Power, Politics, & Persuasion

Nick Bogardus — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:58:25 -0700

A question.

In a large portion of the Christianity, particularly the younger generation, the orthodox tenets of the faith are being 're-imagined', 're-painted', and ultimately 're-written'. I believe much of this is being done in the name of cultural relevance instead of in the name of Jesus, with Biblical truth bowing to popular culture; not for the sake of evangelism but for the sake of acceptance.

The Bible, our highest authority and truth, finds itself secondary to, among other things, cultural trends, popular opinion, therapeutic needs, and entertainment.

In an article, David Wells quoted radical deconstructionist Stanley Fish as saying, "since there is no such thing as truth, all that we have left is power, politics, and persuasion."

In a time when American culture as a whole seems hopelessly adrift and when some in the Church are cutting loose their anchors and sawing down their masts to drift ever more efficiently, is this true?

In the absence of Biblical truth, is the Church left with only power, politics, and persuasion?

If so, what do we even have to offer the world but more of the same?

Nicholas vs. Arius: Smack Down in Nicea

Sanjay Merchant — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:35:38 -0700

I often tell my children an apocryphal story about Nicholas of Myra's courageous stand against blasphemy at the Council of Nicea in 325.

Here's how it goes:

"A long time ago--just a few hundred years after Jesus rose from the dead--all the Christian pastors went to a city called Nicea to talk about some important things. There were a lot of great men there; many of them had been beaten up for telling people about Jesus and some had almost died. Still, none of them ever gave up believing in Jesus because they loved him so much... and the people loved them too.

"One of the great men at Nicea was Athanasius. You know about Athanasius because we named your baby brother after him. Another great man at Nicea was Nicholas of Myra. Today, everybody calls him Santa Claus. Nicholas was good--he was kind to the people, he gave money to the poor, and he told them the truth about God. But there was also a very bad man at Nicea named Arius who told a lot of lies. You've heard of Arius because we named the iguana that used to live in our courtyard after him. (Remember how we would yell, "Get out of here, Arius, you ugly lizard!" as it crawled along our fence?)

"Well, when it was Arius's turn to talk, he began telling the pastors that Jesus wasn't really God but, instead, that the Father had created him, just like the angels. Now all the pastors knew that he was telling lies because Jesus is our savior and only God can save us. Plus, he forgave sins, which only God can do. And the Bible calls him the creator, but there aren't any creators other than God. The pastors also knew that we should worship Jesus, but it doesn't make sense to worship anybody besides God. So, Nicholas listened quietly but, after a while, all the lies made him really angry. When he couldn't take it anymore, sweet Nicholas stood up, walked over to Arius, and punched him in the face! I know that's not a nice thing to do, but Arius was being a really, really big dork.

"Of course, you shouldn't punch people in the face for telling lies... usually... but if you really love Jesus, you might do some strange and unexpected things. So don't worry about making mistakes, be like Nicholas: do the things that God wants you to do, trust him, and love him with all of your heart; even if it takes a lot of courage. And by the way, if any Jehovah's Witnesses come to the door, let Daddy do the talking. Okay?"

Pop-theology and Conspiracy Theories

Sanjay Merchant — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:55:07 -0700

Pop-theology is awash with conspiracy theories. We're breathlessly informed that the church (that omnipotent, crafty monolith) suppresses evidence that Jesus developed his philosophy in an Indian ashram, or that he survived his crucifixion, or that he fathered a child with Mary Magdalene, or that religious bullies hijacked his original message of peace and equality in order to illicitly place his imprimatur upon their own strange metaphysical theories.

On his blog, Five Sacred Crossings, Craig Hazen aptly calls conspiracy theories "the fruit of the soul's dark regions" and notes that such nincompoopery tends to emerge from the fertile ground of blind contempt. Once it has thoroughly poisoned a soul, this emotional vice creates dark regions from which bombastic conjectures grow like diseased fruit. That's why, to use his example, those who obsessively villanize George Bush find it easy to believe almost any outlandish rumor about his nefarious scheming. After all, if you're going to beat a dog, does it really matter what kind of stick you use?

But there's also an intellectual vice which tends to give rise to conspiracy theories; or, perhaps, makes them attractive once they've been formulated: intellectual laziness. Experts in every field of study enjoy insights that non-experts lack; that's what makes them experts. While the information and fundamental ideas from which they've drawn their insights are readily available to everyone, it takes more work to acquire these insights than most people are willing to invest. Those who actively cultivate virtuous mental lives--exemplified by rationality, openness, persistence, vigilance, laboriousness, and humility--gain understanding; those who find this too difficult do not.

