein dwelleth righteousness.\u2019<\/p>\n<p>Regarding the air of <em>compassion,<\/em> Plato and Aristotle believed that defective newborns should be abandoned in garbage dumps or drowned in rivers.\u00a0 Infanticide was legal under Roman law.\u00a0 The oldest known treatise on gynaecology included a section, \u201cHow to Recognize the Newborn that is Worth Rearing.\u201d\u00a0 If not, expose it to die in the elements and try again.<\/p>\n<p>Why so harsh?\u00a0 Raising a disabled child was inconvenient.\u00a0 This, of course, is the dominant reason for abortion, then and now.\u00a0 With ultrasound and other techniques, it is more convenient than ever to opt for abortion.\u00a0 It is the Christian worldview that fights against the murder of the unborn.\u00a0 Note that the most wicked activists and politicians in this country work to legalize the slaughter of infants if they survive an attempted abortion.<\/p>\n<p>Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) explained the worldview connection:\u00a0 \u201cPity on the whole thwarts the law of evolution, which is the law of selection.\u201d\u00a0 I get it.\u00a0 If evolution is how we got here, if matter is everything, if God is not there and we are not souls but merely clods of matter in motion, then choose convenience.<\/p>\n<p>Nietzsche again:\u00a0 \u201cChristianity has taken the part of all the weak, the low, the botched; it has made an ideal out of antagonism to all the self-preservative instincts of sound life.\u201d\u00a0 So, Christianity is the enemy of ruthless convenience.\u00a0 Well, thank you, Friedrich.\u00a0 We affirm your accusation.<\/p>\n<p>In the Roman world, John 3:16 \u2013 \u201cFor God so loved the world . . .\u201d \u2013 was strange, ridiculous.\u00a0 That God would send His Son as a sacrifice . . . crazy.\u00a0 That\u2019s why Paul calls the Gospel foolishness to his culture.\u00a0 The Romans already had a \u2018son of God.\u2019\u00a0 Caesar Augustus, their emperor, was also called \u2018Lord,\u2019 \u2018Saviour of the world.\u2019\u00a0 Julius Caesar\u2019s claims to divinity included killing a million Gauls and enslaving another million.\u00a0 Caesar boasted about that; it was evidence of his godhood.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Christians proclaimed that the essence of God\u2019s love was God\u2019s son on a Roman cross, with arms outstretched to His enemies, offering forgiveness.\u00a0 Jesus came to serve, not to rule . . . not the first time, that is.\u00a0 But He will judge and rule when He returns.<\/p>\n<p>Now, servant leadership is so common as to be a clich\u00e9.\u00a0 Christian elders are termed \u2018ministers,\u2019 the equivalent of \u2018servants.\u2019\u00a0 In the UK, cabinet members are called \u2018ministers.\u2019<\/p>\n<p>Historian William Lecky argues that the viciously bloody gladiatorial games were finally outlawed by Christian influence.\u00a0 Similarly, Christians produced the end of exposing \/ killing infants by exercising sacrificial love to the poor, the sick, and the abandoned.\u00a0 This was not simply a matter of legal victories; rather, the preaching and practice of the Gospel changed hearts, minds, and culture.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ll comment that most of the moral protest and efforts of American Christians in my lifetime seem to have focused on legalities.\u00a0 Modern Christians have woefully neglected Gospel preaching and personal witness.\u00a0 They seem, rather, to enjoy building megachurch campuses and watching the show.<\/p>\n<p>Scrivener turns to the issue of sexual <em>consent<\/em>.\u00a0 He cites the case of predator Larry Nassar, who abused at least 265 girls over decades as team doctor for USA gymnastics.\u00a0 One of his victims pleaded with the judge to impose the maximum possible sentence to send the message that the victims were worth everything.\u00a0 Nassar received multiple sentences totalling 100 to 200 years.<\/p>\n<p>Scrivener:\u00a0 \u201cHow much is a little girl worth?\u00a0 We want to answer, \u2018Everything.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The ancients didn\u2019t see it this way.\u00a0 Once you bought a slave, you could do as you like to her, or to him.\u00a0 Also, prostitution was an open, prominent industry.\u00a0 \u201cA quick visit to the nearest brothel (and they were everywhere), would set you back the price of a loaf of bread.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Christians created the very concept of sexual abuse.\u00a0 The idea would be nonsense to the freeborn Roman man, who had an unquestioned right to the bodies of lower-class women, children, slaves, and prostitutes.\u00a0 It wasn\u2019t <em>abuse<\/em>; it was merely <em>use<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>The \u2018Jesus revolution\u2019 was far different from the 1960s sexual revolution.\u00a0 The latter sought to remove taboos around female sexuality.\u00a0 The former imposed restrictions on men.\u00a0 The 1960s said, \u2018Women can be as free as men,\u2019 while the New Testament teaches, \u2018Men must be as restricted as women.\u2019\u00a0 Furthermore, social and psychological science has finally caught up with biblical morality, <em>discovering<\/em> that a faithful, lifelong, marital relationship enables better sex, better physical and mental health, a longer life, and far more happiness.<\/p>\n<p>Why is this so?\u00a0 God designed reality and so He gives us principles whereby we can successfully live.\u00a0 Marriage joins two people whom God has joined together.\u00a0 What we do with our flesh has a strong spiritual component.\u00a0 It matters to God and facilitates our relationship with Him.\u00a0 Casual sex and easy divorce are anathema to the reality of how God designed human beings.