It is a sad day for Georgia Bulldog fans as UGA VI, the winningest mascot of the Georgia Bulldog football team has passed away from congestive heart failure. I am an Atlanta, GA native and have been a lifelong Georgia fan. Here, UGA is keeping cool while participating in blackout day.
Here are a couple of additional pictures I took while in Alaska recently. The first is Mt. Ranier as we were sailing out of Seattle. The second is a group of playful Sea Lions cavorting on a buoy in the waters bordering Alaska.
Glenn Beck has an excellent commentary in which he ruminates over the candidate for which he will vote this November. I found myself in agreement with much of what he said. One of his main purposes was to, first of all, differentiate a conservative from a republican (or for that matter a democrat). Secondly, he wanted to define just what is a conservative. I classify myself as conservative and found that his list of what a conservative believes was essentially right on. I reproduce it the core values of a conservative here:
A conservative believes that our inalienable rights do not include housing, healthcare or Hummers.
A conservative believes that our inalienable rights DO include the pursuit of happiness. That means it is guaranteed to no one.
A conservative believes that those who pursue happiness and find it have a right to not be penalized for that success.
A conservative believes that there are no protections against the hardship and heartache of failure. We believe that the right to fail is just as important as the chance to succeed and that those who do fail learn essential lessons that will help them the next time around.
A conservative believes in personal responsibility and accepts the consequences for his or her words and actions.
A conservative believes that real compassion can’t be found in any government program.
A conservative believes that each of us has a duty to take care of our neighbors. It was private individuals, companies and congregations that sent water, blankets and supplies to New Orleans far before the government ever set foot there.
A conservative believes that family is the cornerstone of our society and that people have a right to manage their family any way they see fit, so long as it’s not criminal. We are far more attuned to our family’s needs than some faceless, soulless government program.
A conservative believes that people have a right to worship the God of their understanding. We also believe that people do not have the right to jam their version of God (or no God) down anybody else’s throat.
A conservative believes that people go to the movies to be entertained and to church to be preached to, not the other way around.
A conservative believes that debt creates unhealthy relationships. Everyone, from the government on down, should live within their means and strive for financial independence.
A conservative believes that a child’s education is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.
A conservative believes that every human being has a right to life, from conception to death.
A conservative believes in the smallest government you can get without anarchy. We know our history: The larger a government gets, the harder it will fall.
Access Research Network, an organization which seeks to provide accessible information on science, technology and society from an intelligent design perspective, has launched a new website called ID Arts. As an ID supporter who also has an interest in the arts, the site looks quite interesting. The website contains the following explanation about their site:
Our worldview impacts all areas of life including the arts. The arts also reflect philosophical and cultural trends in human societies. If philosophical and scientific concepts of intelligent design (ID) are valid, we believe they will both inspire, and be reflected in, our art, music, literature and film.
This is not a brand new observation, of course. Francis Schaeffer has written numerous books explaining the relationship between worldview and art and culture. ID Arts further explains its goals:
We’ve been talking with artists, musicians, authors, poets, and filmmakers about these ideas and we’ve discovered several who are already producing creative works that fit into the ID Arts category. This website features the work of some of these artists and we hope will inspire others. Our desire is that the ID Arts initiative will open up a whole new dialogue in our culture about whether we live in a world of chance or a world of design.
The homepage of the site contains a small reproduction of apainting by Salvador Dali called Galacidalacidesoxyribonucleicacid (See below). I’ve actually seen this large painting in person at the Salvador Dali Museum in St. Petersburg, Florida. It also links to this interesting commentary on the work by Jonathan Ashar. In it, Ashar concludes (you’ll have to read more of the commentary to see his support for his conclusion):
The Galacidalacidesoxyribonucleicacid is essentially a tribute to lives lost in the Barcelona flood. However, Dalí makes the painting into a synthesis of the ideas of science and religion. I see two possible interpretations of Galacidalacidesoxyribonucleicacid: either, God has the ultimate higher significance, or, religion and science are parallel and balancing. This is certainly not Dalí’s first painting without a single clear meaning.
I’ve only briefly looked at the site and hope to spend more time examining it later.