Conspiracy theories seemingly shortcut the need for serious study by providing maximum intrigue at minimal mental expense. So, for the lazy-minded, a conspiracy theory is hard to pass up because, although it may seem to be the product of serious study, one need not engage in serious study to grasp a terse, pre-packaged rationalization. One only needs to be in the know. And, once one is in the know, he feels as if he has gained insights that have eluded the ignorant. Coming into possession of such stunning deliverances on the cheap is like buying an academic degree online; it has the form of scholarliness with none of the substance.

More on Obama's Abortion Answer

tamb — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:32:03 -0700

I'd like to make one more point about Obama's answer to Rick Warren's question about abortion last weekend. In my last blog, I looked at Obama's claim that he doesn't know when a fetus becomes a person with human rights. My argument, roughly, was that if that's true, he should at the very least recuse himself from voting on abortion legislation, since the crucial question addressed by such legislation is "above his pay grade." Yet he doesn't recuse himself; he actively pursues pro-choice policies. And that seems irrational to me.

Second, if he really is ignorant about when a fetus becomes a person with human rights, and if he is going to endorse legislation on the issue, he ought to endorse very conservative pro-life legislation. If fetuses are people with human rights, abortion is murder. If they're not, it isn't. And if you're not sure whether they are or aren't people, you ought to play it safe and endorse pro-life policies. Yet Obama is pro-choice, despite the fact that he's unsure whether fetuses are or aren't people. That too seems irrational to me.

Later on in the interview with Rick Warren, Obama explained why he is pro-choice. Here again is the video. Here's the transcript:

OBAMA: I am pro-choice. I believe in Roe v. Wade and come to that conclusion not because I'm pro-abortion, but because ultimately I don't think women make these decisions casually. They wrestle with these things in profound ways, in consulation with their pastors or spouses, or their doctors and their family members.

In this quotation, Obama tells us why he is pro-choice. But the reasoning seems to me to be really, really bad. The argument is roughly this:

(PREMISE) Women don't make the decision to have abortions casually, but only after profound deliberation or extensive consultation.

(CONCLUSION) Therefore, we ought to legally protect abortion; that ought to be a right for women; we ought to be pro-choice about abortion.

There seems to me to be a whopping gap between the premise and the conclusion here. I think the invalidity of this inference from PREMISE to CONCLUSION is most easily seen by a parallel argument using the same logical form as Obama's argument:

(PREMISE*) Women don't make the decision to kill infants casually, but only after profound deliberation or extensive consultation.

(CONCLUSION*) Therefore, we ought to legally protect infanticide; that ought to be a right for women; we ought to be pro-choice about infanticide.

I think we can agree that the move from PREMISE* to CONCLUSION* is invalid. It's most likely true that women who kill their infants don't take that decision lightly. Yet it doesn't follow for a second that we ought to legally enshrine a right to infanticide. That's crazy.

And yet this crazy move from PREMISE* to CONCLUSION* is exactly the same move that Barack Obama makes in his argument from PREMISE to CONCLUSION. And so if we think the inference is invalid when it concerns infanticide, we ought to also think it is invalid when it concerns abortion.

(Just one caveat. I'm not comparing abortion to infanticide. What I've done is constructed a parallel argument using the same general inference Obama used in order to make it obvious that the inference is invalid. I'm just attacking the inference, not the conclusion. Obama may be right to take a pro-choice position for all I've said in this blog. My point is only that the argument he gave in support of his position is really bad.)

My Hero in the Pool

Barb Sherrill — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:54:44 -0700

Dear Dara Torres,

Thank you.

While I realize Michael Phelps dominated the swimming headlines last week (and I can’t imagine you would begrudge him one minute of his coverage—what he did was extraordinary), you were the person in the pool who inspired me the most.

You’re probably tired of hearing that you are the oldest swimmer ever in Olympic history…but there’s no getting around that fact. You’re 41. In a culture that worships youth, you are a startling reminder that life doesn’t end at 35. Your lively personality, your grace under pressure, your perspective on what it means to compete (how many other swimmers would have asked the referees to hold up the heat because a fellow competitor had torn her swimsuit?), and your passion to go after something even though, at first glance, it probably looked ridiculous (a 41-year-old competitive swimmer!) personified the Olympic spirit.

