There is an interesting article in the Boston Globe about employers reading people's blogs, MySpace, Facebook, etc. when they are interviewing them for a job. 

The counsel and commands of the Scriptures do apply to blogging

Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; James 1:19 ESV

If you are interviewing for a job and you say: This job really sucks, I may just work there a year, and you write it on your blog.  Well...it seems you are being a bit two-faced, duplicitous with your possible employer, and stupid to write it on the blog. Here is an exerpt from the Boston Globe piece:

In October 2002, after an interview for a job at a nonprofit, she said, someone at the organization read her blog, where she had broadcast to the world that she wasn't actually all that interested in the job and didn't plan to stay for even a year if she were hired.

Don't lie to people, that is wrong.  Then to go and publish the truth on your blog...that is wrong and stupid.  One solution that was offered doesn't seem that great in my mind:

Natalie Gioella, a senior at Northeastern University, knows students who received offers for internships and co-op jobs, but were later turned down because of their postings on Facebook.com. So, Gioella, 23, doesn't post.

The other option would be: Post with integrity so people see who you actually are.  Or don't post and put on whatever face people want to see in your interviews; but that is a very hard way to live.

Here is the link: Job applicants' online musings get hard look - The Boston Globe

Public repentence is good. I keep finding reasons not to not like Mark Driscoll (for those who like logic not (not like) = like).

A little while back Driscoll reacted to some remarks made by Brian McLaren (which were pretty obscure and lacked conviction) about the issue of homosexuality on the blog Out of Ur. It was a pretty amped up response, really funny at times, and a bit over the top in a few places. It seems like Driscoll realized he stepped over some lines

It is good to see that there are men who have Driscoll's heart and ear. Here is an exerpt from his post:

A godly friend once asked me an important question: “What do you want to be known for?” I responded that solid theology and effective church planting were the things that I cared most about and wanted to be known for. He kindly said that my reputation was growing as a guy with good theology, a bad temper, and a foul mouth. And after listening to the concerns of the board members of the Acts 29 Church Planting Network that I lead, and of some of the elders and deacons at Mars Hill Church that I pastor, I have come to see that my comments were sinful and in poor taste. Therefore, I am publicly asking for forgiveness from both Brian and Doug because I was wrong for attacking them personally and I was wrong for the way in which I confronted positions with which I still disagree.

Here is the full text: Apology | Resurgence

Al Mohler has an insightful commentary on marraige up on his blog. See - “Marriage is for White People”—The Decline of Marriage among African Americans To all my young brothers out there, both black and white. This call is for us:

In order for this to happen, couples of all ages, races, and ethnicities need to live out the fullness and fulfillment of marriage before the watching world. Christians have a special stake in this, because we understand that marriage is not only a social institution, but that is also the unique arena in which the glory of God is demonstrated in the holy relationship between the husband and his wife and in the proper ordering of the household as a testimony to the grace and goodness of God. Furthermore, we are the ones who know that we will give an answer for our responsibilities in marriage--and every single Christian has an important stake in this mission of recovering marriage. Above all, the church should be the one place where healthy marriages are nurtured, expected, supported, and lived out, not only before the congregation, but before the entire society.

One of my good buddies who is a student at Vanderbilt, attended a most interesting lecture Tuesday night by a woman who is a "minister and sexologist."  His comments on the evening are insightful and pithy.  And here at Power of Change, we love both insight and pithiness:

So tonight the CG indeed went to hear the sexologist speak.  If you're tremendously bored and can't find a cordless drill to bore into your head, you can read her blog (http://debrahaffner.blogspot.com/).  The really interesting thing about her talk was not the outlandish things she said (in support of abortion, homosexuality, etc.), but the fact that about 15 minutes in I looked at Brett and made the comment that she had started with much of the same stuff you said on Thursday.  Sex is good; it's created by God, for a reason; sex is not merely for procreation, etc.  It's so interesting how much damage the church has done.  The people in the crowd bought the early stuff (that we probably would agree on), and they ate it up so much that they followed her as she went to some very wrong and stupid places.

On a slightly different note, Ben and I have this curmudgeonly philosophy professor, who actually believes in things like absolute truth.  He made the statement that in the absence of truth, there is only power.  That, he says, is the basis of feminism.  There is no truth; therefore, there is no equality, just power.  That seemed to be the underlying reality of her talk.  There is no truth in the Bible or in religion (or anywhere else), so it's all about imposing our agenda.  She made the statement that for the sake of "sexual justice," religious "progressives" need to reclaim the Bible, and reclaim the debate, and, finally, reclaim God.  I almost made a comment to her about how God is not to be colonized in that way.  He doesn't get claimed, or tamed, or whatever the heck else these "sexual justice" folks want him to do.  God claims us, and the terms of claim are stated in the Bible.

One last note:  she used a hilarious hermeneutical method when she talked about the parts of the Bible that disallow homosexuality.  This is near quoting: "In the Bible, and in the entire Judeo-Christian literary tradition, when something was important, they said it over and over.  If they only said it once, that doesn't mean anything."  YIKES!  So if the Bible only says it once or twice, it's just a joke?  Wow.  Great job, Deb.  Thanks for the talk.

 Tim, I'm glad we are on the same team...