\u00a0 1 Corinthians chapter 7 teaches a stunning mutuality and equality regarding male and female in marriage.\u00a0 1 Corinthians chapter 13 defines love in a way that is totally foreign to most of the world throughout most of history, but now . . . it\u2019s simply the air we breathe.<\/p>\n<p>There is a long-documented history of the Christian roots of universities.\u00a0 Oxford, for example, stood on its motto, \u201cGod is my guiding light.\u201d\u00a0 Sadly, the moral and philosophical decline of the West\u2019s universities is due to Marxist scheming and influence that has not been sufficiently resisted.<\/p>\n<p>On politics, consider the \u201crights\u201d of citizens.\u00a0 If individuals possess rights, then rulers cannot have unlimited powers.\u00a0 The biblical principal is revealed in 2 Samuel 23:3 \u2013 \u201cThe God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.\u201d\u00a0 The King is neither God nor a god; rather a man, subject to God\u2019s judgment.\u00a0 Be warned, tyrant!<\/p>\n<p>The modern foundations for rights-centric democracies were laid down in the Middle Ages:\u00a0 separation of church and state, human rights, just war theory, just and constrained rulers, rule by law.\u00a0 These concepts all have Christian roots and are not in sync with the history of those parts of the world with scant Christian influence.\u00a0 Scrivener particularly points out that the so-called Enlightenment\u2019s emphasis on man\u2019s reason (apart from God) did not lead to freedom.\u00a0 Atheism and Communism are the perpetual enemies of freedom.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian roots of science, affirmed by many secular scholars, are grounded in God\u2019s free choice.\u00a0 He could have deemed planetary orbits to be triangular, for example.\u00a0 There is no way the universe <em>must be<\/em>.\u00a0 God\u2019s freedom to create the world\u2019s dynamical patterns \u2013 physical laws that we are free to discover \u2013 motivates our desire to explore.\u00a0 Philosophers of science use terms like \u201cintelligibility\u201d and \u201ccomprehensibility\u201d to marvel at the fact that we are actually <em>able <\/em>to figure out the patterns; for example, the inverse-squared law for gravitational and electromagnetic forces.<\/p>\n<p>Because we believe that God is not capricious (as opposed to Islam), we anticipate order in the universe, so that orbits work the same today as they did thousands of years ago, and that hydrogen spectra have the same physical cause in a far away galaxy as they do in a laboratory in Albuquerque.\u00a0 Albert Einstein:\u00a0 \u201cThe eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility . . .The fact that it is comprehensible is a miracle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>God, indeed, designed our brains so that we could explore His works and glorify Him.\u00a0 Psalm 104:31 \u2013 \u201cThe glory of the Lord shall endure forever:\u00a0 the Lord shall rejoice in his works.\u201d\u00a0 And God wants us to share in appreciating His works.\u00a0 Cats, dogs, and chimps cannot so share.\u00a0 If evolution were true, and we are mere survival machines, our truth-seeking abilities would be suspect . . . and we would not have the innate capacity to doubt our own conclusions.\u00a0 (Doubt, testing, and verification are logical and essential elements of science.)\u00a0 Scrivener observes that properly done science must take human fallibility, including agendas and biases, into account.<\/p>\n<p>Nobel laureate Richard Feynman insisted that the first principle of science is that you must not fool yourself \u2013 and you are the easiest person to fool.\u00a0 Then there are the disastrous \u2018science\u2019 fiascoes of the COVID experience, including the rush to develop dangerous vaccines without adequate testing, the deliberate lies of scientists in public health organizations, and the suppression of data regarding masking, natural immunity, and adverse vaccine reactions . . . which continue to this day.<\/p>\n<p>Why is there moral outrage about phony, life-threatening science?\u00a0 On a Christian worldview, outrage is appropriate.\u00a0 To the Marxist, or Nietzschean, or wokist, though, truth is defined by the established narrative; it\u2019s all about power.<\/p>\n<p>The modern heroes of science (such as Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton) loved God and yearned to discover His mighty works.\u00a0 They believed science was possible <em>because <\/em>God was the Creator of all.\u00a0 Newton, for example:\u00a0 \u201cThis most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an Intelligent Powerful Being.\u201d\u00a0 Despite the world\u2019s complexity, they believed that God created the human mind fit for the task of understanding God\u2019s works.<\/p>\n<p>On <u>liberty<\/u> . . .<em> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.\u201d\u00a0 <\/em>(Declaration of Independence, 1776.)<\/p>\n<p>Considering the history of the world, to claim that equality and human rights are \u201cself-evident\u201d is audacious.\u00a0 This truth is resonant only to the heart, mind, and conscience tuned to a biblical worldview.\u00a0 Ancient civilizations knew nothing of the kind.\u00a0 Scrivener suggests that slavery is a stronger candidate for a universal ground to civilization.\u00a0 \u201cRights are weird,\u201d he notes, \u201cnonsense on steroids,\u201d as characterized by philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832).<\/p>\n<p>The source and ground for the idea of unalienable rights is the Christian faith, specifically that we are all souls made in God\u2019s image, and stand equally before Him, both accountable and redeemable, via perfectly equal standards.<\/p>\n<p>What about slavery?\u00a0 \u201cAbolition was not an Enlightenment movement.