A defective eschatology
Eschatology, the study of the end or end times, is crucial to how we act in the present. There are 31,124 verses in the Old and New Testaments, and of these 8,352 are predictive prophecy, almost one third! In fact only four biblical books contain no predictive prophecies: Ruth, Song of Songs, Philemon and 3 John. Is this not ample reason to take eschatology seriously? And yet so often it is relegated to the last chapter in books of systematic theology.
How we see the future winding up affects how we respond in the present. If at the end of this age Jesus returns to whisk the Christians away to heaven and to destroy this ‘wicked evil earth’, then any environmental involvement can, at best, only be regarded as patching up a dying man’s coat, and effectively a waste of time.
However, God’s final glorious consummation at the end of this age and at the beginning of the age to come is to include the physical world. For the Old Testament prophets, their eschatological hope included the earth. The redeemed earth is to be the scene of the kingdom of God.
There is, throughout the scriptures, a theme of destruction, often coupled with the theme of a new heaven and earth. However, a closer examination of the Scriptures reveal that Jesus will not return to destroy the earth - rather he will renew it. At first - but only at first-there appear to be two contradicting concepts in the scriptures: that of the renewal of the earth and the destruction of the earth.
There will be a renewed heavens and earth [Gk: kairos = fresh, renewed, rather than new in time]. Jesus talks of the renewal (literally rebirth) of all things, and Paul writes about the creation being liberated - there seems to be no room for a destruction of the earth here.
And yet, on the other hand, Peter describes the consummation as the earth being destroyed. The writer to the Hebrews, echoing the psalmist, talks about the earth and heavens perishing and being rolled up like a garment, and Jesus says that heaven and earth will pass away.” So how do we reconcile these conflicting accounts? Is it restoration or destruction?
The first thing we need to remember is that these passages are apocalyptic and therefore may not necessarily have to be taken literally; they may well be metaphors to describe the catastrophic and cataclysmic event the return of Jesus will be. I will look at three passages that talk about an apparent destruction of the earth.
(i) Matthew 24:35: ‘heavens and earth will pass away’ (cf Mk 13:31; Lk 21:33).
The Greek word ‘pass away’ is the same word that occurs in 2 Corinthians 5:17, where Paul describes the person in Christ as a new creation, saying ‘the old has gone’ (literally passed away). This implies not total destruction but transformation. Hence we could legitimately paraphrase Jesus as saying ‘heaven and earth will be transformed but my word never changes’.
(ii) Hebrews 1:12
In this passage, as in the Matthew passage, there is a contrast. In Matthew 25:35 the contrast was between the creation (i.e. heavens and earth) and Jesus’ words; here it is between the creation and the creator. The thing that both writers want to emphasise is the unchangeableness of God compared with his creation; this is the context of both passages, so to use them as proof texts for a theory of destruction is inappropriate.
The word translated as ‘changed’ in v12 is allagesontai; this same word is used in 1 Corinthians 15:51 and 52. Here the context is the resurrection of believers: ‘we will all be changed’. Yet again the meaning can be understood as transformation. When we receive resurrection bodies we shall not be destroyed but changed or transformed; in the same way the earth will be transformed.
(iii) 2 Peter 3:10
Richard Bauckham, in his excellent commentary on 2 Peter and Jude describes this passage as a crux interpretum: it is crucial to our reading of the entire subject of the earth’s destruction. The majority of contemporary commentators translate the key passage as ‘the earth and all its works will be found. [See in particular Al Wolters ‘Worldview and textual criticism in 2 Peter 3: 10’ Westminster Theological Journal 49 (1987) pp. 405-13] This reading is arrived at for textual and contextual reasons: the majority of Greek texts have ‘will be found’ (heu rethestai) rather than ‘shall be burned up’ (katakaesetai). So yet again there is no ground for supposing the earth will be destroyed. The sense here is that the purging fires will enable the earth and all its work to be ‘found’, that is revealed or discovered for what they are (cf 1 Cor 3:15).
From these three passages, often put forward to propound the theory that when Jesus returns the earth will be destroyed, we have seen that there is no basis for such a theory. Rather they confirm the view that the earth will be transformed, which, as we have seen, is also the view of the Old Testament authors (see, for example Is 2:4, 11:6,8 and Is 35:6, and extra-biblical evidence, cf Enoch 45:5). In addition, there is the recurring theme in Revelation of partial, rather than complete, despoliation and destruction. One tenth of the great city collapses (Rev 11:13); the pale horse and its rider, Death, is given power over a quarter of the earth to kill by sword, famine, plague and wild beasts (Rev 6:8); and repeatedly one third of the earth, trees, grass, seas, sea creatures, ships, rivers, sun, moon and stars are variously destroyed, burnt up, corrupted or killed (Rev 8:6-12). This seems to speak of purification and purging: all that is worthy of destruction will be destroyed, but all that remains pure and untarnished will remain.
We can reasonably conclude that any time that we put into caring for the earth will not be wasted. This is, indeed, beginning the task that will be completed when Jesus returns to renew, restore and transform the face of the earth. Then the meek will indeed be able to inherit it (Matt 5:5) and rule upon it (Rev 5:10).
As the fall had repercussions for the earth, so too has the consummation. The eschatological Day of the Lord, as we have seen, involves the transformation of nature, rather than its destruction. The cursed earth produced thorns and thistles (Gen 3:17) and meant food production was difficult (Gen 3:18). But the consummation brings renewed fertility (Ezek 36) and, in that day, ‘the reaper will be overtaken by the ploughman’ (Amos 9:13), ‘they will not toil in vain’ (Is 65:23), ‘the mountains will drip with new wine’ (Joel 3:18), and ‘instead of the thornbush will grow the pine tree, and instead of briars, myrtles will grow’ (Is 55:13). The curse will be undone.
The earth will be renewed (Is 66:17) and there will be a return to more than paradise conditions; what started as a garden will end as a city: there will be no war and killing (Is 2:49, 9:5, 11:9), there will be harmony in the animal kingdom (Is 11:6-8, 66:25), no more deserts (Is 35:1, 6-7) and the earth will respond to the Lord (Hos 2:21).
This is the earth we are to inherit, the earth we are to care for now; hence, what we do now is worth it, and of eternal significance. Our involvement is not futile because God will not destroy his creation.
"If God is sovereign, then his lordship must extend over all of life, and it cannot be restricted to the walls of the church or within the Christian orbit." Abraham Kuyper Common Grace 1.1.
Monday, 23 April 2007
Proceedings of the 1999 Christian Engineering Conference
While wilfing I came across these papers from the above conference. Other papers from other conferences and presentations are available here.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Sunday, 22 April 2007
Christianity and politics
Whether we like it or not, politics concerns all of us. Some as citizens, others as government officials. Politics is one of the ways in which we as people depend on and relate to each other. Whether we like it or not, we bear co-responsibility for one another's lot and thus for the structuration of our society. Even if we are not concerned with politics, politics is concerned about us. That is why head-in-the-sand politics is still a very real form of politics - and an extremely bad form at that.
No one can avoid the challenge of responsible political engagement, not withstanding all our past failings and shortsightedness. The challenge of political action based on the gospel remains for the Christian. While we may not superficially rid ourselves of the problems just posed, there is the undeniable fact that the gospel proclaims itself as a Word for the world: as Word that affects and desires to redeem all our cultural activities. Therefore it is simply impossible to be a Christian and to simultaneously deny the relevance of this Christianity to political life. To put it differently: even if we aren't concerned with the gospel in politics the gospel is concerned about our political activities. Christ has redeemed our total existence and re-directed it to God.
Bob Goudzwaard A Christian Political Option Wedge, 1972, pp. 2-3.
Saturday, 21 April 2007
AoLR update
The bibliography on Dooyeweerd has been updated and an I've added an article by William Young:
- 'Herman Dooyeweerd' in P. E. Hughes (ed.) Creative Minds in Contemporary Theology. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids: 270-306. Reproduced with the permission of the publisher. Please visit their website: www.eerdmans.com
(1979) Technology in a christian-philosophical perspective (ICS - republished in (1984)) [pdf]
(1980) Futurology or eschatology Vanguard 10 (1): 8-11 [pdf]
Thursday, 19 April 2007
Faraday institute lectures
Listeningtowords has over 100 lectures available from the Faraday Institute for Science and religion.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Bolger and Roxborough on missional and emergent
Here's a video of a conversation between Ryan Bolger and Alan Roxburgh on 'what is the missional church?' [HT Bolgblog]
Saturday, 14 April 2007
Leonhard Euler (1707-1783)
Novice philosopher has a post on Leonhard Euler (1707-1783) and reminds us that 15 April is Euler's tercentenary. Euler was a committed Christian and, apparently, a biblical literalist as well as being (arguably) one of the greatest mathematicians ever - he was certainly the most prolific (apart from perhaps Paul Erdos).
According to one website (condensed from E T Bell's Men of Mathematics):
Euler remained a Christian all of his life and often read to his family from the Bible. One story about his religion during his stay in Russia involved the atheistic philosopher Diderot. Diderot had been invited to the court by Catherine the Great, but then annoyed her by trying to convert everyone to atheism. Catherine asked Euler for help, and he informed Diderot, who was ignorant of mathematics, that he would present in court an algebraic proof of the existence of God, if Diderot wanted to hear it. Diderot was interested, and, according to De Morgan, Euler advanced toward Diderot, and said gravely, and in a tone of perfect conviction: "Sir, ( a + bn )/n = x , hence God exists; reply! " Diderot had no reply, and the court broke into laughter. Diderot immediately returned to France.Also on Euler:
- The works of Euler online
- a paper by Duncan roper on Euler and the Koinisberg bridges problem
- a brief bio
- Rouse Ball's bio of Euler
- Christian history Institute
- The Euler archive blog
- Eulogy of Euler by Nicolas Fuss:
He was entirely imbued with respect for religion and his piety was sincere and his devotion was full of fervor. He fulfilled with the greatest detail all the duties of a Christian. He loved everyone, and if he felt stirrings of indignations it was against those enemies of religion, especially against the declared apostles of atheism that he made a stand in the defense of the Revelation against the objections of atheists in a work which was published in Berlin in 1747.
