withallyourmind.net

Because Christians claim that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, Christians often face the charge that they think they are “superior” to other people. Claiming to have the truth about an issue is exceedingly unpopular and politically incorrect in modern America. Christians are accused of being elitists and thinking that they are beter than everyone else. What is one to make of this charge?

I think to answer this question correctly, one must distinguish between “Christians” and “Christianity”. If the question is, “Is Christianity superior to other religions, or better, other religious worldviews?” then the answer is unequivocally, “Yes.” To state that one set of beliefs about the world is superior to another is to make a judgment about how well that set of beliefs matches up with how the world actually is. For example, while lost in Barcelona, Spain this past year, I asked several people for directions to the Picasso museum. These directions all differed in their content. Clearly, as I learned, some were “superior” to others. Some, I found out, did not match up with where the Picasso museum was and what I had to do to get there. All of the great world religions make exclusivist claims which by their very nature imply that the other religions are wrong. To ask if one worldview is superior is simply to ask which worldview corresponds with reality. Now, one may decide they are all wrong, but they certainly cannot be all right since their claims are contradictory. Superiority in this case is simply a matter of judging the truth value of the worldview claims.

If one grants that Christianity is the superior worldview, does this then imply that Christians are superior to other religious adherents? It does not follow that an individual whose views more closely match up to reality is superior to other individuals who hold to faulty worldviews. That one direction-giver in Barcelona had a better understanding of reality than others said nothing of his moral character. This is especially not the case when one comes to Christians. The very essence of Christian teaching is that we are all guilty of violating God’s moral law and all equally deserving of His punishment. That which earns salvation for Christians is not their moral superiority, but the grace which comes by trusting Jesus Christ and his provision for our sins. Christianity is not a religion that states that the key to escaping judgment is to live a good moral life. There may be many non-Christians in the world who are morally superior to Christians, but the fact is that all have offended God’s moral law and are worthy of judgment. The only difference is that the Christian has recognized that he is morally corrupt and has freely acknowledged and trusted that Jesus Christ has made provision for his salvation.

So, in conclusion, it is perfectly compatible that Christianity is superior to other religious worldviews while Christians are not superior to other worldview adherents.

On Saturday, I was privileged to attend a pre-release screening of the upcoming film featuring Ben Stein, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. I was both entertained and moved the film. I laughed and was moved to tears (Of course, I cry at all movies). There was plenty of Stein’s dry wittiness.

The film is ostensibly about the systematic squelching of any opinions in academia who even entertain thoughts of doubting Darwinism. Stein and company travel the globe interviewing the major players in the Intelligent Design movement as well as those who oppose ID. Over 400 hours of interviews are compressed into this roughly 1 1/2 hour film. Among those interviewed are Richard Sternberg, Stephen Myer, Robert Marks, Daniel Dennett, P.Z. Myers, Eugenie Scott, Paul Nelson, William Dembski, Jonathan Wells, David Berlinski, Richard Dawkins, Michael Ruse, Pamela Winick, and Alistair McGrath.

The suppression of dissent from Darwinism is well-documented. The hardships and self-sacrifice of those academicians who have paid the price for their willingness to follow the evidence wherever it leads was well highlighted. The film explores the worldview implications of naturalism and illustrates how when one excludes certain answers before the research is done, one jeopardizes the probability of arriving at the correct answer. Expelled shows that the war is not between religion and science, but about worldviews. Finally, the film makes explicit the moral and ethical implications of Darwinism.

This film has the possibility to affect our culture in a monumental way. The movie is scheduled to open on April 18, 2008. I would encourage the spreading of the word about this wonderful film. To learn more, visit Get Expelled.

As some of this blog’s readers might know, my son, Jeremy, is an excellent classical guitarist. He trained on this instrument during his undergraduate days at Florida State where, besides majoring in philosophy, he also minored in music. None of you probably know that I am a beginning cellist (strongly emphasizing beginner status). I’m taking lessons and would be further along if I could only find more time to practice.

Anyway, Jeremy alerted me to some beautiful music performed by cellist Zhao Jing and guitarist Yasuji Ohagi. It has inspired me to try to practice more so that someday (when I’m 85?) I will play amazing duets with my son. The video is found here. Other pieces by the pair are also found on the page.

A friend recently sent this youtube video to me in which a baptist preacher argues for the supremacy of the King James Version and the need for biblical manhood. One might almost find this hard to believe except that I’ve actually seen similar ludicrousness myself.

I was minding my own business the other day working on reducing my love handles and other excess body fat at the YMCA. There is a bank of televisions in front of the treadmills for the listening and viewing pleasure of those panting, aching souls attempting to keep up with that rotating piece of rubber under their feet. Since the Food Channel was not on (which actually is my favorite channel to watch while I work off the pounds), I tuned to CNN and found ex-basketball great Charles Barkley opining on his support for Barack Obama as well as other presidential election issues. Barkley is not known for his subtlety and soft-spokenness, so I’m not quite sure why I was so surprised to hear what he had to say about some Christians. I present the pertinent portion of the transcript as found at CNN.com.