Mary Jo, an outstanding Christian apologist, has a new post on her website, Confident Christianity, in which she concludes that many Christians do not live as if they truly believe what Christianity teaches, but rather live like one might expect an agnostic to live. Why does Christian behavior not match up with Christian belief? Mary Jo suggests:
One reason for this behavior that I have noticed over the years is not all Christians understand God to be a real being. I do not mean a real idea or a real teaching, but a real being like your parents, spouse, children, or friend. It would be extremely difficult to go to church with your family and then go home and act as though your family does not exist. However, some Christians go to church and then go home and act as if God does not exist. Embarrassingly, some Christians even act as if God does not exist while they are at church. This is such odd behavior for the body of Christ who claim to have the most powerful, intelligent, and loving being dwelling inside of them…
Yet, I see so many defeated Christian lives. In fact, this behavior reminds me of the agnostic view about God; that perhaps there is a being that created everything, but we cannot really know that being. The agnostic view would explain a behavioral pattern of going to church and then going home quite unchanged and indifferent. Christians, on the other hand, do not believe in a nebulous creator that cannot be known. In fact, the New Testament writers affirm the certainty with which believers can know the reality of God…
These authors viewed God as a real being, and Jesus Christ as his real Son. They are essentially saying, “I was there and I saw these things with my own eyes.” No wonder they were able to suffer and die for God, because they had a reasonable understanding that God was real! So I am wondering if we would see a notable difference in the behaviors or attitudes of the body of Christ if all believers could articulate why they believe that God exists (apart from the answer of “the Bible says so”)? At the very least, would Christians be able to better prioritize what is petty from what is important in life if we could grasp hold of the reality of the God who indwells us?
What one believes does impact what one does. If one’s actions are not consistent with what one believes, perhaps one doesn’t really believe it.
I have just finished reading Virgil’s The Aeneid, a classical epic that was thouroughly enjoyable. I was pleased to come across this article, Joe Knows Latin, in which Joe Paterno, football coach of Penn State University (my alma mater), discusses the impact of The Aeneid on his football and on his life. He relates that one of the most significant moments of his time spent at Brooklyn Prep School in the 1940’s was at the beginning of this third year when he stepped into a Latin class taught by Father Bermingham. That year he and Father Bermingham together read The Aeneid in Latin.
The Aeneid is an epic poem composed by the Roman poet Virgil in the first century B.C. The work follows the adventures of Aeneas, a Trojan who was mentioned in Homer’s The Iliad. (By the way, it is in The Aeneid that we are told the story of the Trojan Horse.) Aeneas, among the few Trojans who escape from Troy, suffers numerous hardships before finally founding Rome.
Paterno states:
Virgil and his hero Aeneas, the founder of Rome, more than just entered my life; the adventures of Aeneas seeped into far corners of my mind, into my feelings about what is true and honorable and important. They helped shape everything I have since become. I don’t think anybody can get a handle on what makes me tick as a person, and certainly can’t get at the roots of how I coach football, without understanding what I learned from the deep relationship I formed with Virgil during those afternoons and later in my life.
After he continues to discuss the turmoil, struggle, and suffering of Aeneas as he continues on his journey, he makes this comparison between Aeneas and the heroes of Homer’s works:
To Homer—and, in fact, to most of the modern world—heroes are created through personal exploits and glorification, often through an ambitious drive for self-glorification. Heroes are superstars. The grandstands cheer them, and they throw their high fives up and slam the football down after a touchdown. Homer’s hero Achilles, in his pursuit of glory, ends up destroying his men and his cause and rotting at the end into a kind of monster.
Aeneas, as Virgil created him, was a totally new kind of epic hero. Like Homer’s heroes, he endures battles, storms, shipwrecks, and the rages of the gods. But the worst storm is the one that rages within himself. He yearns to be free of his tormenting duty, but he knows that his duty is to others, to his men. Through years of hardship and peril, Aeneas reluctantly but relentlessly heeds his fata until he founds Rome.
Aeneas is not a grandstanding superstar. He is, above all, a Trojan and a Roman. His first commitment is not to himself, for he is bugged constantly by the reminder, the fatum, “You must be a man for others.” He lives his life not for “me” and “I,” but for “us” and “we.” Aeneas is the ultimate team man. A hero of Aeneas’ kind does not wear his name on the back of his uniform. He doesn’t wear “Nittany Lions” on his helmet to claim star credit for touchdowns and tackles that were enabled by everybody doing his job. For Virgil’s kind of hero, the score belongs to the team.
I thank JoePa for his thoughts on The Aeneid and helping me to read this epic with more clarity and understanding.