Christians - the reluctant greens VII
Jesus did not get involved in environmental issues
It is fair to say that Jesus was not ‘your average environmental protester’. His cursing of a fig-tree and treatment of the Gadarene swine would hardly win him honourary membership of Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth!
Yet, to argue that ‘Jesus was never involved in environmental action, therefore neither should we be’ is as illogical as saying that Jesus never wore trousers, he never drove a car, he never lived in a council flat, so neither should we.
What then of the two incidents mentioned above, the cursing of the fig tree (e.g. Mk 11:12-14) and the apparently wanton destruction of the Gadarene swine (e.g. Mk 5:1-17)? Neither gives the impression of Jesus exercising environmental care. A closer examination reveals that they are not the stumbling blocks that they first appear to be.
The cursing of the fig tree. However we are to understand this passage, one thing is self-evident: it is not to provide us with a normative example of how to treat plant-life! Elsewhere Jesus shows his (and his Father’s) care and concern of both animals and plants (cf the parables in Matthew 13, and the sermon on the mount). So how are we to understand this passage? It is best understood as an enacted parable.
(i) It provides a lesson on praying in faith (Mk 11 :22-25) and the creative (or destructive) power of words.
(ii) The Jews understood the fig tree to be a symbol of Israel (Hos 2:12; Is 34:4; Lk 13:6-9), and the withering of the tree would then be understood as a prophetic action of what was about to happen to Israel if they did not repent.
Its effectiveness as an object lesson and as a prophetic statement could well explain why Jesus acted ‘out of character’ in his treatment of the tree, thus shaking his disciples’ preconceptions and making them take special note.
The Gadarene swine (Mk 5:1-20; Lk 8:26-39; Matt 8:28-34). The purpose of this miracle is likewise not to provide a normative example for the treatment of animals, rather it is to demonstrate Jesus’ lordship over the demonic realm. In all three of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) it occurs after the stilling of the storm where Jesus has demonstrated his lordship over the elements: ‘even the winds and the waves obey him!’ Jesus truly is lord of all.
There is not the time for a full exegesis of this passage, so I shall limit myself to making a few points.
(i) Mark and Luke are very clear that Jesus did not immediately send the demons into the swine. It was only after the demons begged him (Lk 8:32; Mk 5:11), and consequently Jesus gave them permission to do so.
(ii) It was the demons and not Jesus who sent the swine over the bank into the lake and drowned them (Lk 8:33; Mk 5:13).
(iii) One suggestion that has been made is that the demons tried to deceive Jesus and deliberately destroyed the swine to bring Jesus into disrepute with the herdsmen.
(iv) One thing, however, is certain. The passage shows that Jesus places more value on human life than on other animal life. All animals have value, but some have more value than others.
To use these two incidents to reject any Christian involvement in environmental action or to prove Jesus’ lack of concern is grasping at proverbial straws. To an extent Jesus was a man of his time; the environmental problems that we face today were not major problems 2000 years ago in rural Palestine, so we would hardly expect Jesus to get involved. Were he born in our time he would certainly have a few things to say. He was not afraid to get involved in political issues.
Very often we have a distorted image of Jesus, an image that is reinforced by ‘Sunday school’ stories and prayers. It was not ‘gentle Jesus, meek and mild’ who engaged in conflict with the Jewish religious and political leaders. He was not afraid to speak in parables against them (Lk 20:19), or to attack their ‘idols’ of the sabbath and the Temple. Jesus deliberately healed on the sabbath (Lk 13:10-17); he demonstrated in the Temple (Lk 19:45-8), the religious, economic and political centre of Judaism; he prophesied the Temple’s destruction (Lk 21:5-6); and he ate with ‘sinners’ and ‘outcasts’ (Lk 15:1-2; 19:7). Small wonder that the ‘leaders among the people were trying to kill him’ (Lk 19:47).
Two ‘political’ problems in his time were sexism and nationalism; time and again Jesus confronted these two issues. Speaking to a Samaritan woman was unthinkable for a Jew -- she was the wrong sex and race--yet Jesus deliberately went out of his way to do it Jn 4:7). The parable of the good Samaritan and the Samaritan leper, whose faith had made him well (Lk 17:11-19), would have raised more than one or two Jewish eyebrows (Lk 11 :25). He also defied all the religious and political traditions of his day, not only by having women disciples, but by being supported by women (Lk 8:3). Jesus was not one to shrink away from political involvement; even his death on the cross had political significance, since he died a victim of a political system.
Jesus did get involved in his father’s world -- his incarnation and resurrection are testimonies to that. As his followers, then so should we, even if it does bring us suffering and misunderstanding.
It is fair to say that Jesus was not ‘your average environmental protester’. His cursing of a fig-tree and treatment of the Gadarene swine would hardly win him honourary membership of Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth!
Yet, to argue that ‘Jesus was never involved in environmental action, therefore neither should we be’ is as illogical as saying that Jesus never wore trousers, he never drove a car, he never lived in a council flat, so neither should we.
What then of the two incidents mentioned above, the cursing of the fig tree (e.g. Mk 11:12-14) and the apparently wanton destruction of the Gadarene swine (e.g. Mk 5:1-17)? Neither gives the impression of Jesus exercising environmental care. A closer examination reveals that they are not the stumbling blocks that they first appear to be.
The cursing of the fig tree. However we are to understand this passage, one thing is self-evident: it is not to provide us with a normative example of how to treat plant-life! Elsewhere Jesus shows his (and his Father’s) care and concern of both animals and plants (cf the parables in Matthew 13, and the sermon on the mount). So how are we to understand this passage? It is best understood as an enacted parable.
(i) It provides a lesson on praying in faith (Mk 11 :22-25) and the creative (or destructive) power of words.
(ii) The Jews understood the fig tree to be a symbol of Israel (Hos 2:12; Is 34:4; Lk 13:6-9), and the withering of the tree would then be understood as a prophetic action of what was about to happen to Israel if they did not repent.
Its effectiveness as an object lesson and as a prophetic statement could well explain why Jesus acted ‘out of character’ in his treatment of the tree, thus shaking his disciples’ preconceptions and making them take special note.
The Gadarene swine (Mk 5:1-20; Lk 8:26-39; Matt 8:28-34). The purpose of this miracle is likewise not to provide a normative example for the treatment of animals, rather it is to demonstrate Jesus’ lordship over the demonic realm. In all three of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) it occurs after the stilling of the storm where Jesus has demonstrated his lordship over the elements: ‘even the winds and the waves obey him!’ Jesus truly is lord of all.
There is not the time for a full exegesis of this passage, so I shall limit myself to making a few points.
(i) Mark and Luke are very clear that Jesus did not immediately send the demons into the swine. It was only after the demons begged him (Lk 8:32; Mk 5:11), and consequently Jesus gave them permission to do so.
(ii) It was the demons and not Jesus who sent the swine over the bank into the lake and drowned them (Lk 8:33; Mk 5:13).
(iii) One suggestion that has been made is that the demons tried to deceive Jesus and deliberately destroyed the swine to bring Jesus into disrepute with the herdsmen.
(iv) One thing, however, is certain. The passage shows that Jesus places more value on human life than on other animal life. All animals have value, but some have more value than others.
To use these two incidents to reject any Christian involvement in environmental action or to prove Jesus’ lack of concern is grasping at proverbial straws. To an extent Jesus was a man of his time; the environmental problems that we face today were not major problems 2000 years ago in rural Palestine, so we would hardly expect Jesus to get involved. Were he born in our time he would certainly have a few things to say. He was not afraid to get involved in political issues.
Very often we have a distorted image of Jesus, an image that is reinforced by ‘Sunday school’ stories and prayers. It was not ‘gentle Jesus, meek and mild’ who engaged in conflict with the Jewish religious and political leaders. He was not afraid to speak in parables against them (Lk 20:19), or to attack their ‘idols’ of the sabbath and the Temple. Jesus deliberately healed on the sabbath (Lk 13:10-17); he demonstrated in the Temple (Lk 19:45-8), the religious, economic and political centre of Judaism; he prophesied the Temple’s destruction (Lk 21:5-6); and he ate with ‘sinners’ and ‘outcasts’ (Lk 15:1-2; 19:7). Small wonder that the ‘leaders among the people were trying to kill him’ (Lk 19:47).
Two ‘political’ problems in his time were sexism and nationalism; time and again Jesus confronted these two issues. Speaking to a Samaritan woman was unthinkable for a Jew -- she was the wrong sex and race--yet Jesus deliberately went out of his way to do it Jn 4:7). The parable of the good Samaritan and the Samaritan leper, whose faith had made him well (Lk 17:11-19), would have raised more than one or two Jewish eyebrows (Lk 11 :25). He also defied all the religious and political traditions of his day, not only by having women disciples, but by being supported by women (Lk 8:3). Jesus was not one to shrink away from political involvement; even his death on the cross had political significance, since he died a victim of a political system.
Jesus did get involved in his father’s world -- his incarnation and resurrection are testimonies to that. As his followers, then so should we, even if it does bring us suffering and misunderstanding.
Friday, 13 April 2007
Hebden Taylor pages
Thursday, 12 April 2007
Science and Christian Belief 19(1)
The latest edition of Science and Christian Belief is out, complete with a new cover. It contains an obituary of Arthur Peacocke who died last October and my review of Roy Clouser's excellent The Myth of Religious Neutrality.
