New Covenant

Blue trash can, elementary school, New Year's Eve

An empty elementary school on a weekend, this past fall. A dented trash can, painted blue, and a shadowed planter.

What of this past year?

- image © 2007 A. R. Lopez

It's not cheating if you don't get caught

"We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst." - C.S. Lewis

From FoxNews, Hannah Montana Concert Winner Lied in Essay Describing Father's Death in Iraq.

An essay that won a 6-year-old girl four tickets to a Hannah Montana concert began with the powerful line: "My daddy died this year in Iraq."

While gripping, it was not true — and now the girl may lose her tickets after her mom acknowledged to contest organizers it was all a lie.

...

The mother had told company officials that the girl's father died April 17 in a roadside bombing in Iraq, company spokeswoman Robyn Caulfield said.

"We did the essay and that's what we did to win," Priscilla Ceballos, the mother, said in an interview with Dallas TV station KDFW. "We did whatever we could do to win." (emphasis added)

From MyFoxDallas,

Priscilla Ceballos, the girl's mother, telephoned FOX 4 reporter Brandon Todd Friday night to clear up what she said were misconceptions about their side of the story. She claims they never represented the essay as truth, and claims she stormed out of a media photo opportunity in Garland on Friday only because a reporter "accused" her of lying.

"When [contest organizer Robin Caulfield] asked me if this [essay] was true, I told her no," Ceballos said. "We never said this was a true story. We do essays all the time. My daughter does essays at school all the time. It never did say it had to be true, but [Robin] said, 'That's what we expected.'"

Whatever it takes...

Post Christmas gripe

Why do some people feel the need to share a photo of their pet(s) on a Christmas card?

The Christian, and personal relationships with God

Given my posts on Reason, for God, and Heart-wrenching stories and the Great Commission, along with Ilona's Theology of the Evangelical 'Personal Relationship', I was a bit surprised today to read, in J.I. Packer's, Knowing God, the following,

The word which God addresses directly to us is (like a royal speech, only more so) an instrument, not only of government, but also of fellowship. For, though God is a great king, it is not His wish to live at a distance from His subjects. Rather the reverse: He made us with the intention that He and we might walk together for ever in a love-relationship. But such a relationship can only exist when the parties involved know something of each other. God, our Maker, knows all about us before we say anything (Ps. 139:1-4); but we can know nothing about Him unless He tells us. Here, therefore, is a further reason why God speaks to us: not only to move us to do what He wants, but to enable us to know Him so that we may love Him. Therefore God sends His word to us in the character of both information and invitation. It comes to woo us as well as to instruct us; it not merely puts us in the picture of what God has done and is doing, but also calls us into personal communication with the loving Lord himself.

The danger, as I see it, with an over-emphasis on the "personal relationship with God" aspect of Christianity, is that it ultimately relegates the study of the Word of God to a lower level of relational intimacy than that gained through the experiential. The academic study of God's Word is taken to be strictly objective and, as such, a less valid form of experiencing relationship with God. The experiential approach, while subjective in nature, is deemed ultimately more reliable precisely because of its subjective nature. After all, who can argue with what another has personally experienced?

Yet I think that those who over-emphasize the subjective, experiential approach to relationship with God have settled for something far, far short of what God intended for us. If an intimate, personal relationship is to occur between sentient beings, then it would stand to reason that, as Packer states, both of those beings know something of each other. Ultimately, I believe, the experiential approach relies on subjective intuitions rather than on objective truths. Yes, the one who has no access to the Word of God can, indeed must, rely on an experiential relationship. But for those of us in the West, that is not the case. We have been given the Word, and we have been given the responsibility to study it, and to respond to the wooing and instruction it gives, calling us into a deep, personal relationship with the God of Abraham, Jacob, and Isaac.

If I can only have one friend...

(on Facebook) then it's nice to know it's someone like Joe.

One man's ceiling,

is another man's floor. - Paul Simon

In the dry, desert air of Chloride, Arizona; rusted junk, or hidden treasure?

- image, © 2007 A. R. Lopez

Heart-wrenching stories and the Great Commission: decisions or commitment?

Yesterday, I referenced a post by Keith Plummer titled, Reason as Evidence for God. In discussing apologetics, with other Christians, I've often run across the thinking that, in terms of evangelism, giving evidence or "proofs" for God's existence is not as effective as simply expressing genuine Christian love. Phrases such as, "It's a relationship, not a religion," come to mind. The issue is, I think, much too complex to be corralled into an either / or situation, but I've been wondering just what it is about the emotional approach that seems to give it more "validity"?