\u201d\u00a0 It was entirely a Christian initiative, both in England and in the U.S. in the 18<sup>th<\/sup> and 19<sup>th<\/sup> centuries.\u00a0 How ironic is it that the leftists in the West, who damn our history of slavery (as do we), especially hate Christianity, the source and bulwark of human freedom?\u00a0 But modern Marxists (or wokists) are either genuine or practical atheists, with no moral ground at all to criticize slavery . . . and no motivation to fight for freedom, either, as shown horrifically in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe before the fall of the Soviet empire, and yet today in China, North Korea, and Cuba.<\/p>\n<p>On <em>progress <\/em>. . . In ancient cultures the past was seen as better than the present.\u00a0 In the past resided heroes and gods.\u00a0 The only way forward to the ancient Greeks was down, although it was possible that we might cycle around again.\u00a0 The Hindu grand narrative invokes cycles going back into eternity.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible, however, portrays an arrow pointing onwards and upwards through history, with unique events enroute, such as the deliverance of the Israelites from Egyptian slavery, the coming of the Messiah, and above all, the 2<sup>nd<\/sup> coming of Christ and a New Heaven and a New Earth in our future.<\/p>\n<p>The Marxist (or wokist) strives to establish utopia on Earth, administered, of course, by their own privileged elites.\u00a0 Urban America is presently suffering the consequences.\u00a0 \u201cProgressives\u201d have a truly dark vision of a godless, secular future.\u00a0 Their attempts at utopia since the beginning of the 20<sup>th<\/sup> century have resulted in the misery and deaths of hundreds of millions of people worldwide.\u00a0 Do they admit error?\u00a0 No.\u00a0 Adolf Hitler was once asked what was the heaviest blow that ever struck humanity.<\/p>\n<p>His answer did not include his own rise to power.\u00a0 Rather, he opined, \u201cThe coming of Christianity.\u201d\u00a0 Continuing, \u201cThis filthy reptile [Christianity] raises its head whenever there is a sign of weakness in the State, and therefore it must be stamped on.\u00a0 We have no use for a fairy story invented by the Jews.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>This sentiment is still shared by Marxists, wokists, academics, and corporate elites.<\/p>\n<p>What was the basis for the judgments in the trials at Nuremberg (1945-46)?\u00a0 Why did the Allies insist on prosecuting the Nazi leaders for their atrocities in WW2?\u00a0 Didn\u2019t the Germans have their own culture?\u00a0 Aren\u2019t all cultures equally valid?\u00a0 Doesn\u2019t might make right?\u00a0 What standard could be used for judgment?<\/p>\n<p>The Nazis were prosecuted for \u201ccrimes against humanity.\u201d\u00a0 But \u201chumanity\u201d was present on all sides of every issue.\u00a0 Some humans ruthlessly gassed the Jews and some, at great risk, hid and rescued them.\u00a0 Humans both lost the war and won the war.\u00a0 Himmler, a defendant, stated that he was \u201cbut a part of this world.\u201d\u00a0 Goebbels admitted that the Jew is a man, but the flea is also an animal.\u00a0 To the evolutionist there is no intrinsic moral difference between man and flea.<\/p>\n<p>In short, there is no transcendent justice to condemn Nazism, unless you are immersed in the atmosphere of Christianity.\u00a0 The Allies couldn\u2019t go so far as to invoke God, but their moral outrage relied on the Western public\u2019s acceptance of biblical morality.\u00a0 The Allies depended on the air we breathe.<\/p>\n<p><em>Progress <\/em>is doomed to disintegrate, according to biblical prophecy, during the Tribulation, under the rule of the Antichrist.\u00a0 But progress will reignite when Jesus returns.\u00a0 Can\u2019t wait.<\/p>\n<p>Hopefully, we\u2019re\u00a0 close.\u00a0 Under modernism and postmodernism, it was understood that, as the novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote, \u201cwithout God . . . all things are permitted.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Now, under post-postmodernism, anti-Christians have discovered that they love preaching, they love moralizing, they love finger-wagging.\u00a0 Accordingly, the most virulent judgmentalists are the woke cancel-culture sociopaths.\u00a0 Social media magnifies and supercharges outrage.\u00a0 Getting offended gives many a cheap high.\u00a0 And they want everyone to know just how angry they are!\u00a0 The world is now filled with woke evangelists.<\/p>\n<p>Scrivener observes that the heart of this new zealotry lacks what Christianity features \u2013 above all:\u00a0 <em>forgiveness.<\/em>\u00a0 Sin against almighty God and forgiveness is immediately available via humility and confession.\u00a0 Offend a Christian and the true Christian is obligated to forgive you, even unto seventy times seven.\u00a0 Offend a wokist, though, and you\u2019re doomed for life.\u00a0 Who wants to live in that world?<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 130:3 . . . <em>If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>God is omniscient and eternal, yet He promises to forget sins when we repent.\u00a0 Psalm 103:12 . . . <em>As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Scrivener has much more to say.\u00a0 I recommend his book.\u00a0 His final advice is, <em>To the \u201cWon\u201d:\u00a0 Be Weird.<\/em>\u00a0 If you\u2019re a genuine born again Christian, embrace it.\u00a0 You\u2019re on the (future) winning side of history.\u00a0 As for today, and every day, be a witness, speak up, be salt, be light, share some Gospel truth, hand out a tract . . . even if you get some grief.\u00a0 Your Lord will appreciate it.