Wednesday, 11 April 2007
AoLR update
I have now added an interview with Bob Goudzwaard to the Goudzwaard pages. It was originally in Dutch, it was translated by Theo Plantinga and published in Vanguard in 1977: Economics and Christian faith: an interview with Bob Goudzwaard.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Faith in the Academy: Shaping our disciplines
Faith in the Academy: Shaping our disciplines
A two-day conference: Friday to Saturday, 7th - 8th September 2007
Exploring positive contributions that a Christian faith-perspective can make to core disciplines in today's academy
Jointly sponsored by WYSOCS and Christian Academic Network
Speakers include: Adrienne Dengerink Chaplin, Jonathan Chaplin and Richard Weikert
Bodington Hall, University of Leeds, UK
More details here
A two-day conference: Friday to Saturday, 7th - 8th September 2007
Exploring positive contributions that a Christian faith-perspective can make to core disciplines in today's academy
Jointly sponsored by WYSOCS and Christian Academic Network
Speakers include: Adrienne Dengerink Chaplin, Jonathan Chaplin and Richard Weikert
Bodington Hall, University of Leeds, UK
More details here
Powered by ScribeFire.
Tuesday, 10 April 2007
Christians - the reluctant greens VI
The New Age movement
Environmental action is seen by some Christians as synonymous with participation in the New Age movement, and hence they steer clear of any involvement.
But what is the New Age movement? Its name is based on the idea underlying much of the ‘movement’, namely, that we are looking forward to a ‘new age’ in which people will see things in a different light from the present age. This is sometimes called the ‘new consciousness’. However the term New Age is a misnomer. It is not new, but rather a hotch-potch of very old ideas including monism (all is one), panentheism (God is in all) and pantheism (all is God). The idea of a New Age has been traced back to the mid-eighteenth century, to the poet and artist William Blake.
One ‘New Ager’, Jeremy Tarcher, the publisher of Marilyn Ferguson’s influential New Age book The Aquarian Conspiracy, describes four concepts that underlie much of the New Age philosophy:
(i) the everyday world and our personal consciousness are manifestations of a large ‘divine’ reality;
(ii) we have a hidden higher self that reflects or is connected to this reality;
(iii) this higher self can be awakened and assume a central part of our everyday lives; and
(iv) this awakening is the goal or purpose of human life.
The New Age philosophy is not new, and it is not a movement - it is far too diffuse and amorphous to be called a movement. What in the fifties was called ‘occult’, was called ‘mind expansion’ in the sixties, and in the eighties and nineties is ‘New Age’. It includes crystal healing, chanelling, astrology, Tarot, Tantric Yoga, earth worship, creative visualisation, transcendental meditation, hypnotherapy, theosophy, Eastern mysticism - the list is almost endless. Some Christians have over-reacted to it. Constance Cumbey writes that, ‘for the first time in history there is a viable movement - the New Age movement - that truly meets all the scriptural requirements for the antichrist and the political movement that will bring him on the world scene’. Cumbey falls into the trap of what the British philosopher Karl Popper describes as the ‘conspiracy theory of society' and in doing so she trivialises both history and biblical prophecy.
The New Age movement is best seen, not as a conspiracy, but as a shift in world-view.
There is no doubt that some of the New Age movement is not only dangerous, it could even be described as demonic, but that is not an excuse to abdicate our responsibility to care for God’s earth. As Christians we need to be on our guard against New Age thinking and its subtle ideas and influences, but we also need to be able to learn from what is good in it. Those involved in the green movement and in environmental action need to have a distinctly Christian world-view worked out, from which they can discern, critique and sift the New Age ideas that might try to creep up on them.
Many are involved in the so-called New Age movement because they have seen the futility of our contemporary ideas: economic growth at all costs, and technology as an answer to all our problems - and are looking for a more satisfying world-view. This is something that Christianity does have to offer. Indeed, Christianity is the only coherent and consistent world-view there is. Those who do not adhere to the Christian world-view will inevitably struggle to find meaning. Ultimately, it is only Christianity that has the answers that ‘New Agers’ are looking for.
There is no doubt about it that some New Agers are involved in the green movement and involved in environmental action, but that does not mean that all involved in it are New Agers, or that Christians should not be involved. Mormons do door-to-door visiting, but not all who are involved in door-to-door visiting are Mormons, and it doesn’t mean that Christians should never ‘door knock’. Video watching is part of our materialistic hedonistic society, but that doesn’t mean Christians should never watch videos.
New Age or not, Christians should be involved. The earth is the Lord’s-not the New Agers’ - and he has given it to us to care for. He has called us to be involved in his world; it is not a responsibility we can shirk. Like it or not we are inextricably linked with this planet. We are, after all, earthlings. We were created from the earth (Gen 2:7, 3:19; cf Eccles 3:20; Job 10:9), given the task to care for the earth (Gen 1:26,2:15); and it was humanity’s fall that resulted in the cursing of the earth (Gen 3:17); we have the task of taking the gospel of reconciliation to all the earth (Mk 16:15); and it is our liberation as sons of God, at the return of Jesus, that will release the earth from its frustration (Rom 8:21).
Environmental action is seen by some Christians as synonymous with participation in the New Age movement, and hence they steer clear of any involvement.
But what is the New Age movement? Its name is based on the idea underlying much of the ‘movement’, namely, that we are looking forward to a ‘new age’ in which people will see things in a different light from the present age. This is sometimes called the ‘new consciousness’. However the term New Age is a misnomer. It is not new, but rather a hotch-potch of very old ideas including monism (all is one), panentheism (God is in all) and pantheism (all is God). The idea of a New Age has been traced back to the mid-eighteenth century, to the poet and artist William Blake.
One ‘New Ager’, Jeremy Tarcher, the publisher of Marilyn Ferguson’s influential New Age book The Aquarian Conspiracy, describes four concepts that underlie much of the New Age philosophy:
(i) the everyday world and our personal consciousness are manifestations of a large ‘divine’ reality;
(ii) we have a hidden higher self that reflects or is connected to this reality;
(iii) this higher self can be awakened and assume a central part of our everyday lives; and
(iv) this awakening is the goal or purpose of human life.
The New Age philosophy is not new, and it is not a movement - it is far too diffuse and amorphous to be called a movement. What in the fifties was called ‘occult’, was called ‘mind expansion’ in the sixties, and in the eighties and nineties is ‘New Age’. It includes crystal healing, chanelling, astrology, Tarot, Tantric Yoga, earth worship, creative visualisation, transcendental meditation, hypnotherapy, theosophy, Eastern mysticism - the list is almost endless. Some Christians have over-reacted to it. Constance Cumbey writes that, ‘for the first time in history there is a viable movement - the New Age movement - that truly meets all the scriptural requirements for the antichrist and the political movement that will bring him on the world scene’. Cumbey falls into the trap of what the British philosopher Karl Popper describes as the ‘conspiracy theory of society' and in doing so she trivialises both history and biblical prophecy.
The New Age movement is best seen, not as a conspiracy, but as a shift in world-view.
There is no doubt that some of the New Age movement is not only dangerous, it could even be described as demonic, but that is not an excuse to abdicate our responsibility to care for God’s earth. As Christians we need to be on our guard against New Age thinking and its subtle ideas and influences, but we also need to be able to learn from what is good in it. Those involved in the green movement and in environmental action need to have a distinctly Christian world-view worked out, from which they can discern, critique and sift the New Age ideas that might try to creep up on them.
Many are involved in the so-called New Age movement because they have seen the futility of our contemporary ideas: economic growth at all costs, and technology as an answer to all our problems - and are looking for a more satisfying world-view. This is something that Christianity does have to offer. Indeed, Christianity is the only coherent and consistent world-view there is. Those who do not adhere to the Christian world-view will inevitably struggle to find meaning. Ultimately, it is only Christianity that has the answers that ‘New Agers’ are looking for.
There is no doubt about it that some New Agers are involved in the green movement and involved in environmental action, but that does not mean that all involved in it are New Agers, or that Christians should not be involved. Mormons do door-to-door visiting, but not all who are involved in door-to-door visiting are Mormons, and it doesn’t mean that Christians should never ‘door knock’. Video watching is part of our materialistic hedonistic society, but that doesn’t mean Christians should never watch videos.
New Age or not, Christians should be involved. The earth is the Lord’s-not the New Agers’ - and he has given it to us to care for. He has called us to be involved in his world; it is not a responsibility we can shirk. Like it or not we are inextricably linked with this planet. We are, after all, earthlings. We were created from the earth (Gen 2:7, 3:19; cf Eccles 3:20; Job 10:9), given the task to care for the earth (Gen 1:26,2:15); and it was humanity’s fall that resulted in the cursing of the earth (Gen 3:17); we have the task of taking the gospel of reconciliation to all the earth (Mk 16:15); and it is our liberation as sons of God, at the return of Jesus, that will release the earth from its frustration (Rom 8:21).
Monday, 9 April 2007
Odds and sods
Friedbeef's tech has a list of 41 places to get free books on-line.
Owlb's alter ego EconoMix has a blog new blog: bizmixture for use.
MakeUseOf has an excellent list of Mozilla Firefox tweaks. As if any more reasons are needed to switch to Firefox!
A couple of new search engines:
Lifehack looks at a few writing applications for bloggers - I occasionally use scribefire, previously known as performancing.
This looks like a great idea - though I have yet to try it out - send future email [HT lifehack]. It allows you to 'send messages to yourself and have them delivered on any date and time' and idel way to rememebr birthdays, anniversaries and assignment deadlines!
Got MacEnvy? Then try Flyakite to make your XP look like Mac OSX [HT MakeUseOf]
Owlb's alter ego EconoMix has a blog new blog: bizmixture for use.
MakeUseOf has an excellent list of Mozilla Firefox tweaks. As if any more reasons are needed to switch to Firefox!
A couple of new search engines:
- alpha from Yahoo!
- blackle which I think looks pretty sleek! Though looking black it claims to be green!
Lifehack looks at a few writing applications for bloggers - I occasionally use scribefire, previously known as performancing.
This looks like a great idea - though I have yet to try it out - send future email [HT lifehack]. It allows you to 'send messages to yourself and have them delivered on any date and time' and idel way to rememebr birthdays, anniversaries and assignment deadlines!