It seems to me that, if a non-Christian could be convinced of the veracity of Christianity based on a well-delivered emotional tug, then perhaps said non-Christian could also be convinced of some other worldview based on an equally well delivered emotional tug.

Reason, for God: from the Christian Mind

Keith Plummer, at the Christian Mind, presents a concise, and well thought out, post on Reason as Evidence for God.

One has to keep in mind that the dispute between the atheist and the theist doesn't consist merely of disagreement about particular facts but is in actuality a clash of worldviews, systems of interpretation that rest on certain presuppositions about the nature of reality, the sources and scope of human knowledge, and ethics. All of these are intertwined and interrelated. What one believes in one area has consequences for another. For example, if I assume that reality consists exclusively of matter and material processes, a necessary consequent is that there are no such things as objectively existing moral truths. Likewise, claims to knowledge of moral absolutes would be inconsistent with the belief in such a universe. What the argument from reason asks is, given our belief that we are able to form true beliefs that correspond to the world outside our minds and that we are able to make reliable inferences and deductions, what kind of universe best accounts for or grounds these phenomena.

Read it all.

Judah's Lion

Where does the lion, Judah's golden lion walk?
Stealthy under star by winter night his soft paws stalk.
Out on lonely hills a cold wind howls and darkness scowls;
Shepherds shiver - danger in the dark! - some wild beast prowls.
Suddenly up springs a light; a voice rings like a bell:

"Joy, O men of Judah! Come and see! Noel! Noel!"

Where lies Judah's longed-for lion? "Come and see the sight!
Fear not - you golden one is couched among the lambs
tonight."

- Keith Patman

4th Sunday of Advent: Peace

"Our Heavenly Father, we praise your name and give glory to you. Fill us, O Lord, with your peace and with fellowship for all peoples. Teach us to share your peace, and our family's love, with the lonely, the poor, and your people, everywhere."

May the Lord give strength to his people!
May the Lord bless his people with peace!

    - Psalm 29:11

“Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”

    - Luke 19:38

For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

    - Romans 14:17

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

    - Galatians 5:22-23

- image, © A. R. Lopez

Science Saturday: Confusing the Big Bang with evolution

From Ed Brayton, a link to a story about a parent questioning a local school board regarding the teaching of creationism. From the article, Parent wants intelligent design in PV,

A concerned parent questioned Pymatuning Valley Local School officials at Monday’s meeting, as to how they are teaching the science curriculum regarding the theory of creationism.

The parent, a Frank Piper, whose daughter is a PV Middle School fifth-grader, is concerned because the district is teaching the “big bang theory” of the creation of the universe and not presenting students with alternatives to Darwin’s theory of evolution. Creationism, which posits that life is too complex to be explained by evolution alone, and its place in public school curricula, has been a highly debated issue in Ohio and elsewhere for several years.

...

Piper said his daughter is a straight A student and failed her test on the “big bang theory” because she didn’t understand it.

“We’re Christians,” he said. “I couldn’t even help her because I don’t understand it.”

It's very frustrating to encounter such ignorance, with regards to the "big bang theory". For instance, the theory of the big bang has nothing to do with Darwin's theory of evolution. One theory looks at the physics of the creation of the cosmos while the other posits how existing life forms diversified. To research the two theories requires varied approaches, essentially based on whether or not you are a physicist or a biologist. Yet, it's not surprising to read such comments when the Institute of Creation Research outputs articles attempting to lump the big bang in with the evolution of life. Consider this opening paragraph,

One main reason why most cosmologists accept the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe is that it fits so well into the theory of total evolution. It begins with nothing, then matter evolves out of that nothing with a horrendous bang, then stars and galaxies evolve more or less simultaneously with the higher elements, then planets evolve around their stars, then simple life evolves, then more and more complex life forms, and finally humans evolve.

It's a not-so-clever use of the wide definitions of the word "evolve". It's also completely wrong.

If Frank Piper really wants to "understand it", then he should consider the following resources, for a start.

Books:

The Creator and the Cosmos - Hugh Ross

Show Me God - Fred Heeren

Articles:

Facing Up to Big Bang Challenges RTB

Big Bang - The Bible Taught It First! RTB

Putting the Big Bang to the Test RTB

What was the Big Bang? Probe Ministries

What if we win? (v. 8)

Senior Syrian al Qaeda leader confirmed killed

The regions around Samarra and Tarmiyah in Salahadin province continues to be a flashpoint for raids against senior al Qaeda operatives and propaganda cells. US forces have confirmed killing a senior Syrian al Qaeda leader near the city, and another media cell was dismantled in the city.