BARKLEY: I have got great respect for Senator McCain. Great respect. But I don’t like the way the Republicans are taking this country. Every time I hear the word “conservative,” it makes me sick to my stomach, because they’re really just fake Christians, as I call them. That’s all they are. But I just — I’m going to vote Democratic no matter what…

BLITZER: All right. One quick point before I let you go. You used the phrase “fake Christians” for conservatives. Explain what you’re talking about.

BARKLEY: Well, I think they — they want to be judge and jury. Like, I’m for gay marriage. It’s none of my business if gay people want to get married. I’m pro-choice. And I think these Christians — first of all, they’re supposed to be — they’re not supposed to judge other people. But they’re the most hypocritical judge of people we have in this country. And it bugs the hell out of me. They act like their Christians. And they’re not forgiving at all.

BLITZER: So you’re going to get a lot of feedback on this one, Charles.

BARKLEY: They can’t do anything to me. I don’t work for them.

BLITZER: You feel comfortable saying all that?

BARKLEY: I feel very comfortable saying I’m pro-choice, and I’m for gay marriage. Very comfortable.

BLITZER: But you can’t lump all these conservatives as being fake. A lot of them obviously — most of them are very, very sincere in their religious beliefs.

BARKLEY: Well, they should read the part about they’re not supposed to judge other people. They forget that one when it doesn’t fit what they want it to say.

Now, I’m not sure if Barkley claims to be a Christian or not, but if so, by his own criteria, he is obviously a “fake” one seeing how he is “judging” all those “conservative” Christians. It always amazes me how “judgmental” these folks are who disagree with “judgmental” “conservative” Christians.

So, what is Mr. Barkley advocating? Are Christians to make no moral judgments at all? Are any and all actions to be allowed since it would be “un-Christian” to judge the actions of others? I don’t think Mr. Barkley has consistently thought through his objections to those he calls “fake Christians”. His rant exposes a complete misunderstanding of the teachings of Jesus on judging others.

Today’s Lakeland Ledger reports on the decision of the Florida Board of Education to revise the state science standards to specifically include the teaching of evolution as “the fundamental concept underlying all of biology” and one “supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence.”

The article’s first words are, “Science won Tuesday.” Unfortunately, Science did not win… and not just because the teaching of evolution was entered into the state science standards. Science lost because a full understanding of the issue involved is no closer than it was weeks ago. The last minute insertion into the standards describing evolution as a “scientific theory” was a compromise solution to appease those who opposed the standards. While this made appeased some (and “left scientists grumpy”), it simply reveals the widespread lack of understanding on the part of those involved in the debate.

Those who read this website know that I am a strong advocate for the intelligent design movement. Having said that, I am not opposed to Darwinian evolution being taught in school. The real problem is that Darwinian evolution should not be taught with the philosophical and religious blinders of naturalism in place. Science lost on Tuesday, not because the standards are being revised, but because nothing was done to deal with the real issue of the necessity of teaching the weaknesses and flaws of the Darwinian theory of evolution. Darwinism should be taught fairly, examining both the strengths and weaknesses of the theory. Those who oppose intelligent design will not even admit that there are problems with Darwinian evolution (at least not in the public debate over ID).

The article, perhaps without intent, continued to paint the controversy as a battle between science and religion. Hence, we have the initial comment about science winning. Those in favor of the revision are referred to as “scientists”, “science teachers”, and “experts” while those opposed are called “religious conservatives”, “Christian conservatives”, and promoting “Biblical values.” The article fails to mention the scientists who doubt Darwinism and the philosophical and “religious” underpinnings driving the teaching of Darwinism. The controversy is between a worldview which allows only for naturalistic explanations (no matter how weak or flawed). The evidence cannot be fully evaluated because philosophical, or religious, presuppositions refuse to allow certain evidence to be discussed. Those I know in the ID movement are all in favor of allowing the evidence for Darwinian evolution taught in the classroom. I think the schools would be derilect not to do so. They are, however, equally as derilect to act as if Darwinian evolution has been firmly established as the answer to how complex life has arisen on earth and that there is no controversy over whether it is a viable theory.

Science lost, because in the words of John Stemberger, The board’s decision…

… will do absolutely nothing to inform students about the (flaws) with evolution… It’s a meaningless, symbolic change.

Tuesday, the Florida Board of Education (my home state) will decide whether to revise the Sunshine State Standards to specifically encourage the teaching of evolution which is “the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence.” Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, has an excellent op ed piece opposing the adoption of these changes in today’s Lakeland Ledger.

The newspaper’s opinion, on the opposite page, hails the National Academy of Sciences as the nation’s preeminent scientific organization and points to their publication, Science, Evolution and Creation, as the definitive work on the controversy over Darwinian Evolution and Intelligent Design. Luskin gets to the core of the controversy by directing his readers to this comment found in that book of the NAS:

[t]here is no scientific controversy about the basic facts of evolution” because “no new evidence is likely to alter” it.