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211; <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<br \/>\n<strong><br \/>\n189. Intellectuals<br \/>\nDecember 1, 2023 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>We live in a nasty, uncivil culture, don\u2019t we?\u00a0 Reason, logic, and evidence have become irrelevant in public policy, subordinated to whatever it takes to gain and to hold power.\u00a0 If you have been slammed by cancel culture, there is no point in apologizing for your supposed offense \u2013 forgiveness is not available.<\/p>\n<p>We find ourselves, perhaps, at the end of cultural history, where <em>critical theory<\/em>, including specific branches like <em>critical race theory<\/em>, permeate the educational, entertainment, political, and even business power centers.\u00a0 Critical theory, of course, is all about tearing down long-held principles and institutions, including the family, rule by law, freedom of speech, sexual morality, and everything associated with biblical Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Karl Marx laid much groundwork for the present chaos.\u00a0 This was his doctrine for the use of criticism:\u00a0 \u201cIts essential sentiment is indignation; its essential activity is denunciation.\u201d\u00a0 How enthusiastically has our present generation embraced this doctrine!\u00a0 Why go to the trouble of weaving evidence and logic to make your point when you can simply vilify and cancel those you disagree with?\u00a0 The lockdowns and vaccine mandates in recent years were well-greased with indignation and denunciation.\u00a0 This is how tyranny works.<\/p>\n<p>Tyrants, therefore, need not be intelligent, but merely find it useful to be unconstrained by anything resembling biblical morality.\u00a0 The elites know best, so whatever it takes to control the masses, that\u2019s good.\u00a0 Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the 18<sup>th<\/sup> century French \u2018intellectual,\u2019 likened the masses of the people to \u201ca stupid, pusillanimous invalid.\u201d\u00a0 Karl Marx insisted, \u201cThe working class is revolutionary or it is nothing.\u201d\u00a0 Namely, they only mattered if they fulfilled his communist vision.\u00a0 George Bernard Shaw suggested the working classes were \u201cdetestable people\u201d who \u201chave no right to live.\u201d\u00a0 Recall that Hillary Clinton called us \u201cdeplorables.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Mussolini, a darling of the left and its \u2018intellectuals\u2019 until well into the 1930s, opined, \u201cThe mass will simply follow and submit.\u201d\u00a0 Only after Mussolini invaded Ethiopia and teamed up with Adolf Hitler, did the left disavow Mussolini and labeled him as on \u201cthe right.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>These last few examples are cited by Thomas Sowell in his wonderful 2011 book, <em>Intellectuals and Society.<\/em>\u00a0 Here\u2019s a hint:\u00a0 he doesn\u2019t like intellectuals.\u00a0 He applies the T.S. Eliot quote:\u00a0 \u201cHalf of the harm that is done in the world is due to people who want to feel important.\u00a0 They don\u2019t mean to do harm \u2013 but the harm does not interest them.\u00a0 Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Sowell describes the consequences of the environmental crusade to outlaw use of DDT because of the potential danger to the eggs of some songbirds.\u00a0 During the 1940s, 50s, and early 60s, DDT had drastically reduced the mosquito populations that fostered malaria.\u00a0 Banning DDT then produced a resurgence of malaria that cost millions of lives, \u201ceven in countries where the disease had been all but eradicated.\u00a0 Rachel Carson may have been responsible for more deaths of human beings than anyone without an army.\u00a0 Yet she remains a revered figure among environmental crusaders.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>What is an <em>intellectual<\/em>?\u00a0 Sowell defines this as someone whose occupation deals primarily with ideas \u2013 \u201cwriters, academics, and the like.\u201d\u00a0 Not brain surgeons or engineers, despite the training and demanding mental skills involved.\u00a0 Surgeons, engineers, physicists, and other such professionals <em>apply <\/em>their mental skills to discover how things work, or to actually make things work.\u00a0 Intellectuals don\u2019t have to live with the consequences of the ideas they promote.<\/p>\n<p>Intellectuals, notes Sowell, desire power regardless of how little knowledge or accomplishment they can demonstrate.\u00a0 Effectively, they want to transfer decision-making from the masses to themselves.\u00a0 Recent examples include our government\u2019s war on fossil fuels, mandates to replace ICEs with EVs, and establishing speech codes on campuses and within workplaces.\u00a0 An impressive historical example Sowell cites is the case of the Soviet Union\u2019s central planners, who set prices for 24 million goods and services, without any possible understanding of the relative scarcities or costs.\u00a0 While impossible for central planners to avoid disasters in exercising such authority, the task is quite manageable for market economies in which millions of individuals are experts in tracking and evaluating the relatively few prices important to them.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, the masses of a market economy are far wiser than the intellectuals at the top of a socialist scheme.<\/p>\n<p>To be fair, Sowell admits, \u201cIntellectuals are often extraordinary within their own specialties \u2013 but so too are chess grandmasters, musical prodigies, and many others.\u201d\u00a0 Yet these other \u2018specialists\u2019 would not dare to imagine that they should pontificate to or direct a whole society.