Got MacEnvy? Then try Flyakite to make your XP look like Mac OSX [HT MakeUseOf]
Sunday, 8 April 2007
Links lost!
Last night I changed my template - and disaster struck I lost all my links etc. I've changed my template before and not lost them, so I don't know what happened. I've made an attempt to put some of them back - but it my take a few days to restore them all.
Saturday, 7 April 2007
Dooyeweerd interview from 1974
Glenn Friesen has translated an interview with Dooyeweerd by Magnus Verbrugge from Sept 1974. There are also mp3 extracts from the interview.
Also on Glenn's site are the following recent additions:
Also on Glenn's site are the following recent additions:
Friday, 6 April 2007
Christians - the reluctant greens V
Dualism
Dividing life into sacred and secular, spiritual and non-spiritual, provides the Christian with the most common excuse for non-involvement.
Dualism is rooted in Greek philosophy and in Plato (427-347 BC) in particular; it is alien to the Scriptures. According to Plato, reality is composed of two separate realms, the material and the spiritual. The spiritual realm was thought to be superior to the material. Plato’s ideas and thinking had a tremendous impact on the early church fathers. Justin Marty (ca 100-165) even described Plato as a Christian before Christ. Many Christians are unconsciously influenced by these Platonic ideas, and consequently, so-called ‘spiritual’ activities such as worship, prayer and evangelism are regarded as more important than business, politics or caring for the earth.
This separation of life into sacred and secular, or spiritual and material, is nowhere to be found in the Old or New Testaments. Indeed the biblical evidence is very much to the contrary: all of life is spiritual. Six times in Genesis 1 God affirmed the goodness of the material realm. Elsewhere, we find that God loved the world so much that he sent his son to redeem it; as we have already seen, the cross vindicates creation; Jesus, God’s son, became human and his resurrection body was a physical one - he was not a disembodied spirit (cf 1 Jn 1:1ff); and it is this material realm that will be redeemed and restored at the consummation of all things.
There is no dualism in Scripture. Politics, environmental action, walking and planting trees are just as much spiritual activities as prayer, praise and speaking in tongues. Abraham Kuyper summed it up like this: ‘There is not an inch of secular life of which Christ does not say “It belongs to Me.’” It is by failing to grasp this that many Christians have come to regard some things as more religious than others, and this is reflected in how they choose to lead their lives and occupy their time, and indeed where their commitment lies. Neglect of caring for the earth is an inevitable consequence. And yet God declares ‘The earth is mine’!
Dividing life into sacred and secular, spiritual and non-spiritual, provides the Christian with the most common excuse for non-involvement.
Dualism is rooted in Greek philosophy and in Plato (427-347 BC) in particular; it is alien to the Scriptures. According to Plato, reality is composed of two separate realms, the material and the spiritual. The spiritual realm was thought to be superior to the material. Plato’s ideas and thinking had a tremendous impact on the early church fathers. Justin Marty (ca 100-165) even described Plato as a Christian before Christ. Many Christians are unconsciously influenced by these Platonic ideas, and consequently, so-called ‘spiritual’ activities such as worship, prayer and evangelism are regarded as more important than business, politics or caring for the earth.
This separation of life into sacred and secular, or spiritual and material, is nowhere to be found in the Old or New Testaments. Indeed the biblical evidence is very much to the contrary: all of life is spiritual. Six times in Genesis 1 God affirmed the goodness of the material realm. Elsewhere, we find that God loved the world so much that he sent his son to redeem it; as we have already seen, the cross vindicates creation; Jesus, God’s son, became human and his resurrection body was a physical one - he was not a disembodied spirit (cf 1 Jn 1:1ff); and it is this material realm that will be redeemed and restored at the consummation of all things.
There is no dualism in Scripture. Politics, environmental action, walking and planting trees are just as much spiritual activities as prayer, praise and speaking in tongues. Abraham Kuyper summed it up like this: ‘There is not an inch of secular life of which Christ does not say “It belongs to Me.’” It is by failing to grasp this that many Christians have come to regard some things as more religious than others, and this is reflected in how they choose to lead their lives and occupy their time, and indeed where their commitment lies. Neglect of caring for the earth is an inevitable consequence. And yet God declares ‘The earth is mine’!
A new reformational philosophy Wiki
I have just spotted a new wiki devoted to reformational philosophy. it looks like most of the material is taken from wikipedia at present. It has been a small battle to get reformational scholars onto the main wikipedia so it will be interesting to see how this develops.
Update: This looks like it is another mirror for the main wikipedia site.
Update: This looks like it is another mirror for the main wikipedia site.Thursday, 5 April 2007
Wednesday, 4 April 2007
Christians - the reluctant greens IV
The size of the problems
The complexity of environmental problems are too much for most people, Christians included. There are no simple answers for acid rain, North Sea pollution, global warming and nuclear waste dumping - and we certainly can’t turn to a few Bible verses to find an answer. Hence many Christians are content to ‘leave it to the experts’, while they get on with prayer and evangelism. However, by doing nothing we are part of the problem. By being ostriches we disobey God’s call to us to be salt and light. As Christians we have a responsibility to be obedient to God, and to call the institutions and structures in society to do the same; part of this will be to call them to care for the earth. Edmund Burke once said that ‘Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little.’ We can do something, despite the size of the problems, because Christ is in us and his Spirit is equipping us for the task.
The complexity of environmental problems are too much for most people, Christians included. There are no simple answers for acid rain, North Sea pollution, global warming and nuclear waste dumping - and we certainly can’t turn to a few Bible verses to find an answer. Hence many Christians are content to ‘leave it to the experts’, while they get on with prayer and evangelism. However, by doing nothing we are part of the problem. By being ostriches we disobey God’s call to us to be salt and light. As Christians we have a responsibility to be obedient to God, and to call the institutions and structures in society to do the same; part of this will be to call them to care for the earth. Edmund Burke once said that ‘Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little.’ We can do something, despite the size of the problems, because Christ is in us and his Spirit is equipping us for the task.
Tuesday, 3 April 2007
Jesus and his own transport
Bruce Wearne has a piece in Sight magazine:
More 'hunches' about the death and resurrection of Jesus are to follow.
This is the story of the final preparation for the final leg of Jesus' journey to Jerusalem. The question is: Why should Jesus ride on a donkey?
More 'hunches' about the death and resurrection of Jesus are to follow.
powered by performancing firefox
Monday, 2 April 2007
Odds and sods
Biblical Archaeology Review has a fascinating article on 'losing faith: how scholarship affects scholars'
Notes on Richard Mouw's Abraham Kuyper Prize Lecture are here [HT prosthesis]
Notes on Richard Mouw's Abraham Kuyper Prize Lecture are here [HT prosthesis]
powered by performancing firefox
Christians - the reluctant greens III
Misunderstanding the message of the gospel of the kingdom
The Bible is full of the kingdom of God; it is a theme that runs through it from cover to cover.
The proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom was central to Jesus’ mission: ‘the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news’ (Mk 1:45). It was exactly the same message that John the Baptist proclaimed (Matt 3:2), and the same one Jesus entrusted to his disciples (Matt 10:7; Mk 16:16).
Unfortunately, many have misunderstood the relevance of the kingdom - it is seen as something far off and other-worldly. Jesus appears to support this idea; when confronted by Pilate at his trial, he says, ‘My kingdom is not of this world’ (In 18:36). Taken out of context this saying does imply an other-worldly kingdom, but read in context its meaning becomes apparent. Jesus declares that the kingdom does not reflect fallen worldly values: his disciples will not take part in violent rebellion. The kingdom’s authority is derived from heaven and does not come from the fallen power structures of the world.
The message of the kingdom was, and is, a radical message. John Howard Yoder remarks that ‘Jesus’ concept of the kingdom was borrowed extensively from the prophetic understanding of the Jubilee year’. Six themes characterised Jubilee (Lev 25), and we can see these same themes in Jesus’ kingdom message:
(i) celebration-it was a time for jubilation;
(ii) faith in God’s provision-they were totally dependent
upon him to provide for their every need;
(iii) the remission of debts;
(iv) the liberation of slaves;
(v) the redistribution of property; and
(vi) rest.
Jesus’ first public sermon in Luke’s Gospel is sometimes called the ‘Nazareth Manifesto’ (Lk 4:18-21). Howard Snyder suggests that it was preached in a year of Jubilee (AD26-27). In it Jesus announced the arrival of the kingdom - in fact he declared himself to be the manifestation of the kingdom, by declaring ‘Today, this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing’. Jesus also took up the Jubilee themes and made them part of his message. In Jesus the Jubilee age had dawned; he brought celebration, faith, remission of debts (Lk 11 :4; Matt 18:23), liberation (GaI5:1), the redistribution of property (Lk 12:32-34; Mk 10:21; Lk 19:8-10) and rest (Lk 12:22-31; Heb 4:9). It was the proclamation of a new order and it was not limited to humanity. The Jubilee and sabbath year legislation showed God’s concern not only for humanity but also for the non~human creation; it included rest for the animals and the land (Lev 25:5,6). In the same way Jesus commanded the disciples, and hence us, to take the gospel to all of creation (Mk 16:15). The word creation [Gk: ktsis] is used both of the act and product of creation, and this also, therefore, includes all the created orders. Jesus may have had in mind the Old Testament prophets when he gave this command to his disciples. Ezekiel prophesied to the mountains (Ezek 6:1ff; 36:lff), to the land (Ezek 7:1ff) and even to dry inanimate bones (Ezek 37:4). The book of Isaiah even speaks of trees clapping their hands, and the mountains and hills bursting into song in response to the word of their creator (Is 55:12). We fail in our duty of proclaiming the kingdom if we restrict it to humanity. When God created the earth, he created it as one of order. It is the Christian’s task in proclaiming the kingdom to ensure every aspect of crea tion is obedient to that creational order; if it is not, we are to call it to repentance.