He correctly shows that this statement if fundamentally untrue. Many scientists have questioned the science behind Darwinism. Unfortunately, many of these have been marginalized and discriminated against. Luskin states:

Sadly, the academy is commonly intolerant of dissent from Darwinism. Consider the NAS’ statement that “there is no scientific controversy” over evolution. Imagine you are a scientist with fundamental doubts about Darwinism and you see the top science organization in the U.S.A. asserting that your views don’t exist.

This spring, a documentary will be released featuring Ben Stein, titled “Expelled,” that recounts the stories of scientists who have experienced persecution of their academic freedom because they questioned evolution. One such scientist is Dr. Richard Sternberg, a biologist formerly at the Smithsonian with two Ph.D.s in evolution, who was harassed and intimidated because he is a skeptic of neo-Darwinism. Another biologist lost her job at George Mason University because she challenged evolution in a classroom.

No wonder Darwinists confidently declare there is no debate over evolution: They shut down such debate and prevent it from taking place.(emphasis mine)

Unfortunately, the proposed Florida science standards will stifle free inquiry because they, too, censor any scientific challenges to evolution. Change is necessary if Florida teachers are to be given the freedom to inform students about scientists who dissent from evolution.

Luskin makes important points in this debate. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the public continue to misunderstand the issue. Instead, they continue to misrepresent the views of the Intelligent Design movement. The Ledger’s editorial was again mischaracterizes those who oppose the revision of the standards as…

… mostly represent(ing) Evangelical Christianity and Orthodox Judaism. They take the biblical description of Earth’s creation literally.

Understand that those in the Intelligent Design Movement do not oppose the teaching of Evolution in public schools. What is opposed is the teaching of evolution as incontrovertible, established fact that is unopposed by the scientific community. Well-known and respected scientists have expressed many concerns with Darwinian Evolution. Students should be taught the controversy over Darwinism. They should be told why many hold it to be the best theory of how to account for the present diversity and complexity of life as well as why many feel the theory breaks down and is inadequate to account for such life.

Ben Witherington has a post in which he presents an article by Warren Smith entitled, “Oprah and Friends” to teach course on New Age Christ. Apparently, Oprah’s XM Radio show, Oprah and Friends, will be featuring a year-long course, A Course in Miracles, taught by New Age Guru, Marranne Williamson. According to the article:

Lesson #29 asks you to go through your day affirming that “God is in everything I see.” Lesson #61 tells each person to repeat the affirmation “I am the light of the world.” Lesson #70 teaches the student to say and believe “My salvation comes from me.”

By the end of the year, “Oprah & Friends” listeners will have completed all of the lessons laid out in the Course in Miracles Workbook. Those who finish the Course will have a wholly redefined spiritual mindset—a New Age worldview that includes the belief that there is no sin, no evil, no devil, and that God is “in” everyone and everything. A Course in Miracles teaches its students to rethink everything they believe about God and life. The Course Workbook bluntly states: “This is a course in mind training” and is dedicated to “thought reversal.”

This is definitely not harmless stuff and is antithetical to the teachings of Scripture.

Al Mohler has an excellent post in which he considers the question of whether one can be a Christian and believe in evolution? I think he answers well:

I have not said that one can’t be a Christian and believe in evolution. It is entirely possible to be a confused Christian or a confused evolutionist . . . or both. Nevertheless, the dominant theory of evolution — the theory as taught and defended by the world’s leading evolutionary scientists — explicitly rules out any supernatural design or interference at any point in the evolutionary continuum. That fact alone makes the theory incompatible with any legitimate affirmation of divine creation or of biblical theism.

One should read his entire post to obtain the full flavor of his argument. Darwinian evolution and Christianity are incompatible and contain contradictory premises. (Let me be clear that I am not arguing that God could not have used some evolutionary process to bring about the complex life which we now observe. I am arguing that Darwinism and Christian Theism are incompatible.)

On this day in 1564 Galileo Galilei was born. Galileo is often trumpeted as a hero in the triumph of rational science over religious superstition. His story is sometimes offered as the paradigm of how Christianity opposed science and reason. Often, one reads a simplistic representation of his conflicts with the Catholic Church, offered in support of this false claim. Galileo himself would have been quite surprised to be painted as a scientist opposed to religion. In fact, it was Galileo’s deep Christian faith which nurtured his scientific discoveries. He understood the importance of both special revelation and general revelation. These are not in conflict, but both give accurate, non-conflicting representations of reality. Galileo said:

God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word.

Galileo quoted Augustine in order to show how science and scripture are not in conflict or contradiction:

And in St. Augustine [in the seventh letter to Marcellinus] we read: “If anyone shall set the authority of Holy Writ against clear and manifest reason, he who does this knows not what he has undertaken; for he opposes to the truth not the meaning of the Bible, which is beyond his comprehension, but rather his own interpretation; not what is in the Bible, but what he has found in himself and imagines to be there.”

So, Happy 544th Birthday, Galileo! Thanks for your contributions to science and faith.