<\/p>\n<p>Sowell:\u00a0 \u201cEverything from economic central planning to environmentalism epitomizes the belief that third party elites know best and should be empowered to over-ride the decisions of others.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Sowell relates the obvious when he writes that the most knowledgeable person on Earth has less that one percent of a society\u2019s useful knowledge.\u00a0 A member of the intellectual elite may have more knowledge per capita, which tempts some to demand the right to lead or to direct others.\u00a0 But \u201cthe population at large may have vastly more <em>total <\/em>knowledge \u2013 in the mundane sense \u2013 than the elites, even if that knowledge is scattered in individually unimpressive fragments among vast numbers of people.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The free market idea and its practice is akin to a vast analog computer, running \u2018simulations\u2019 continuously to discover what works best for billions of real people.\u00a0 Free markets are quick, adaptable, resilient, and efficient.\u00a0 Top-down planned economies run by arrogant intellectuals (forgive the redundancy) are not.<\/p>\n<p>He mentions the particular arrogance of philosopher Simone deBeauvoir, who said, \u201cNo woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children.\u00a0 Society should be totally different.\u00a0 Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.\u201d\u00a0 I don\u2019t know if deBeauvoir ever laid out the specifics on how to restructure families and societies and how that might work out.<\/p>\n<p>The track record of intellectuals who have had their way is dismal indeed.\u00a0\u00a0 New and \u201cinnovative\u201d and \u201cexciting\u201d educational theories in the 1960s resulted in substantially lower test scores despite much increased spending per student.\u00a0 New theories on crime produced new crime waves.\u00a0 (Consider in recent years how defund-the-police-and-replace-them-with-social-workers programs have destroyed urban America.)\u00a0 For generations now, welfare policies supposedly intended to help black communities, have destroyed families and produced multi-generational dependence on the state.<\/p>\n<p>Surgeons and engineers are judged by external standards, Sowell observes.\u00a0 If the patient lives and recovers, the surgeon is good.\u00a0 If the computer works efficiently or the satellite achieves orbit, the engineer is competent.\u00a0 The intellectual, though \u2013 the leftist \/ Marxist pundit \u2013 has no external standard.\u00a0 He is successful or esteemed if his fellow Marxists admire his ideas or phraseology.\u00a0 If his writing is elegant or interesting, he is respected.\u00a0 This was Lenin\u2019s pedigree, by the way.\u00a0 He only had a real job briefly, once in his early life.\u00a0 He didn\u2019t like it. But he loved to write progaganda rags and make speeches.<\/p>\n<p>Vince Lombardi\u2019s ideas about playing football were tested on the field.\u00a0 If his teams had not won, his name would be unknown and his career would have been short.\u00a0 Einstein\u2019s ideas on relativity were not accepted based on plausibility or aesthetics.\u00a0 They were validated in the laboratory.\u00a0 But the ideas of Marx, Lenin, Hitler, and Mao \u201chad enormous \u2013 and often lethal \u2013 impact on millions of people,\u201d regardless of their evil or denial of reality or rejection by anyone with the freedom to do so.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, the teachings of Jesus Christ have been tested and proven by the multitudes of those delivered from the bondage of sin, and the transformation of lives from selfishness and wickedness to virtue and benevolence.\u00a0 Of course, biblical teachings are <em>true <\/em>because God wired reality and told us what <em>truth <\/em>is.\u00a0 But Jesus also told us, \u201cYe shall know them by their fruits.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Public policies across the spectrum are influenced or dictated by intellectuals who acquire power.\u00a0 Pundits or politicians may express outrage at the number of shots fired by police in a confrontation with criminals, \u201ceven if many of these intellectuals have never fired a gun in their lives, much less faced life-and-death dangers requiring split-second decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>A\u00a0 New York City Police Dept. study found that half the shots fired by police miss completely . . . within a range of six feet!\u00a0 From 50 to 75 feet, about the distance from 1<sup>st<\/sup> base to 2<sup>nd<\/sup> base on a Little League field, only 14% of shots hit the target.<\/p>\n<p>An example from microeconomics on the cost of financial services in low-income neighborhoods:\u00a0 Personal loans are often tied to short-term needs, facilitating \u201cpayday loan\u201d businesses, which may charge $15 interest per $100 loaned . . . until payday.\u00a0 On an annual basis, this interest rate is astronomical, prompting the intelligentsia to cry for an end to \u201cexploitative\u201d and \u201cunconscionable\u201d interest rates.\u00a0 Accordingly, Oregon capped the annual interest rate on loans, and 75% of loan businesses closed down.\u00a0 If you can charge only $1.50 for a 2-week loan of $100, you can\u2019t make any profit, much less accept the risk of making such loans.\u00a0 And so the \u201coppressed poor\u201d don\u2019t even have the opportunity for tide-over loans.<\/p>\n<p>But the intellectuals feel good about themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Socialists \/ communists tend to see economics as a zero-sum game.\u00a0 Somebody has to decide how to divide the fixed pie.\u00a0 But capitalism and free markets are about cooperation between capital and labor, with innovation to <em>create <\/em>wealth that would not exist otherwise.