The kingdom is one of justice, peace and joy (Rom 14:17). The animals, the earth, the institutions and structures of society need to have that message proclaimed to them, whether by words or works or wonders (Rom 15:19) so that they too can experience the rule and order of God that is the kingdom, and then one day come into the same liberty that the children of God can now enjoy.
The Bible is full of the kingdom of God; it is a theme that runs through it from cover to cover.
The proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom was central to Jesus’ mission: ‘the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news’ (Mk 1:45). It was exactly the same message that John the Baptist proclaimed (Matt 3:2), and the same one Jesus entrusted to his disciples (Matt 10:7; Mk 16:16).
Unfortunately, many have misunderstood the relevance of the kingdom - it is seen as something far off and other-worldly. Jesus appears to support this idea; when confronted by Pilate at his trial, he says, ‘My kingdom is not of this world’ (In 18:36). Taken out of context this saying does imply an other-worldly kingdom, but read in context its meaning becomes apparent. Jesus declares that the kingdom does not reflect fallen worldly values: his disciples will not take part in violent rebellion. The kingdom’s authority is derived from heaven and does not come from the fallen power structures of the world.
The message of the kingdom was, and is, a radical message. John Howard Yoder remarks that ‘Jesus’ concept of the kingdom was borrowed extensively from the prophetic understanding of the Jubilee year’. Six themes characterised Jubilee (Lev 25), and we can see these same themes in Jesus’ kingdom message:
(i) celebration-it was a time for jubilation;
(ii) faith in God’s provision-they were totally dependent
upon him to provide for their every need;
(iii) the remission of debts;
(iv) the liberation of slaves;
(v) the redistribution of property; and
(vi) rest.
Jesus’ first public sermon in Luke’s Gospel is sometimes called the ‘Nazareth Manifesto’ (Lk 4:18-21). Howard Snyder suggests that it was preached in a year of Jubilee (AD26-27). In it Jesus announced the arrival of the kingdom - in fact he declared himself to be the manifestation of the kingdom, by declaring ‘Today, this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing’. Jesus also took up the Jubilee themes and made them part of his message. In Jesus the Jubilee age had dawned; he brought celebration, faith, remission of debts (Lk 11 :4; Matt 18:23), liberation (GaI5:1), the redistribution of property (Lk 12:32-34; Mk 10:21; Lk 19:8-10) and rest (Lk 12:22-31; Heb 4:9). It was the proclamation of a new order and it was not limited to humanity. The Jubilee and sabbath year legislation showed God’s concern not only for humanity but also for the non~human creation; it included rest for the animals and the land (Lev 25:5,6). In the same way Jesus commanded the disciples, and hence us, to take the gospel to all of creation (Mk 16:15). The word creation [Gk: ktsis] is used both of the act and product of creation, and this also, therefore, includes all the created orders. Jesus may have had in mind the Old Testament prophets when he gave this command to his disciples. Ezekiel prophesied to the mountains (Ezek 6:1ff; 36:lff), to the land (Ezek 7:1ff) and even to dry inanimate bones (Ezek 37:4). The book of Isaiah even speaks of trees clapping their hands, and the mountains and hills bursting into song in response to the word of their creator (Is 55:12). We fail in our duty of proclaiming the kingdom if we restrict it to humanity. When God created the earth, he created it as one of order. It is the Christian’s task in proclaiming the kingdom to ensure every aspect of crea tion is obedient to that creational order; if it is not, we are to call it to repentance.
The kingdom is one of justice, peace and joy (Rom 14:17). The animals, the earth, the institutions and structures of society need to have that message proclaimed to them, whether by words or works or wonders (Rom 15:19) so that they too can experience the rule and order of God that is the kingdom, and then one day come into the same liberty that the children of God can now enjoy.
Tuesday, 27 March 2007
Slavery = climate change?
Andrew Basden has a fascinating table here looking at some of the reasons against road use and air traffic - they look remarkably like those used against the abolition of slavery!
powered by performancing firefox
Sunday, 25 March 2007
Saturday, 24 March 2007
Christianity and society
The Kuyper Foundation's journal Christianity and Society is now to be produced solely as a pdf. Back issues are available here.There are some great articles including Roger Henderson on how 'Abraham Kuyper became a kuyperian' (vol 12 (4)) and Colin Wright on 'Dooyeweerd made easy (well ...easier)' (vol 9(1)).
There is no subscription charge for downloading and printing off the journal. However, we ask those who do download it to consider making a donation to the Kuyper Foundation to enable us to continue our work.
Christians - the reluctant greens II
1. A failure to grasp the full implications of the cross
The cross and all that it signifies lies at the heart of Christianity. It was the only thing that the apostle Paul wanted to boast about (Gal 6: 14). The word ’cross’ has rich theological meaning and is used by Paul to symbolise all that Christ’s suffering, death and resurrection has achieved1 (cf 1 Cor 1:17,18; GaI5:11,6:12,14; Eph 2:16; Phil 2:8,3:18; Col 1:20, 2:14; for the sake of argument I am assuming Pauline authorship of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and the pastoral epistles). Paul, alone among early Christian writers, used the word ‘cross’ in this way.
Many Christians associate the cross with personal salvation – a term that never occurs in the New Testament. It is this association that undermines any desire for environmental action. Environmental action is seen to be totally irrelevant to the cross; the work of the cross deals with individuals’ sin and enables people to have a relationship with God. Hence the Christian’s priority should be to preach the gospel and bring individuals to God, or so the argument runs.
The cross does deal with the sin of individuals and it does enable them to have a relationship with God and in this sense it is personal. However, to restrict it to that limits the cross; the cross is good news for all of creation! It is all-embracing; it touches every area and aspect of life.
The work of Jesus on the cross is central to Christianity. It follows then that it is foundational to a distinctly Christian environmental ethic. Any environmental ethic that bypasses the cross forfeits the right to be called Christian. The apostle Paul in his epistles brings to light several theological implications which have great relevance to environmental action.
(i) The cross is cosmic in scope
To limit the work of the cross to dealing with ‘personal’ sin or salvation emasculates it. Jesus achieved so much more than this. Paul writing about the cosmic Christ in Colossians gives us its full impact.2 He describes Jesus as: the image of the invisible God; the firstborn of all creation; the creator of the heavens and earth; the means of, and the reason for, the creation of all things; the pre-existent one; the sustainer of all things; the head of the church; the firstborn of the dead; the fullness of God. It is in this context that he says of Christ, that he is the one, ‘to reconcile all things [Gk: ta panta] to himself, making peace through the blood of the cross’.
Not only is he the cosmic Christ, but his work on the cross is cosmic in scope. It reconciles all things (ta panta). Some theologians have tried to restrict this reconciliation to humanity, by suggesting that ta panta is the human creation. This is unjustifiable for two at least reasons. First, ta panta is defined in v20b as ‘things on earth or things in heaven’, and secondly and perhaps more conclusively, the use of ta panta elsewhere (see, for example, Heb 2:8-10 and Eph 1 :10) indicates that it means all things without restriction. Oliver O’Donovan describes ta panta as ‘the universe as a whole’. Eduard Lohse, commentating on Colossians 1:15-20, states that it ‘emphasizes the universal significance of the Christ-event by exhibiting its cosmic dimensions and by speaking of salvation for the whole world, including the whole of creation’. Hence nothing is exempt from its power; it has implications for the whole of the created order, whether it is humans, animals, institutions, the powers, Satan or the earth. It is on this foundation that any Christian environmental ethic must rest.
(ii) The cross vindicates creation
We have already seen that the cross redeems creation; it also declares God’s love for his world. ‘God so loved the world [Gk: kosmos] that he gave his Son’ (Jn 3:16). Because all of the creation is included in the work of the cross it shows the love that God has for it. It is in the cross that God reaffirms his ownership of the earth (Ps 24:1; Job 39). Humanity is not to be redeemed apart from the created order but with it5 Indeed the earth will be the scene of God’s total completion and consummation of the ages-although it will be a renewed and transformed heaven and earth (Rev 21: 1-2).
(iii) The cross deals with the consequences of the fall
When Adam and Eve fell in Genesis chapter 3, it had consequences not only for their relationship with humanity and God but also their relationship with creation. The earth became cursed: ‘Cursed is the ground because of you’ (Gen 3:17). There is some debate about the nature and extent of Adam’s ‘fall’. Did Adam’s rebellion affect humanity alone and leave the rest of creation unaltered or did it result in a fall of creation? Walther Eichrodt describes it as a decisive event which has ‘the characteristics of a “Fall”, that is, of a falling out of line of the development willed by God’. Several things are evident from the Genesis account. The fall had consequences not only for Adam and Eve’s relationship with God and each other but also with the earth: it became cursed as a consequence of the fall (Gen 3:17). On whether this curse on the soil was intended as a curse on the rest of creation the Scriptures are silent. It may be that Paul’s description of the creation as ‘subjected to frustration’ (Rom 8:20) is a reference to fallen creation. One thing, however, is clear: all relationships were in some way ruptured-the pre-fall shalom was broken. Sin affects the whole of the earthly creation; the whole of the created order suffers, and as a consequence the whole of the created order is in need of redemption.
The cross dealt with all the consequences of the fall. On the cross Christ completed a cosmic reconciliation (2 Cor 5:19), the relationships between humanity, God and the earth, were restored and the barriers of hostility were destroyed (Eph 2:14-18). We can once more experience shalom. This, though, has not happened automatically-it is to be fulfilled by the ministry of the body of Christ. We have been entrusted with this ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18). We are to bring shalom to the earth (Matt 5:9) by proclaiming the cross and resurrection of Christ.