I’ve been unable to blog for the past few days as I’ve had the wonderful experience of spending a week cruising in Alaska. I’m back now and will hopefully be able to resume regular blogging. Here are a couple of photos I took while there. The first is the Sawyer Glacier in Tracy Arm Fjord. The second is one of many humpback whales we saw .
This is a subject that has been on my mind for some time. I have not, as of yet, felt comfortable commenting on the meetings which have been ongoing in Lakeland, Florida for the past several weeks. I have been a resident of Lakeland for 5 years now. I work at the Lakeland Regional Medical Center as an emergency physician and have met in the emergency department a number of those who have travelled from across the U.S. and around the world to be a part of the “Lakeland Revival.”
I am probably as qualified as any to speak on the subject. First, I trusted Christ as a teenager in a Pentecostal church and served as a Pentecostal pastor for 14 years. Second, I live in Lakeland. Third, I have a number of friends and acquaintances from around the country who have come to Lakeland for the meetings. I’ve talked with them and some have stayed in my home. Finally, I’ve attended the meetings myself.
I’m actually quite troubled by the “Lakeland Revival,” as it has come to be known around the world. This “move of the Spirit” has been compared to past “revivals” such as the Toronto Blessing and the Brownsville Revival. First, I’ll state where I think some critics of the “revival” have erred.
1. Todd Bentley, of Fresh Fire Ministries, the leader of the revival is not your stereotypical preacher. He exhibits large amounts of tattoos and piercings, dresses like a biker and has a troubled background. None of that in itself discredits what is taking placed in Lakeland. These things might make one approach with a little more skepticism, but has no direct bearing on whether these meetings are of God or not.
2. I do not think that Bentley’s antics are demonically motivated. He is not under the power of Satan. Furthermore, the people that attend these meetings (at least the one’s I know) are sincere Christians who love God with all their heart and are truly hungry for God’s active presence in their lives and ministries. They are not subject to demonic influences, as some have suggested.
So, what’s wrong with the “Lakeland Revival?”
1. The Revival is extremely focused on the experiential and seems mostly unconcerned with the fundamentals of the Christian faith. There is not an emphasis on doctrinal correctness. The night I attended, the first thing I heard when I walked in the doors, was the worship leader mis(quoting) scripture: “The Scripture says that God dances in heaven over one sinner who repents!” While the main point of that statement is true (God is happy when one repents), the quote immediately made me question the commitment to doctrinal accuracy. Now, I’m not against enjoying the presence of God. I enjoyed the extended time of singing and praise. The problem is that “spirit” seems emphasized to the detriment of “truth.”
2. The tactics of Bentley are unscriptural and plain weird. For some examples of what goes on, see this youtube video. On that video he boasts of following God’s leading to kick people in the face, to punch them in the stomach (knocking their teeth out) and body slamming them in order to produce healing. The night I attended I watched him (under God’s direction) approach a gentleman and knee him in the stomach, knocking him to the ground. These antics do not in any way resemble anything I see in the ministry of Jesus or in the Acts of the Apostles. Does this mean all this is demonic? No. There is a third category - human lunacy and goofiness.
Perhaps, my greatest grievance with all of this is its impact on non-Christians. As one who is interested in the Christian apologetic enterprise, I am concerned that this complicates the task. The already signficant barriers to some accepting the faith have been multiplied by such foolishness. While Bentley prophesies of the coming worldwide move of God, “revivals” such as this in Lakeland, present a caricature of true Christianity easily dismissed by unbelievers. Much damage is ultimately done to the cause of the Gospel. The Gospel is offensive enough to many. We need not add additional offense unnecessarily.
The supposed large number of healings also concerns me. I’ve been in hundreds of services where the sick have been prayed for and in a number of dedicated “healing services.” Most of the healings are of the kind that are unconfirmable (except upon the testimony of the “healed”). I have yet to see a physically crippled individual with obvious physical deformities (or mental) healed despite the large number of healings which purportedly takes place. Let me clearly state: I am not a cessationist. I see no reason to believe that God has stopped working miracles in our day. On the other hand, I see nothing which makes me think such meetings as the Lakeland Revival are similar to that which took place in the New Testament. I must also state that it is possible, even probable, that some are healed in such meetings. That does not place God’s stamp of approval on the meetings themselves, however. It might be that God heals some folks in spite of, and not because of, the antics of those involved. I am quite concerned that non-Christians see through this facade of “healing” and are turned off to the Gospel of Christ. This becomes a hindrance to true revival and evangelism, rather than promoting it.