I’ll never be an Olympic athlete (wouldn’t matter if I were 21, 41, or 101!), but I do have dreams and hopes and things I’d very much like to do still. And there’s no getting around the fact that every day I’m getting a little bit older. But now when I wonder if it’s too late for some of this, you come to mind, along with the words you shared in interview after interview (and always with a smile on your face), “Don’t let your age discourage you from pursuing your dreams.”

So, thank you, Dara Torres, for a great week. And congratulations on your silver medal. You are a beautiful reminder to all of us that it isn’t over until it’s over.

Do Apologetics Matter Anymore?

Sean McDowell — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:23:50 -0700

I would be a rich man if I had a dollar for every time I heard or read an emerging leader say something like: “Apologetics don’t matter anymore in our postmodern world,” “Young people no longer need evidence; it’s about relationships.” Are these claims true? Have we moved into a new era in which apologetics are no longer needed? From my perspective, nothing could be further from the truth.

This past weekend I spoke at the Big Dig youth apologetics conference by Focus on the Family to over 2,200 youth. Speakers included Lee Strobel, Josh McDowell, Ryan Dobson, Mark Mittelberg, and Alex McFarland. I was blown away at how engaged, interested, and attentive the students were. Many of them took notes and hung around book tables to ask questions. There is clearly a movement of young people who desire to know not only what they believe by why. They want to dig deeper.

One student emailed me with the following thoughts after I gave a talk based on my new book Understanding Intelligent Design: “So I was at the Big Dig this past weekend and absolutely loved it! All the information was so helpful but I connected the most with yours. All the scientific proof of Christianity and a Creator just absolutely amazes me…I'm really excited to get started looking at many of the worlds "truths" and find why our truth is the only one!”

Throughout the weekend I asked students if they chose to come or if their parents dragged them to the conference. EVERY student I talked to said that it was his or her decision to attend. In fact, one young man was even willing to miss a high school soccer game to be there!

Don’t believe the claim that apologetics no longer matter for new generations. Let me state it clearly: Apologetics matter more than ever for this generation, especially since youth today are exposed to more non-Christian ideas than any generation in history. And apologetics are not only important for Christians—they matter in evangelism, too. But this does not mean we simply continue business as usual. We need to really re-think how we engage younger generations with an apologetic that meets their thinking patterns and emotional needs.

To help reach newer generations, I’m editing a new book entitled Apologetics for a New Generation (Harvest House, 2009). I’ve put together an amazing list of contributors—Lee Strobel, Dan Kimball, John Mark Reynolds, and more—so we can effectively engage younger generations. The time is now. Let’s go for it!

Every Writer Knows

Alissa Wilkinson — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:00:00 -0700

This is not Poetry Friday, but this poem has meant a lot to me in the last few years as I hit my introspective late-summer state in preparation for the busyness and joy of the fall and winter season. It's by Linford Detweiler, again.

(By the way, if you're not familiar with Over the Rhine, the band that Detweiler and his wife Karin Bergquist formed over twenty years ago, you can stream their entire most recent studio album, The Trumpet Child, for free at their website. Their music touches the soul deep down.)

I am beginning to write my life story
On blank sheets of paper
The one that I write everyday
Whether or not I pick up a pen
The days: pages
The nights: illustrations
My mouth: dialogue
The years: chapters

Characters come and go
The protagonist which is me
The antagonist which is me

Somedays I lose the plot
And flounder
I can’t remember why I dreamed of what I now have
Joyless hours lay about
Like fish on the bank of a river
Gills no longer even heaving
And these are the pages I wish I could leave out
Pages where nothing much happens
Pages where I sabotage myself
With muddled thinking
And lack of will
And the pale pasty flowers of malaise
I paint all over my walls
With the paintbrush called
What if
If only
Instead of
What is

But every writer knows we have to write to find out
We have to write to discover what wants to happen
We have to write to know where the story needs to go
We have to write to learn why we are here
We have to write to find we are not alone

And a few days back I had an epiphany
I am not going to talk about my epiphany with anyone
Because I have a long list of failed epiphanies
That I talked about too soon