(iv) The cross declares God’s victory over the powers
Paul’s use of the term ‘powers’ (Rom 8:23; Eph 6:12; 1 Pet 3:22) is ambiguous. Some take it to mean unseen demonic forces, others identify the powers as certain structures in society, such as the state, politics, the market economy, education and multinational corporations. It is perhaps best to see it referring both to unseen forces and the structures in society. These forces control and direct the structures and orders of society. It is these forces that lie behind much of the pollution and rape of God’s earth.
These powers, however, were created by Christ and were not created evil (Col 1:16)-they are part of God’s good creation. In some inexplicable way they became deformed by the fall. Jesus’ victory on the cross defeated the powers; he stripped them, exposed them to ridicule and led them out as a conquered enemy in a victory parade (Col 2:15),10 so that when he returns again they will be reconciled to him and will conform to the order he intended them to have. The structures of society will no longer be tainted by the fall. But now, because they have been dethroned by the cross, these powers have the potential to be transformed so that they can submit to the lordship of Christ.
(v) The cross makes us realists
The cross is also vital because it keeps us from two dangerous tendencies: liberalism and triumphalism.
Liberalism. Liberalism, with its skepticism of the miraculous and its optimistic view of humanity’s ability to save itself, dominated European Protestantism for over five decades. Its view of ‘progress’ saw the rise of a ‘social gospel’ and a kingdom that would be established on earth by human endeavour. But liberalism is a corruption of the truth, because the kingdom of God is the rule and reign of God which cannot be established by humanity. Furthermore, the gospel of the cross is not a ‘social gospel’ that sees Jesus merely as an example. Jesus does not only provide us with an example of how to cope under oppression or under injustice, although he does that. What we need is not an example to follow, but liberation. It is in the cross that Jesus provides us with a way out, that is, liberation and redemption from sin and all its consequences, both personal and global.
Triumphalism. An equal, if not opposite, error is triumphalism, the ‘Hallelujah! We are saved-we no longer need to suffer’ syndrome that characterises much of the ‘prosperity gospel’. It was in the very act of Jesus’ suffering and apparent defeat that the kingdom was established. The cross was not an easy victory; it involved the greatest act of sacrifice and suffering the world has ever seen. Victory came through suffering. The cross reminds us that in our struggle to care for the earth there will be no easy answers; in fact it will be an uphill struggle all the way, until Jesus finally returns and consummates what he achieved on the cross.
The cross then has manifold implications. Its significance to Christianity cannot be overemphasised. By failing to grasp its full implications we water-down Christianity; it becomes domesticated and irrelevant to God’s creation and the kingdom of God becomes other-worldly. It is to this misunderstanding of the gospel of the kingdom that I will look at in another post.
The cross and all that it signifies lies at the heart of Christianity. It was the only thing that the apostle Paul wanted to boast about (Gal 6: 14). The word ’cross’ has rich theological meaning and is used by Paul to symbolise all that Christ’s suffering, death and resurrection has achieved1 (cf 1 Cor 1:17,18; GaI5:11,6:12,14; Eph 2:16; Phil 2:8,3:18; Col 1:20, 2:14; for the sake of argument I am assuming Pauline authorship of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and the pastoral epistles). Paul, alone among early Christian writers, used the word ‘cross’ in this way.
Many Christians associate the cross with personal salvation – a term that never occurs in the New Testament. It is this association that undermines any desire for environmental action. Environmental action is seen to be totally irrelevant to the cross; the work of the cross deals with individuals’ sin and enables people to have a relationship with God. Hence the Christian’s priority should be to preach the gospel and bring individuals to God, or so the argument runs.
The cross does deal with the sin of individuals and it does enable them to have a relationship with God and in this sense it is personal. However, to restrict it to that limits the cross; the cross is good news for all of creation! It is all-embracing; it touches every area and aspect of life.
The work of Jesus on the cross is central to Christianity. It follows then that it is foundational to a distinctly Christian environmental ethic. Any environmental ethic that bypasses the cross forfeits the right to be called Christian. The apostle Paul in his epistles brings to light several theological implications which have great relevance to environmental action.
(i) The cross is cosmic in scope
To limit the work of the cross to dealing with ‘personal’ sin or salvation emasculates it. Jesus achieved so much more than this. Paul writing about the cosmic Christ in Colossians gives us its full impact.2 He describes Jesus as: the image of the invisible God; the firstborn of all creation; the creator of the heavens and earth; the means of, and the reason for, the creation of all things; the pre-existent one; the sustainer of all things; the head of the church; the firstborn of the dead; the fullness of God. It is in this context that he says of Christ, that he is the one, ‘to reconcile all things [Gk: ta panta] to himself, making peace through the blood of the cross’.
Not only is he the cosmic Christ, but his work on the cross is cosmic in scope. It reconciles all things (ta panta). Some theologians have tried to restrict this reconciliation to humanity, by suggesting that ta panta is the human creation. This is unjustifiable for two at least reasons. First, ta panta is defined in v20b as ‘things on earth or things in heaven’, and secondly and perhaps more conclusively, the use of ta panta elsewhere (see, for example, Heb 2:8-10 and Eph 1 :10) indicates that it means all things without restriction. Oliver O’Donovan describes ta panta as ‘the universe as a whole’. Eduard Lohse, commentating on Colossians 1:15-20, states that it ‘emphasizes the universal significance of the Christ-event by exhibiting its cosmic dimensions and by speaking of salvation for the whole world, including the whole of creation’. Hence nothing is exempt from its power; it has implications for the whole of the created order, whether it is humans, animals, institutions, the powers, Satan or the earth. It is on this foundation that any Christian environmental ethic must rest.
(ii) The cross vindicates creation
We have already seen that the cross redeems creation; it also declares God’s love for his world. ‘God so loved the world [Gk: kosmos] that he gave his Son’ (Jn 3:16). Because all of the creation is included in the work of the cross it shows the love that God has for it. It is in the cross that God reaffirms his ownership of the earth (Ps 24:1; Job 39). Humanity is not to be redeemed apart from the created order but with it5 Indeed the earth will be the scene of God’s total completion and consummation of the ages-although it will be a renewed and transformed heaven and earth (Rev 21: 1-2).
(iii) The cross deals with the consequences of the fall
When Adam and Eve fell in Genesis chapter 3, it had consequences not only for their relationship with humanity and God but also their relationship with creation. The earth became cursed: ‘Cursed is the ground because of you’ (Gen 3:17). There is some debate about the nature and extent of Adam’s ‘fall’. Did Adam’s rebellion affect humanity alone and leave the rest of creation unaltered or did it result in a fall of creation? Walther Eichrodt describes it as a decisive event which has ‘the characteristics of a “Fall”, that is, of a falling out of line of the development willed by God’. Several things are evident from the Genesis account. The fall had consequences not only for Adam and Eve’s relationship with God and each other but also with the earth: it became cursed as a consequence of the fall (Gen 3:17). On whether this curse on the soil was intended as a curse on the rest of creation the Scriptures are silent. It may be that Paul’s description of the creation as ‘subjected to frustration’ (Rom 8:20) is a reference to fallen creation. One thing, however, is clear: all relationships were in some way ruptured-the pre-fall shalom was broken. Sin affects the whole of the earthly creation; the whole of the created order suffers, and as a consequence the whole of the created order is in need of redemption.
The cross dealt with all the consequences of the fall. On the cross Christ completed a cosmic reconciliation (2 Cor 5:19), the relationships between humanity, God and the earth, were restored and the barriers of hostility were destroyed (Eph 2:14-18). We can once more experience shalom. This, though, has not happened automatically-it is to be fulfilled by the ministry of the body of Christ. We have been entrusted with this ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18). We are to bring shalom to the earth (Matt 5:9) by proclaiming the cross and resurrection of Christ.
(iv) The cross declares God’s victory over the powers
Paul’s use of the term ‘powers’ (Rom 8:23; Eph 6:12; 1 Pet 3:22) is ambiguous. Some take it to mean unseen demonic forces, others identify the powers as certain structures in society, such as the state, politics, the market economy, education and multinational corporations. It is perhaps best to see it referring both to unseen forces and the structures in society. These forces control and direct the structures and orders of society. It is these forces that lie behind much of the pollution and rape of God’s earth.
These powers, however, were created by Christ and were not created evil (Col 1:16)-they are part of God’s good creation. In some inexplicable way they became deformed by the fall. Jesus’ victory on the cross defeated the powers; he stripped them, exposed them to ridicule and led them out as a conquered enemy in a victory parade (Col 2:15),10 so that when he returns again they will be reconciled to him and will conform to the order he intended them to have. The structures of society will no longer be tainted by the fall. But now, because they have been dethroned by the cross, these powers have the potential to be transformed so that they can submit to the lordship of Christ.
(v) The cross makes us realists
The cross is also vital because it keeps us from two dangerous tendencies: liberalism and triumphalism.
Liberalism. Liberalism, with its skepticism of the miraculous and its optimistic view of humanity’s ability to save itself, dominated European Protestantism for over five decades. Its view of ‘progress’ saw the rise of a ‘social gospel’ and a kingdom that would be established on earth by human endeavour. But liberalism is a corruption of the truth, because the kingdom of God is the rule and reign of God which cannot be established by humanity. Furthermore, the gospel of the cross is not a ‘social gospel’ that sees Jesus merely as an example. Jesus does not only provide us with an example of how to cope under oppression or under injustice, although he does that. What we need is not an example to follow, but liberation. It is in the cross that Jesus provides us with a way out, that is, liberation and redemption from sin and all its consequences, both personal and global.
Triumphalism. An equal, if not opposite, error is triumphalism, the ‘Hallelujah! We are saved-we no longer need to suffer’ syndrome that characterises much of the ‘prosperity gospel’. It was in the very act of Jesus’ suffering and apparent defeat that the kingdom was established. The cross was not an easy victory; it involved the greatest act of sacrifice and suffering the world has ever seen. Victory came through suffering. The cross reminds us that in our struggle to care for the earth there will be no easy answers; in fact it will be an uphill struggle all the way, until Jesus finally returns and consummates what he achieved on the cross.