\u00a0 Biblical teachings are completely consistent with the notions of private property, limited government, innovation derived from God\u2019s gifts to individuals, and honest cooperation.<\/p>\n<p>When I was a child in the 1950s and 60s, only the rich had color TVs, fat monstrosities that failed quickly; few had air conditioning, <u>none<\/u> had the internet, MRIs, electric toothbrushes, smart phones, or tablets.\u00a0 How did our modern tech world come to be?\u00a0 Innovation, protection of intellectual property, cooperation between sources of capital and labor, and free markets were certainly essential to progress.<\/p>\n<p>What is deemed poverty now in the West would have been considered prosperity, even opulence, to previous generations.\u00a0 Communist nations, on the drastically other hand, simply do not work to reduce poverty; their goal is control \u2013 violently, if required, as it often is.<\/p>\n<p>Sowell cites historian Paul Johnson who notes that violence often walks hand-in-hand with the intellectual elite.\u00a0 Mussolini was popular with many intellectuals, and not just Italian ones.\u00a0 Hitler was singularly successful on campus, drawing votes from students at a higher rate than from the general population.\u00a0 Intellectuals were drawn frequently into the upper echelons of the Nazi Party.\u00a0 Stalin, Mao, and Castro had legions of intellectual admirers.\u00a0 The killing fields of Cambodia were sourced in a group of French intellectuals, including teachers, a professor, a civil servant, and an economist.\u00a0 In recent times, American intellectuals were quite supportive of the violent riots fostered by BLM and ANTIFA.<\/p>\n<p>Interventions by \u2018intellectuals\u2019 among politicians, judges, or bureaucrats to \u201cinsure fairness\u201d typically harm or destroy enterprise.\u00a0 For example, minimum wage laws usually produce higher unemployment rates and rent control laws reduce the available housing.\u00a0 There are no <em>personal <\/em>consequences for the 3<sup>rd<\/sup> party intellectuals who contrive simplistic policies on how the world \u2018should be.\u2019 People directly involved in free market transactions can more easily decide what they want at what price and that influences the sellers who must work to please those desires.<\/p>\n<p>Sowell contrasts the \u201cvision of the anointed\u201d with the \u201ctragic vision.\u201d\u00a0 Jean-Jacques Rousseau declared, \u201cMan was born free, and he is everywhere in chains.\u201d\u00a0 Accordingly, the\u00a0 problems in society are solvable by the morally anointed intellectual elites.\u00a0 Sowell cites Thucydides on the tragic vision of human nature . . . \u201ca human race that escaped chaos and barbarism by preserving with difficulty a thin layer of civilization,\u201d based on \u201cmoderation and prudence\u201d derived from experience.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019d rather take the biblical position that we live in a sinfully fallen world and are accountable to God and His laws.\u00a0 Accordingly, our institutions and policies should account for man\u2019s sinfulness \/ selfishness \/ etc., by dispersing power and rewarding virtue.\u00a0 The founding fathers were quite mindful of the biblical worldview when they established a tripartite government, along with state \/ federal distinctives, with a Constitution that <em>constrained <\/em>the power of government and rulers in vital ways.<\/p>\n<p>Sowell writes that in the tragic vision, social and legal contrivances seek to restrict bad behavior, but these restrictions themselves cause a certain amount of unhappiness.\u00a0 Professor Richard A. Epstein (U. of Chicago):\u00a0 \u201cThe study of human institutions is always a search for the most tolerable imperfections.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In the tragic vision public policymaking always requires tradeoffs.\u00a0 In the anointed vision, man is perfectable and can solve all of his problems.\u00a0 (Replace police with social workers and decline to prosecute criminals because \u2018man\u2019 is good at heart and you will get more crime, lots more crime.)<\/p>\n<p>One result is a perverted moral stance from the two camps.\u00a0 Joseph Epstein (<em>NY Times Magazine<\/em>, 1985):\u00a0 \u201cDisagree with someone on the right and he is likely to think you obtuse, wrong, foolish, a dope.\u00a0 Disagree with someone on the left and he is more likely to think you selfish, a sell-out, insensitive, possibly evil.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It is ironic that a generation ago, the postmodern leftists largely abhorred moral judgments, but now the woke crowd is viciously judgmental and unforgiving.\u00a0 My take on Epstein\u2019s summary is that both stereotypical camps are wrong.\u00a0 The woke \/ communist \/ leftist crowd is, in fact, definitely evil, anti-Christian, anti-reality, openly antagonistic to God, the family, the Constitution, rule by law, freedom of speech . . . everything that enables physical and moral prosperity.\u00a0 The conservative \/ \u2018right\u2019 \/ Republican crowd is wrong in that their opponents are not merely making pragmatic mistakes, but rather are opposing the way God wired physical and moral reality.<\/p>\n<p>Testing the fruits of opposing worldviews, studies have shown that conservatives (in contrast with \u2018liberals\u2019) donate more to charity (although the average conservative income is less), donate more time as volunteers, and donate far more blood.\u00a0 This result is surprising to the intelligentsia.\u00a0 Anecdotally, but notably, Ronald Reagan donated more of his income to charity than did Ted Kennedy or Franklin D. Roosevelt.