But in the meanwhile
Here are a few reasons why I might bother to get out of bed
I can work to serve my future children
If I should ever have any
Give them the gift of passion and persistence
In my own life’s work
I can write to bring some heart and warmth to others
However few
I can strum music to make the world a little wider for my friends
I can fling handfuls of muddy joy at a whitewashed church
That all too often misses the point
And missed the point again
A church that would rather be white than alive
I can give back what I was given and let it be multiplied

I want to put on this threadbare tuxedo and serve
Is this not what any good film does
That makes us want to watch our own lives
And take care not to miss the good parts
Any song that makes us want to pull the car over to the side of the road
Any book that someone labored and poured over
That makes us weep and smile together
A painting that makes us breathe deeply
The air sweeter because of its existence
(Close your eyes and still see it)

These are all gifts that were ultimately the work of servants
Whether or not they knew what they were doing
They served a thirsty world a glass of water
The best they could offer
Surprising Jesus and even themselves

There is at times much dogged effort that goes into creating good things
But by mopping our brows with the backs of our hands
And continuing to run after something that we sometimes cannot name
We hope to see our love made physical
Find our feet have left the ground
And hello, we are suddenly being skyjacked by joy (are we not)
And it is fleeting

And by doing the least we could do
We occasionally find ourselves doing more than we knew how
Last first
Lost found
Unbound

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls,
Roll your eyes:
Now it’s your turn

The Epic of Gilgamesh, Enkidu, and William Loftus

Sanjay Merchant — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:58:34 -0700

After slaying the Bull of Heaven, Gilgamesh and his devoted friend Enkidu embarked on a long trek back to the palace at Uruk. Along the way, Gilgamesh boasted to Enkidu that he had installed an ingenious security system to protect his royal chamber from intruders: if anything larger than a gnat passed through a door or window, the system would give it a lethal electrical shock. He added that the system logged each instance in which it was triggered and security cameras monitored activity outside his room at all times. There was no safe way in or out, Gilgamesh warned, unless one carried the electronic key card that hung from his neck.

But when the Champions of Uruk arrived at the royal chamber they found that the furniture had been overturned, the king's clothes were shredded and strewn across the floor, certain valuable items--jewelry, statues of lapis lazuli, and his T.V.--were missing, a half eaten sandwich was left on the dining table, and the words "William Loftus wuz here!" were painted on the wall.

Gilgamesh frantically searched the system's logs and found that it had, indeed, been continuously operational while he was away; the logs registered neither that the system had been accessed nor that anything had passed through an entry. Moreover, the video cameras failed to capture anything approaching the chamber from the outside and there was no dead intruder on the floor. He confirmed that the system was operating properly by throwing one of his many prize-winning pet hamsters through each door and window and observing that the system killed it.

"I don't know how William Loftus got in here--whoever he is--but he's one remarkable burglar," the wild man Enkidu muttered in amazement.

Gilgamesh turned to his astonished friend with conspicuous confidence: "On the contrary, Enkidu, I'm certain that no one could have possibly gotten in or out. There is no 'William Loftus' behind this calamity; what you see here is the result of ordinary events."

Enkidu knew very little about the ways of human society, he was not sophisticated--or even domesticated, for that matter--but he was unable to restrain his incredulity. "What sort of ordinary events? What could possibly account for all these things?"

Gilgamesh cocked his head in a pensive, academic manner before answering. "Well, perhaps a great earthquake rocked the chamber. That could have easily overturned all my furniture and left things in disarray. Most importantly, it wouldn't have triggered the system."

"But your clothes, they've been torn to pieces!"

"Perhaps after the earthquake a violent wind ripped through the chamber. That wouldn't trigger the system either, yet it would have blown my clothes around. As the clothes were stirred by the wind they probably tended to catch on that closet doorknob over there. Now if the door was open then the other end of any garment could have snagged on that nearby bedpost. The swirling wind would have caused the door to open and close and, so, if any article of clothing was hooked on both the doorknob and the bedpost, it would be torn when the door slammed shut."

"Lugal Gigamesh, clearly your stories cannot account for everything we see here! What about your missing items? Surely wind didn't carry them out of the room. If it had then your security system would have been triggered."

"Yes, but I have inexplicably lost things before, Enkidu. Until recently I had a back scratcher and a Star Wars DVD that I am now utterly unable to locate. I have looked everywhere but I just can't find them. Still, I have no reason to think that they were stolen or that I took them out of the chamber myself. Things like that happen from time to time. Just give me time to search; they may still turn up."