The cross then has manifold implications. Its significance to Christianity cannot be overemphasised. By failing to grasp its full implications we water-down Christianity; it becomes domesticated and irrelevant to God’s creation and the kingdom of God becomes other-worldly. It is to this misunderstanding of the gospel of the kingdom that I will look at in another post.
Thursday, 22 March 2007
Christians - the reluctant greens
In 1990 I co-wrote a book with Christopher Droop called The earth is the Lord's (Regius Press, 1990). In the intrests of recycling I thought I post some excerpts from the book.There have been many good theological and sociological studies on the reasons for the churches’ neglect of social issues. However, there has not, to our knowledge, been any study that deals specifically with Christians’ reluctance to get involved in environmental action. [This was written in 1990 when this was the case – Calvin B. De Witt has since written on this subject.] The purpose of this chapter is twofold: first to examine why Christians are reluctant greens, and secondly to expose and challenge non-biblical perspectives on life, so that the path can be cleared for the construction of a truly Christian response to environmental and ecological issues.
It is not the case that Christians have always been opposed to involvement in politics or social action. William Wilberforce, Lord Shaftesbury, Elizabeth Fry and the Salvation Army are testimony to the contrary. They were involved because of their Christian commitment. The reasons for what has been called the ‘Great Reversal’ (i.e. the withdrawal of Christian social involvement) are manifold. John Stott in Issues Facing Christians Today suggests five reasons:
- reaction against liberalism in the church;
- reaction against the so-called ‘social gospel’;
- the pessimism that followed World War One;
- the spread of pre-millennial dispensationalism, the modern idea that Jesus will ‘rapture’ the church at any moment, with the prediction that the world would get worse until Jesus finally returns; and
- the rise of middle-class Christianity and the resulting identification of Christianity with middle-class values.
Wednesday, 21 March 2007
Odds and sods
Apple Mac have hit back at the Vista wow adds:
[HT Digital inspiration]
Douglas Groothuis has another post on reading and a link to a paper by Jeram Bars on Francis Schaeffer.
Macht has some great recent posts on:
Christian eugenics , Christians and eugenics, redux and What is a creature?
21st Century reformation has a great video of Thelonious Monk playing Blue Monk
Short of blogging ideas? Then have a look at 101 great ideas that will make your blog sizzle from ihelpyoublog [HT lifehack]
David Field has a look at Tom Wright's views.
It looks like Google now offers a Presentation tool.
[HT Digital inspiration]
Douglas Groothuis has another post on reading and a link to a paper by Jeram Bars on Francis Schaeffer.
Macht has some great recent posts on:
Christian eugenics , Christians and eugenics, redux and What is a creature?
21st Century reformation has a great video of Thelonious Monk playing Blue Monk
Short of blogging ideas? Then have a look at 101 great ideas that will make your blog sizzle from ihelpyoublog [HT lifehack]
David Field has a look at Tom Wright's views.
It looks like Google now offers a Presentation tool.
powered by performancing firefox
Saturday, 17 March 2007
Odds and sods
In July 2009 it's Jean Calvin's 500th birthday. The details for a quincentenary conference are here [HT Between two worlds]
More background on the recently deceased Herman Ridderbos are here, courtesy of PhilGons.com [HT Between two worlds]
Douglas Groothius has some tips on reading at his Constructive Curmudgeon blog. If I took seriously his point 12 I'd need a warehouse and be very poor!
Emma Darwin, Charles Darwin's wife, has her diaries online.
Free textbooks online from Freeload Press - but with adverts. [HT Google operating system]
More background on the recently deceased Herman Ridderbos are here, courtesy of PhilGons.com [HT Between two worlds]
Douglas Groothius has some tips on reading at his Constructive Curmudgeon blog. If I took seriously his point 12 I'd need a warehouse and be very poor!
Emma Darwin, Charles Darwin's wife, has her diaries online.
Free textbooks online from Freeload Press - but with adverts. [HT Google operating system]
powered by performancing firefox
Friday, 16 March 2007
ASBO Jesus
The ongoing adventures ASBO Jesus is a great new visual blog by Jon Birch (ASBO, of course, being an acronym for anti-social behaviour order). Here's a great visual aid for Creation, fall and redemption from the blog:
Tuesday, 13 March 2007
Herman Ridderbos (1909-2007)
Herman Ridderbos the Dutch theologian and author of Paul: An Outline of his Theology died last Thursday. [HT Russ Reeves]
More details are here and here.
More details are here and here.powered by performancing firefox
Thursday, 8 March 2007
The fair tracing project
World Changing brings us a piece on 'The fair tracing project':
HT Matthew Bartlett
A group of computer scientists and economic geographers in the UK put their heads together over the last few months to address a challenge in food systems design. As they see it, the Fair Trade movement faces obstacles to widespread adoption due to an ongoing divide between Northern consumers and Southern producers, as well as a lack of direct, specific information for customers about particular products. Their Fair Tracing Project proposes to enhance the growth of equitable global trade systems by adding digital tracing technology to individual items so that they can be tracked, and their stories recorded, as they move from farm to table.
HT Matthew Bartlett
powered by performancing firefox
Wednesday, 7 March 2007
Warburton on Satre mp3
Nigel Warburton, who blogs at virtual philosopher, has a short mp3 lecture on Satre's Existenialism and Humanism - or what Warburton maintains should have been called Existentialism is a Humanism.
powered by performancing firefox
Christian Perspectives in Science
Calvin College's Christian Perspective in Science Seminar Series 'explores interactions between Christian faith and scholarship in the natural and applied
sciences'. A list of past (some with audio files) and future seminars are given here.
Past seminar speakers have included Alan Padgett, Brian Leftow, Charles Adams, Jaap Klapwijk, Ted Davis and Uko Zysla.
sciences'. A list of past (some with audio files) and future seminars are given here.
Past seminar speakers have included Alan Padgett, Brian Leftow, Charles Adams, Jaap Klapwijk, Ted Davis and Uko Zysla.
powered by performancing firefox
Tuesday, 6 March 2007
Monday, 5 March 2007
Odds and sods
Charlie Cameron has now transferred all his material from numerous blogs to a wordpress site here.
Digital inspiration has a list of 10 common mistakes made by bloggers.
Technical tips: eConsultant highlights three useful sites of freeware and shareware:
More on the 'Jesus tomb':
Digital inspiration has a list of 10 common mistakes made by bloggers.
Technical tips: eConsultant highlights three useful sites of freeware and shareware:
More on the 'Jesus tomb':
- Ben Witherington
- Doug Blomberg guesting on Doug Groothius's Constructive Curmudgeon blog
powered by performancing firefox
Fashionable dictionary
The folks at Butterfliesandwheels.com has bought us a fashionable dictionary. Here are some interesting entries:
Acceptance
Nice, warm, cooperative way of evaluating ideas, much better than argument.Accuracy
Exploded concept. Foolish, Platonic notion that we can get our facts straight.Argument
Assertion
Unpleasant, testosterone-driven method of supporting one's assertions, to be avoided in favour of acceptance.
1. Essential technique, replacing the need for argument and evidence.
2. To be greeted with acceptance, rather than argument.Assumption
Something to be examined when it is our opponent's and taken for granted when it is our own.Defensive
Adjective for someone who insists on disagreeing with me, and goes on disagreeing even after I've said how right I am.Demonising
Sharply criticising something that I approve of.Education
Brutal, violent intrusion of arbitrary material into the clean innocent heads of children, which should be left empty.Elitist
Someone who knows more than I do.Ideology
Ideas we don't agree with. Probably exploitative.
powered by performancing firefox
Sunday, 4 March 2007
Talking philosophy on Dawkins
A new blog from the editors of TPM, Talking philosophy, has an interesting post on Dawkins:
At least it's not just the theists who think Dawkins is shooting atheism in the foot.
Message to Dawkins: If you want to take on religion, then there is something to be said for taking on the best versions of the arguments that can be made in its favour, not the worst versions.
At least it's not just the theists who think Dawkins is shooting atheism in the foot.
powered by performancing firefox
Saturday, 3 March 2007
mindmaps
I love mind maps and concept maps. There are some great software that enable mindmapping- i have reviewed Inspiration 8 here for the ATM.
One web-based application for mindmapping is mindomo.
Here's a sample they created to help you learn mindmapping by doing. [HT lifehack]
NB contratry to popular belief Tony Buzan didn't invent mindmapping - Porphy of Tyros got there a while before him!
One web-based application for mindmapping is mindomo.