<\/p>\n<p>What is called <em>social justice <\/em>is often about correcting the imbalances of fate, or life in a fallen world.\u00a0 Sowell considers mental aptitude or scholastic qualification tests, which have long been under attack for not being \u2018fair.\u2019\u00a0 Rather, Sowell suggests, \u201cThe tests are not unfair.\u00a0 <em>Life <\/em>is unfair and the tests measure the results.\u201d\u00a0 There is a fundamental difference, Sowell reminds us, \u201cbetween <em>conveying<\/em> a difference that already exists and <em>causing <\/em>a difference to exist.\u201d\u00a0 If you fail to understand this \u2013 and it seems that the intellentsia routinely do \u2013 then you cannot possibly find the root causes and help the people who suffer.<\/p>\n<p>The triumph of Western civilization, especially the prosperity and freedom enjoyed over the last couple of centuries in the English speaking world, is due in part, not to <em>social justice<\/em>, but <em>formal justice<\/em>, equality before the law and \u201ca government of laws, not of men.\u201d\u00a0 Sowell notes that <em>formal justice <\/em>has taken centuries of struggle to achieve, and cost many lives.\u00a0 <em>Formal justice <\/em>is foundationally a biblical concept, grounded in God\u2019s laws written in stone for the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>If some social justice crusade were implemented by people who actually cared to improve lives, there would be analysis and investigations to insure that negative unintended consequences do not make life worse.\u00a0 As before, if minimum wage laws destroyed entry level jobs or if rent controls grossly diminished housing availability, such policies would be reversed and lessons learned would be publicized.\u00a0 But if the crusade is merely to proclaim the elite on the side of the angels, then there will be no interest in evaluation; rather, investigations will be ignored or even prevented.\u00a0 (Note, for example, the enormous international efforts to cover up the dangerous side effects of COVID vaccines.)<\/p>\n<p>Hypocritically, and sadly, success by means other than what revolutionaries promote is despised.\u00a0 Prosperity and the relative uniformity of comfortable economic benefits has been achieved in the West over the last century by means of free markets and the other attributes of Western civilization.\u00a0 But Marxists give no credit, rather doubling down on efforts to magnify the power of the State and to restrict the freedom of individuals.<\/p>\n<p>The intelligentsia routinely misjudge their opponents.\u00a0 Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was vilified in his confirmation hearings; afterward his enemies in the media wrote of him as \u201cWashington\u2019s most famous recluse,\u201d apparently a friend only to his wife, the couple\u2019s life described as \u201cone of shared, brooding isolation.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The reality is that Thomas is probably the most accessible and personable Justice in history.\u00a0 He will notice a group of schoolchildren visiting the Court and invite them to his chambers.\u00a0 He and his wife travel the country in an RV, visiting small towns and striking up conversations with all kinds of people.\u00a0 He made a point of getting to know \u201cevery employee of the Court, from cafeteria cooks to the nighttime janitors.\u00a0 He played hoops with the marshals and security guards . . . Thomas had an uncanny ability to recall details of an employee\u2019s personal life.\u201d\u00a0 A prominent lawyer calls him \u201cthe most real person\u201d among all the Justices.<\/p>\n<p>Sowell has a significant chapter on how intellectuals have perverted the law; for example, as far back as 1908 the Dean of the Harvard Law School wrote of the desirability of \u201ca living constitution by judicial interpretation.\u201d\u00a0 Dean Roscoe Pound insisted that law should reflect \u201csocial justice\u201d (without defining it), and despite the prevailing morality of the people.\u00a0 Louis Brandeis believed that judges are best suited to be the arbiters of social needs, and also used the term \u201csocial justice\u201d without defining it.<\/p>\n<p>On war, Sowell considers American President Woodrow Wilson, a lifelong academic who helped sow the seeds of World War 2, by redrawing the map of eastern Europe at the end of WW1.\u00a0 He mandated the breakup of the old empires into small countries so that people could have their own homeland . . . ignoring vital elements of history, economics, demography, and military security.\u00a0 His idea of rescuing oppressed minorities ignored the reality of human nature, that when they became rulers themselves, they were sure to begin oppressing other minorities.<\/p>\n<p>Wilson\u2019s famous declaration, \u201cThe world must be made safe for democracy\u201d &#8212; Sound familiar? \u2013 generated unworkable policies that led to brutal totalitarian regimes in command of Russia, Italy, and Germany.\u00a0 Wilson, along with his British counterparts, helped undermine the interim revolutionary government that replaced the Czar in Russia, leaving the field open for the Bolsheviks (Lenin, Stalin), for which the whole world suffers to this present day.<\/p>\n<p>Intellectuals were largely responsible for the growth of pacifism between the wars, which enabled Germany, Japan, and Italy to get the jump on the rest of the world.\u00a0 The <em>New Statesman<\/em> characterized Winston Churchill in 1931 as a mind \u201cconfined in a militaristic mould,\u201d because he wanted to maintain the French Army and the British Navy at full strength.\u00a0 Editor Kingsley Martin concluded that anyone who disagreed with the virtues of pacifism had psychological defects.