"Great king, what about the paint on the wall and the half eaten sandwich?"

"It's true, I did not paint on that wall nor did I leave that sandwich. But aren't some things simply mysteries? There are many, many curious things that cannot be explained. Even you cannot explain how this mysterious William Loftus got into my chamber. Who is William Loftus, anyway? Why have I never heard of William Loftus before? Surely we can't be expected to explain everything, but if we are simply willing to search, we can explain many things. There's simply no reason to resort to fanciful burglar theories."

"By Ishtar! Have you lost it Gilgamesh? Obviously someone broke in, overturned your furniture, made and ate a sandwich, painted on your wall, and stole some of your items. Your just-so stories clumsily explain some things but leave other significant things wholly unaccounted for. The people of Uruk would howl to see their wise king beg for time to explain things that he should be able to explain now. I know a crime scene when I see it. Whether you like it our not, your security system cannot keep William Loftus out."

Five Small Adjustments Toward Faithful Ecological Stewardship

Christy Tennant — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:00:00 -0700

In my last post, I shared some thoughts on the biblical mandate for faith ecological stewardship. But for someone who has simply not thought much about environmental responsibility, where do we begin?

Here are five small steps toward a more ecologically sound lifestyle:

1. REDUCE. "Paper or Plastic?" Neither! Start carrying cloth bags to the grocery store instead of having the cashier bag your items in paper or plastic. This is one way to reduce your post-consumer waste (and how many of those flimsy plastic bags are actually reusable, anyway? They usually come home with holes in the bottom!) Plus, some stores offer a small discount for bringing your own bags.

2. REUSE. OK, so say you forget the cloth bags every now and then, and you end up with a "bag of bags" in your kitchen pantry. Find other ways to use them! For example, I use them to pick up after my dog (a must when you are a dog-owner in an urban setting!), line my kitchen and bathroom trash cans, and carry lunch to work. I know a woman who uses them as shower caps, and another friend makes bags from those plastic shopping bags. Get creative!

3. RECYCLE. In New York City, recycling is a law and the recycling is picked up curbside twice a week by the city sanitation department, so I admit, it is more convenient than in many places. However, I used to live in Roanoke, VA, where (unfortunately) recycling was not required by law. We separated our recyclables in the garage (make sure to rinse the food items well!) and every week or so, drove to a recycling center and dropped them off. It's a pain, but c'mon - we find time to do lots of things that are inconvenient, because they are important to us. This should be one of those things we make time for.

4. BUY IN BULK. This is a good way to reduce the post-consumer waste. For example, buying a large carton of yogurt rather than small containers leaves less plastic behind. Same with most things - cereal, soda (buy a 2-liter rather than bottles or cans), vegetables, etc.

5. PLAN YOUR ROUTE SO YOU DRIVE LESS. I have noticed that the convenience of owning a car can sometimes lead to many short trips around town, running errands back and forth from my house several times in one day. However, by taking a little time to think through my day and plan ahead, I can reduce the number of miles I drive around town.

In addition to reducing my carbon footprint, this saves money on gas too!

The Meaning of "Perichoretic Blue"

Sanjay Merchant — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:40:58 -0700

The phrase "perichoretic blue" comes from a poem that I wrote for my wife about the love shared by the sky and the sea, entitled "The Second Day". The final stanza reads:

The horizon dissolves into perichoretic blue,
Where there's no separating me from you.
And there's no separating you from me,
Because you are the sky and I am the sea.

I use "perichoretic" as the adjectival form of "perichoresis": the theological doctrine pertaining to the interpenetration of, and complete fellowship shared among, the persons of the Trinity. Marriage, while not truly perichoretic, resembles the unity of the divine persons as two individuals become one flesh. In my poem, the horizon is a metaphor for this "marital perichoresis" as an azure band where the sky and sea meet, becoming entirely confluent.

In a far less sappy sense, there is a deep fellowship and natural intercourse between the Queen of the Sciences--theology--and Her Handmaiden--philosophy--that cannot be facilely bifurcated; despite the fact that some theologians bellow, "Nein!" with impressive emphasis. To put it bluntly, unphilosophical theology risks incoherence and untheological philosophy flails into explanatory incapacity as it drifts from its moorings.

Modernism's retarded twin children--isolationist theology and scientific naturalism--will go the way of the dodo. In eternity, thinking about God, science, ethics, meaning, and metaphysics will be perichoretic.