Here's a sample they created to help you learn mindmapping by doing. [HT lifehack]
NB contratry to popular belief Tony Buzan didn't invent mindmapping - Porphy of Tyros got there a while before him!
powered by performancing firefox
Friday, 2 March 2007
Statistics and the Jesus tomb
Here are two great posts on the Jesus tomb and statistics:
- Magic Statistics
- Jack Poirier on Darrel Bock’s blog
Christianity and the environment conference mp3s
The recent conference lectures from the MacLaurin Institutute on Christianity and the environment are now available as mp3s:
- September 23rd, 2006 - Paul Capel
Paper presentation: Our Consumption of Creation: Actions and Attitudes- September 23rd, 2006 - John Nagle
Paper presentation: The Evangelical Debate Over Global Warming- September 23rd, 2006 - Gregory Poore
Paper presentation: Life Is a Miracle: The Spirituality and Philosophy of Wendell Berry- September 23rd, 2006 - David O’Hara
Paper presenation: The Nature of Nature: C.S. Lewis’ Literary Response to Henri Bergson- September 23rd, 2006 - Matthew Dickerson
Paper presentation: Beyond Romanticism: Applications of Tolkien’s Christian Agrarian Romance- September 23rd, 2006 - Ed Brown
Paper presentation: From Garden to City: Living Theologically in the- September 23rd, 2006 - David Foster
Paper presentation: Green Religion vs. the Greening of Religion- September 23rd, 2006 - Karl Johnson
Paper presentation: Church and the Environment: Common Grace, Saving Grace, and Stewardship of the Natural Environment- September 23rd, 2006 - Susan Emmerich
Closing plenary: A Faith-Based Approach to Social and Environmental Transformation: Three Case Studies From the Chesapeake Bay Watershed- September 23rd, 2006 - Rolf Bouma
Plenary address: Rules for Intelligent Tinkering: Should Nature Be Engineered?- September 23rd, 2006 - Stephen Bouma-Prediger
Plenary address: God the Homemaker and Recycler: A Biblical Case for a Green God- September 22nd, 2006 - Cal DeWitt
Keynote address: Pristine Harmony in the Ecological Economy: Dynamic Stewardship for a Dynamic World - September 23rd, 2006 - John Nagle
AoLR 2006 articles
In 2006 there were over 100 new articles on All of life redeemed. Listed here:
Baus, Gregory
Dooyeweerd's societal sphere sovereignty: neither tax based nor laissez-faire
Bert Witvoet
'Interview with Pete Steen'
Bishop, Steve
Brief Biography of Herman Dooyeweerd
Bruce Wearne
Interview with Professors Eiichi Yamamote and Michiya Murata
Bruce Wearne
Interview with Mark Roques
Bruce Wearne
Interview with Bob Goudzwaard
Bruce Wearne
Inteview with Jim Skillen
Clouser, Roy
“Faith Tectonics
Clouser, Roy
Review of Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting by John Cooper
Clouser, Roy
Review of The Challenge of Marxist and NeoMarxist Ideology for Christian Scholarship. Ed. John Vander Stelt
Clouser, Roy
"Puritanism on Authority".
Clouser, Roy
Genesis regained
Clouser, Roy
Social norms and religious belief
Clouser, Roy
Prospects for theistic science -
Eric J. Kamphof's
Masters thesis on Vollenhoven
Fernhout, Harry
Education in a pluralist society (1996)
Fernhout, Harry
Christian schooling: telling a worldview story
Goudzwaard, Bob
Christianity and economics (1996s)
Goudzwaard, Bob
Globalization, exclusion, enslavement (1996)
Goudzwaard, Bob
Bible and economy: two reflections
Gousemett, Chris
Hope of the resurrection
Gousmett, Chris
Bavinck and Kuyper on miracles
Gousmett, Chris
Humanity of Jesus
Gousmett, Chris
Jesus ate in their presence
Gousmett, Chris
Old age, new age, age to come
Gousmett, Chris
Realising your purpose in life
Gousmett, Chris
The glory of the unseen God
Gousmett, Chris
The Lord will come with the storm
Gousmett, Chris
The true temple of God
Gousmett, Chris
Free from condemnation
Gousmett, Chris
Faith in the unseen
Gousmett, Chris
Economics in Christian perspective
Gousmett, Chris
Cornerstone values
Gousmett, Chris
God has concealed himself in Jesus
Gousmett, Chris
God keeps his promises
Gousmett, Chris
God the creator of time
Hanson, David
How the reformational movement got started in the UK
Hanson, Ruth
Lives in your Hands
John Vander Stelt
Church in society (an orientation)
McIntire, C. Thomas
Dooyeweerd in North America
McIntire, C. Thomas
God's work in history: the post-biblical epoch
Olthuis, James H
Chapter 6
Olthuis, James H
Chapter 7
Olthuis, James H.
On Worldviews [pdf]
Olthuis, James H.
The word of God and biblical authority
Olthuis, James H.
The word of God and creation
Olthuis, James H.
Values and valuation
Olthuis, James H.
Chapter 1
Otto, Paul
'In the twilight of Dooyeweerd's corpus'.
Quadros Gouveais, Ricardo
Introducing reformational philosophy in Brazil: a hopeful report
Rice, Martin A.
What is a science?
Ridgway, Ian
'A Disclosing model of psychotherapy'
Ridgway, Ian
'Circumambulating interpersonal sensitive disclosure therapy using rational emotive behaviour therapy'
Roper, Duncan
Euler and the Konisberg bridges: some lessons for the philosophy of mathematics
Russell, Richard A
Looking at the medieval programme, how the church got involved and failed to reform it
Russell, Richard A
Reformation, popular literacy, callings, marriage, natural science etc
Russell, Richard A
Confessions of a book-pushing ideologue
Russell, Richard A
Where is Francis Schaeffer going?
Russell, Richard A
Going round the prickly pear of British education
Russell, Richard A
Natural theology: is it scriptural?
Russell, Richard A.
Starting with Plato and a biblical critique
Russell, Richard A.
In defence of Dooyeweerd
Schuurman, Egbert
Information society: cultural impoverishment or enrichment (c. 1983)
Schuurman, Egbert
A confrontation with technicism as the spiritual climate of the West (1996)
Seerveld, Calvin
Christian faith for today.
Seerveld, Calvin
Reformational Christian philosophy and Christian college education
Seerveld, Calvin
Creativity
Seerveld, Calvin
Vollenhoven's legacy for art historiography.
Seerveld, Calvin
Towards a cartographic methodology for art.
Seerveld, Calvin
Prov 25: 11-15.
Seerveld, Calvin
'Will you be a joke to God?' (Prov 24) .
Seerveld, Calvin
'Tomorrow is the gift of the Lord' Prov 27: 1-11
Seerveld, Calvin
'Proverbs 27 again'
Seerveld, Calvin
'How God's word in Proverbs communicates'
Seerveld, Calvin
'Uncover wrong to heal things straight' (Prov 25:2-10)
Seerveld, Calvin
Prov 27.
Seerveld, Calvin
God's gifts our thank offering - an interview
Seerveld, Calvin
Reading the Bible and understanding art
Seerveld, Calvin
A Christian tin-can theory of man
Seerveld, Calvin
Pain is a four-letter word
Seerveld, Calvin
Philosophy as schooled memory
Seerveld, Calvin
Reading the Bible like a grown-up child
Seerveld, Calvin
The gift of artistry - God's clothing for human life
Seerveld, Calvin
'The evil of authoritarianism' (Prov 29)
Sewell, Keith
Review of Dooyeweerd's Roots of Western Culture
Sewell, Keith
Mustard Seed in Australia
Simons, Petrus
Reformational philosophy in New Zealand
Stafleu, M D
'Quantum physics and the philsophy of the cosmonomic idea'
Stafleu, M. D.
Relations and Characters
Steen, Pete
'The problem of time and eternity in its relation to the nature-grace ground-motive'
Steen, Pete
Dooyeweerd and the Amsterdam Philosophy, by Ronald H Nash. Westminster Theological Journal 25: 116-118.
Steen, Pete
Review Worldly Theology: The Hermeneutical Focus of an Historical Faith, by Carl Michalson.
Steen, Pete
Review Het eeuwige leven, by Okke Jager.
Steen, Pete
Review The Basis of Christian Faith: A Modern Defense of the Christian Religion, by Floyd Eugene Hamilton..
Steen, Pete
Review Understanding God: The Key Issue in Present-Day Protestant Thought, by Frederick Herzog..
Steen, Pete
Review Set Forth Your Case, by Clark H Pinnock..
Strauss, D F M
The concept of number: multiplicity and sucession between cardinalitry and ordinality
Strauss, D. F. M.
Infinity and Continuity: The mutual dependence and distinctness of multiplicity and wholeness.
Van Woudenberg
Darwinian and teleological expanations: are they incompatible?
Van Woudenberg, R
Truth, the goal of science
Van Woudenberg, R
Design in nature: some current issues
Van Woudenberg, R
Abraham Kuyper and science
Wearne, Bruce
"Review Essay: The Calvinistic ethic and the spirit of renewal in some recent Christian scholarship"
Wearne, Bruce
Reading the Bible or Life-Direction on the Path of Scholarship
Wearne, Bruce
Electronic Tickets, Youth Despair And The Fabric Of Urban Society
Wearne, Bruce
Deism and the Absence of Christian Sociology
Wearne, Bruce
"Ticket and Travel - 20 propositions
Odds and sods
Lent has hardly started, so it seems a little premature to think of Easter, yet Triablogue has some links to interesting Easter resources.
Billy Bee is a newish blogger who has recntly discovered some neocalvinist resources.
There are a number of blogs that have dealt with the so-called 'Jesus Tomb'
Scott McKnight has hosted a review of Vern poythress's new book Redeeming Science here and here.
An online whiteboard
spirited exchanges uk is launched
Billy Bee is a newish blogger who has recntly discovered some neocalvinist resources.
There are a number of blogs that have dealt with the so-called 'Jesus Tomb'
- Darrell Bock
- Richard Baukham [pdf] (on Chris Tilling's blog)
- Ben Witherington
Scott McKnight has hosted a review of Vern poythress's new book Redeeming Science here and here.
An online whiteboard
spirited exchanges uk is launched
powered by performancing firefox
Thursday, 1 March 2007
Atheism - a faith position?
Stephen Law (editor of Think and lecturer at Heythrop College, London) argues that it's not here and here.
Is atheism a "faith position"? Anything can be, of course. But I challenge anyone to show that my atheism - or Dawkins' atheism - is a "faith position". It's not. I'll be explaining why in next blog.In the next post he writes:
Is atheism a "faith" position? If by "faith position" we mean can't be proved beyond all doubt, then yes, it is. But then so is the belief that there are no fairies and that the sun goes round the Earth. It doesn't follow from the fact that both theism and atheism are "faith positions" in this sense that they are equally reasonable.
If by "faith position" we mean can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt, then I certainly don't accept that atheism is a "faith position". The evidence for atheism is overwhelming (though of course not everyone can see the evidence is overwhelming - this sort of evidence-blindness is an interesting feature of religious belief. That religion certainly does have the power to blind people to the obvious is demonstrated by the fact that in just 50 years, some 100 million US citizens have come to accept both that the entire universe is six thousand years old and that this is consistent with the empirical evidence).
powered by performancing firefox
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