Additionally, the time and expenses that are invested (I won’t quite say “wasted”) by those who fly in from all over the world could be much better spent elsewhere. A great deal of time was spent prophesying about the coming revival all over the world (and how God told Bentley he was a big part in it) in the meeting I attended. As a former Pentecostal, I’ve heard these prophecies since my first week as a Christian. We need to spend less time looking for a new move of the Spirit and more time preaching, teaching, and doing what we already know from the Bible.
I have gone on longer than usual and there is much more I could say. I thought I should say something since I am close to action and have personally attended the meeting. Stand to Reason has recently posted several blog posts (here, here, and here) on their website regarding this “revival.” They are insightful and helpful, offering more legitimate criticism of the Lakeland Revival. Greg Koukl also spent time discussing this issue on his most recent radio show. Koukl also has an article adressing the Toronto Blessing called New Movement of the Spirit - So What?, which is applicable and offers wisdom when considering such meetings as the Lakeland Revival.
I’ve recently finished the latest issue of Salvo Magazine, an excellent issue dealing with the sordid state of higher education in America. In Mind Control: Now Occurring at a University Near You, Herb London writes:
Professor Richard Rorty, the much acclaimed philosopher who shuffled off this mortal coil last June, argued that professors in the university ought “to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own.” Rorty noted further that students would be fortunate to find themselves under the control “of people like me, and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents.” Indeed, parents who send their children to college should recognize that professors “are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable.”
These were not comments made at Marxist Leninist University or by the Red Guard. Nor was this the ranting of a deranged atheist who opposed the Commandment to “honor your father and mother.” These views were those of a greatly respected senior professor who not only influenced his colleagues but, to a degree, embodied their sentiments.
I recommend subscribing if at all possible. Their website describes their mission as:
Blasting holes in scientific naturalism, marveling at the intricate design of the universe, and promoting life in a culture of death;
Critiquing art, music, film, television, and literature, interrupting mass media influence, and questioning the sanity of our consumerist lifestyle;
Countering destructive ideologies, replacing revisionist fictions with undeniable facts, and paring away political correctness;
Debunking the cultural myths that have undercut human dignity, all but destroyed the notions of virtue and morality, and slowly eroded our appetite for transcendence;
Recovering the one worldview that actually works.
Over at Scriptorium, you will find a couple of posts worth reading by two of my favorite comtemporary philosophers, J. P. Moreland and John Mark Reynolds.
Reynolds discusses a contemporary issue, personal vs. non-personal causation, from a Greek Classical perspective in this post, Before Socrates: the Tension between Personal and Impersonal Causes. In this excerpt, he argues that Christianity brought about a resolution of the tension present in the works of the philosophers of Greek antiquity:
The coming of Christ was, therefore, good news for science and philosophy.
The Christian church would eventually fill the gap between the two extremes of Greek thought. Christian theology, with a God outside of nature, would allow for both natural and personal cosmic cause. Some things could be recognized as divine action, the creation of life for example. Other things, such as the cycle of seasons, could be given natural explanations in the context of an overarching divine purpose. Only Plato and Aristotle would come close to grasping this elegant solution. As we shall see, neither fully grasped it and only with the coming of Christianity were the necessary philosophical distinctions to be made. Christianity allowed for the final birth of a truly modern science.
Moreland has a post on Human Persons and Equal Rights. In it, he discusses how that only the Judeo-Christian view of humans as being made in the image of God can adequately ground human rights. Naturalism (and belly-buttons, among other things) cannot. Here’s the beginning lines:
It is a cherished belief of most people that human beings simply as such have equal value and rights and that they have significantly greater value than animals. However, this claim is difficult if not impossible to justify given a naturalist worldview. For many naturalists, the best, perhaps only, way to justify the belief that all humans have equal and unique value simply as such is in light of the metaphysical grounding of the Judeo-Christian doctrine of the image of God. Such a view depicts humans as substances (a particular thing like a dog that is a simple, indivisible unity of parts and attributes at a time, that remains the same through change, and that has a nature (being a human, being a carbon atom, being a dog) that provides an answer to the question “What kind of thing is this particular object?”)…