<\/p>\n<p>The French teachers\u2019 unions promoted pacifism between the wars, objecting to textbooks that favorably described the French soldiers who had shed their blood to defend their homeland.\u00a0 The \u2018intellectual\u2019 position was that nationalism was bad and a cause for war, but internationalism and \u2018impartiality\u2019 were good.\u00a0 Nothing has changed since then.<\/p>\n<p>When France surrendered to the German army in 1940, Charles Degaulle and other leaders blamed a lack of national will and general moral decay for their humiliating collapse.\u00a0 Thank you, intellectuals.\u00a0 Hitler, by the way, drove his nation to war against the recommendations of his generals, who knew that France had significant more military strength than did Germany.\u00a0 But Hitler had analyzed the French people, and knew they would cave quickly.\u00a0 Particularly, Hitler perceived that France lacked patriotism and a sense of national honor.\u00a0 At that point he was more in touch with reality, enabling a shocking military victory.<\/p>\n<p>The British PM, Neville Chamberlain, was criticized (before the war) by John Maynard Keynes, who said, \u201c. . . our statesmen have lost the capacity to appear formidable.\u00a0 It is in that loss that our greatest danger lies . . . our power to avoid a war depends not less than on our recovering that capacity to appear formidable, which is a quality of will and demeanour.\u201d\u00a0 Sowell goes on to describe how Ronald Reagan won the Cold War and effectively broke up the Soviet Union without firing a shot.\u00a0 Both Reagan and British PM Margaret Thatcher were formidable in the eyes of the Soviets.<\/p>\n<p>Intellectuals who gain political power are responsible, Sowell explains, for the usual asymmetry between democratic and autocratic governments over the last century.\u00a0 The intelligentsia often create a climate of opinion eager for treaties while uncritical of their specifics.\u00a0 In this week\u2019s news (as I draft this), once again there are moves by the U.S. government to establish a nuclear weapons deal with Iran, despite decades of deceit and untrustworthiness on the other side.\u00a0 Sowell cites many other examples, including the cease-fire negotiated to supposedly end the Vietnam War, which was used by the Communists to complete their conquest.<\/p>\n<p>Sowell, in this book, and in many other writings, has much to say about race.\u00a0 He reports how the intellectuals of the early 20<sup>th<\/sup> century were the driving forces behind eugenics . . . \u201cas late as 1928, there were 376 courses devoted to eugenics\u201d in the universities.\u00a0 He quotes Professor Henry Seager of Columbia:\u00a0 \u201cWe must courageously cut off lines of heredity that have proved to be undesirable,\u201d even if that requires \u201cisolation or sterilization.\u201d\u00a0 Today, it is the same type of people, namely \u2018intellectuals,\u2019 who are behind Critical Race Theory, gender ideology, and trans surgeries for children.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ll close with one of Sowell\u2019s most notable historical analyses.\u00a0 The successful development, both technologically and economically, of 19<sup>th<\/sup> century Japan and 18<sup>th<\/sup> century Scotland, resulted from building tangible skills in engineering and medicine, for example.\u00a0 In contrast, the 20<sup>th<\/sup> century saw a host of 3<sup>rd<\/sup> world leaders who went to college in the West to study sociology and Marxist-friendly ideologies.\u00a0 The countries they went back to and led to independence then suffered economic stagnation (or worse), along with internal polarization, with politics aimed at pitting group against group.\u00a0 A startling current example is the utter degradation in South Africa under the ruling party\u2019s Marxist leaders.<\/p>\n<p>So . . . ideas matter.\u00a0 Worldview matters.\u00a0 Truth really matters.\u00a0 This world would experience enormous peace and prosperity if its people and its leaders worked to embrace biblical principles, even if they didn\u2019t embrace the Gospel itself.\u00a0 Because God wired reality, because He designed human nature and the physical environment in which we live, it simply makes sense, even for selfish reasons, to follow God\u2019s laws . . . foster freedom, work hard, be honest and kind, treat others how you want to be treated yourself, obey lawful authorities, exercise careful stewardship over Earth\u2019s resources, and constrain evil.\u00a0 None of this is complicated, as we will find out by demonstration during the coming Millennium under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>drdave@truthreallymatters.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br \/>\n&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211; <\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>178. 1\/1\/23 How did Christianity succeed in its first hundred years? 179. 2\/1\/23 The God Hypothesis 180. 3\/1\/23 Money, Greed, and God 181. 4\/1\/23 How Goes Your Quest 182. 5\/1\/23 Progressive Christianity: Old-Fashioned Apostasy 183. 6\/1\/23 Scientism is not Science 184. 7\/1\/23 Against the Flow 185. 8\/1\/23 Why bother believing? 186. 9\/1\/23 Identity, History, Reality [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":8,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-4262","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4262","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4262"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4262\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4388,"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4262\/revisions\/4388"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/truthreallymatters.com\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4262"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}