Iraqi oil exceeds pre-war output

Iraqi oil production is above the levels seen before the US-led invasion of the country in 2003, according to the International Energy Agency

Iraq by the numbers: Graphing the decrease in violence

Multinational Forces-Iraq has released the data of the effects of the "surge" on the security situation. The reduction in deaths, attack trends, sectarian violence, and improvised explosive device, suicide, and car bomb attacks is dramatic. The number of weapons caches found per year has more than doubled. The graphs below have been provided by Multinational Forces Iraq. Click each graph to view in detail.

On the Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton paradox

How old were you when you became aware of who the President of the United States was? Maybe, 5 years old?

I was thinking about the possibility that Hillary Clinton would be elected President in 2008, and then again in 2012. If that were to happen, then it means she wouldn't leave office until the year 2017.

What it would also mean is that anyone in their early 30s, in the year 2017, would only know a world in which either a Bush or a Clinton was President.

Understanding science & faith: why we need ID

Some of the most clever people can make some of the biggest mistakes.

At Human Events.com, Mac Johnson has an article titled, Intelligent Design, and Other Dumb Ideas. Johnson, a molecular biologist, writes,

...I would just like to say that Intelligent Design is a really, really bad idea --scientifically, politically, and theologically.  I say this as a dedicated conservative, who has on many occasions defended and espoused religion and religious conservatism.  I also say it as a professional molecular biologist, who has worked daily (or at least week-daily) for years with biological problems to which the theory of evolution has contributed significant understanding -- and to which Intelligent Design is incapable of contributing any understanding at all.

To what, may we ask, is Johnson's understanding of Intelligent Design?

Scientifically, attributing every aspect of biology to the arbitrary design of a divine tinkerer explains as much about biology as attributing the eruption of volcanoes to the anger of the Lava God would explain geology.  A theory, by definition, makes predictions that can be tested.  Intelligent Design predicts nothing, since it essentially states that every thing is the way it is because God wanted it that way.

Is he serious? Is he claiming that people such as Philip Johnson, Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Michael Denton, Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, Bill Dembski, et. al., have all posited that every aspect of biology is due to the mere arbitrary whim of a designer?

Johnson then trades his shovel in for a backhoe and proceeds to dig in deeper.

Can you explain why an intelligent designer would create a species of live-bearing bipedal primates so large-headed that normal childbirth would be a major cause of death and disfigurement?  From an evolutionary point of view it makes perfect sense: the biomechanics of efficient two-legged walking require a narrow pelvis, while delivery of a big-brained child requires a broad pelvis.  The two reproductively favorable attributes are at odds with one another, so a compromise is reached in a mildly deadly, moderately efficient human pelvis.  Hey, whatever gets you through the Pliocene.

The trouble with his explanation is that it also fits in with the notion of optimal design. You know - the concept of tradeoffs, pros & cons, designer's intentions, etc.? Throwing a 20/20, hindsight-derived, evolutionary rationale into the mix doesn't make it so. Of course, if the evolutionary sequence is correct, then we should have oodles of fossils of all those species that didn't make the Pliocene cut, what with their way-too-narrow pelvis or way-too-big brained offspring.

Yet, where Johnson trips up is on the issue of faith.

St. Thomas Aquinas said, “In the end, we know God as unknown.”  That is why religion really boils down to faith.  You believe or you don’t.  If you need me to find God for you in a layer of sediment or the curve of a bird’s beak, you have no faith.  Faith is a mystery.  That is why, during communion, the Priest sings, “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith.”  Note that he does not sing, “Let us proclaim the verifiable scientific certainty of faith.” (emphasis added)

This is a false view of faith. Or, to contextualize it for orthodox Christianity, it is not a Biblical view of faith. The Christian religion is not one of mere myth or fanciful storytelling. Indeed, the very foundational aspect of Christianity, the resurrection of Christ, was taught as fact. The faith Johnson speaks of may blindly give one a warm fuzzy feeling, but it is not a faith that hopes for the eternal, or weathers times of peril. To be sure, it is a mystery, yet it is a mystery which encompasses the Christian in certainty. Johnson himself should understand that simply because we don't know everything doesn't mean we don't know something. While God is unknowable, it doesn't mean He isn't capable of being known.

As the late Ron Nash so eloquently put in his book, Faith & Reason,

As a Christian, I am interested in sharing my faith and my reasons for holding those beliefs. I have little use for misguided Christians who regard philosophy or science or any intellectual pursuit as somehow incompatible with Christian faith. I have little respect for uninformed Christians who think that reason and logic are threats to the Christian faith and who describe faith as some kind of irrational leap into a dark abyss.

3rd Sunday of Advent: Joy

"Our Heavenly Father, we praise your name and give glory to you. Help us to count it all joy when we meet trials of various kinds. Help us, especially, to count it all joy when we remember that you sent your son, Jesus, to save and deliver us from sin."

Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth;
break forth into joyous song and sing praises!

Sing praises to the Lord with the lyre,
with the lyre and the sound of melody!

With trumpets and the sound of the horn
make a joyful noise before the King, the Lord!

Let the sea roar, and all that fills it;
the world and those who dwell in it!

Let the rivers clap their hands;
let the hills sing for joy together

    - Psalm 98:4-8

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

    - Luke 2:13-14

- image, © 2007 A. R. Lopez

The Promise

The Lord God said when time was full
He would shine His light in the darkness
He said a virgin would conceive
And give birth to the Promise

For a thousand years the dreamers dreamt
And hoped to see His love
The Promise showed their wildest dreams
had simply not been wild enough
But the Promise showed their wildest dreams
Had simply not been wild enough

The Promise was love and the Promise was life
The Promise meant light to the world
Living proof Jehovah saves
For the name of the Promise was Jesus

The Faithful One saw time was full
And the ancient pledge was honored
So God the Son, the Incarnate One
His final Word, His own Son
Was born in Bethlehem

But came into our hearts to live
What more could God have given
Tell me what more did He have to give
What more could God have given
Tell me what more did He have to give

The Promise was love and the Promise was life
The Promise meant light to the world
Living proof Jehovah saves
For the name of the Promise was Jesus

At last the proof Jehovah saves
For the name of the Promise was Jesus

- Michael Card

Science Saturday: reviewing Genesis 1 in church history

From Today's New Reason to Believe (per Reasons to Believe):
Historic Age Debate - Overview, Part 1, and Historic Age Debate - Overview, Part 2, both by John Millam. An excerpt,

Even a fairly simple review shows that the church'€™s view of Genesis 1 is complex and not the simple uniform view that is commonly assumed. Moreover, we can discern that scholars in each major time period wrestled with this issue in their own characteristic manner.    

• The Apostolic Church (30-90 AD) -€“ Completely silent on the issue of the "€œdays€" of creation.
• The Early Church (90-476 AD) -€“ Both the calendar-day and instantaneous creation (or creation not in time) views were held by prominent theologians. Origen and Augustine in particular clearly rejected the idea that the creation days were normal calendar days.
  
• The Middle Ages (476-1492 AD) -€“ The issue of creation receives little attention during this period. Instantaneous creation and figurative interpretations of Genesis 1 predominate, but the calendar-day view is still popular.    
• The Reformation (1492-1675 AD) -€“ Calendar-day view is clearly predominant but other views are still around. Instantaneous creation and other allegorical interpretations are strongly rejected at this time.    
• Golden Age of Science (1675-1781 AD) -€“ Day-age view appears but calendar-day remains prevalent. Day-age emerges in an attempt to understand God'€™s process in creation.

A "Holiday" greeting tailored for the likes of Barbara Walters

Piggybacking off of my previous post on Barbara Walters ignorant concern over a religious Christmas card coming from the White House, my blog buddy Greg (Hope & New Life), e-mailed me the quintessential Christmas Holiday greeting for Democrat, politically-correct liberals, such as Barbara (Walters and Streisand). He was good enough to also include the standard Republican greeting.

From Greg (posted with his permission),

To All My Democrat Friends:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2008, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

To  My Republican Friends:

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Greg W.

And a Merry Christmas to you, too, Greg!

Barbara Walters receives a religious CHRISTMAS card

And she's upset. What makes this incident newsworthy is that she received it from... The White House.

She ignorantly pontificates,

"Now, does this also go to agnostics and atheists and Muslims?"

Yes, Barbara, it does. The first sentence from the Wikipedia entry for "Christmas":

Christmas is an annual holiday that celebrates the birth of Jesus. (emphasis added)

Watch, and enjoy.

Link: sevenload.com

Snow

Was it a cold awakening Christmas morning
In a wooden trough,
In spite of straw and swaddling clothes and angel songs?

That was not to be the last time
You'd be laid upon the wood
(There were Herods, Judases from the start
Among the stars and shepherds).

And did they smile, those simple folk,
And kiss your tiny hands and weep delight?
They'd touch those hands again someday,
Believing you through cracks and scars.

Then, oh! the million Christmas mornings
When you'd lie, a babe again,
Beneath a million million trees
And hear the countless tongues chanting your name.

And, oh! the white snow on black shingles
Where icy crystals capture windows
And fires glow and mistletoe is wreathed and strung.

But ah... will they remember crimson
Dripping from the iron nails
And will they pray, and will they know
A whiter white than
Snow?

- Keith Patman