Many an atheist has shaken a loaded fist towards the heavens about the problem of evil.  God, how could you allow such suffering in this world if you are good and powerful?  In moments of existential angst, many attempt to deny God's existence while railing againsts this same "non existant" being. Yet the problem assumes a real distinction between "good" and "evil" as many have pointed out.

Though many are quick to ask "why evil" not as many are as quick to ask "why all the goodness?"  I have asked myself this question today.

Over the years my wife and I have experienced six miscarriages; five before we had any children at all.  After the first few I asked myself the question: Is God good and satisfying even if he does not give us children?  By his grace I was able to answer a resounding yes!  Then, for reasons of God's choosing, we had two beautiful little girls; Kayla and then Kylene. 

A few months ago we found out that  we were pregnant with baby #3.  We cautiously rejoiced and taught our oldest (Kayla, 4) that some babies make it to this world while others do not; we need to pray and hope this one will make it.  So I asked myself one more question: Is God good and satisfying even if he does not give me a son, and fills my house with an all female squad?  By grace, I was able to answer with a resounding yes!  Then today, for reasons of God's choosing, we saw some amazing pictures on an ultrasound screen.  We are pregnant with a little boy, man, wrestler (if he wants)...son.  Why? I don't know.  But I sensed and rejoiced with joy unspeakable today.  Not so much that I am having a boy.  But more that God would give us this gift.  I did not need it, I did not really ask for it as much as one would think (though I did pray here and there), I only know that I was so overwhelmed and touched deep in the gut with joy today...at the goodness of God.

Why would he be so good to us?  I don't know.  He is who he is.  There is a problem of goodness.  Joys unexplained and gifts so rich; we dare not miss them because of our travails.

OK, there is an upcoming debate on "Calvinism" in October. Over at the fun fundamentalist site, Challies says "this could be a good one".  Here is my question.  Is this a good use of our time?

Pro - Why this could be good

• Every generation does not understand or been exposed to the historical discussions (Pelagius/Augustine, Luther/Erasmus, Whitfield/Wesley, White/Caner???) surrounding election, sovereignty, foreknowledge, etc.
• Believers are a bit doctrinally apathetic...well, lets just say ridiculously, sadly, pathetically even, doctrinally apathetic.  So this debate shows that doctrine matters.
  
• Some may be encourage at the majesty of God seen in the Bible through a debate like this.
• I just love debates...I am convinced this is predestined, I just can't help it.
  

• Here we have major teachers, professors, evangelists, apologists "going at each other" - don't we have enough deceitful philosophies "out there" to deal with rather than putting all this energy into intramurals?
• Could this not just polarize the Calvinist groupies and the Arminian groupies and make a big mess?
• Are there not enough people needing compassion and the gospel that need our attention rather than putting our efforts into such an event?

This past Thursday night we taught a message with Inversion entitled Dream a New Dream about Sex.  It was a great night.  I owe a great debt to God, His Word, and the book Sex and the Supremacy of Christ for shaping and reshaping my thoughts on this issue.

• The bible study version is found here.
• The MP3 of the message if found here.
  

Podcasting has really changed my life. Really. I know that sounds cheesy and a bit of an overstatement but I have been greatly encouraged by great audio content over the last several months that I don't feel weird saying that. Driving back and forth to my office and around town to meet with people affords some time in the car. What better time to fill the mind with some edifying stuff...or at least some fun stuff. The more I have listened to good content from podcasts, I have found I listen to thinks like "talk radio" much less often. The stuff on talk radio really can be filled with such vitriol and guile that it bums you out and just can make put you in a funky state of mind. The effect of talk radio (left wing or right wing) on the soul will be saved for perhaps another post.

In all seriousness though, I thought I would share a few of the podcasts that build up my life. For those who are new to podcasts, I'll include an intro at the end of the is post.

Desiring God Radio - This is the radio broadcast of Desiring God Ministries featuring the biblical teaching of John Piper. It comes in 25 minute segments so you can chew reasonable sized bytes (sorry for the pun). The teaching of Piper could be described as theological exposition which aims to provoke the mind and the affections towards God. In short - it just fires me up and points me in a godward direction.

Feed URL:http://rss.salemweb.net/oneplace/ministries/podcasting/356.xml
Click Here to Subscribe Using iTunes

Mars Hill Featured Audio - I listen to this for the Film and Theology discussions as well as the weekly teaching of Mark Driscoll. Driscoll is a bit abrasive for some but I really enjoy his mixture of humor, theologically driven messages, and a nack for communicating to our generation. Current series is entitled Christians Gone Wild: 1 Corinthians. The messages are usually about an hour.

Feed URL:http://feeds.marshillchurch.org/feed/featuredaudio/rss.xml
Click Here to Subscribe Using iTunes

This Week in Tech - This is one of the most popular podcasts out there. This is basically a bunch of techno geeks and tech journalists talking about all things geeky. The show consists of news, commentary, banter, humor and cool stuff coming out in tech world. Being one who has some past education in Computer Science this makes me feel still part of the club. Even though for the most part I am now a wanna be geek. Shows are about an hour each week.

Feed URL:http://leoville.tv/podcasts/twit.xml
Click Here to Subscribe Using iTunes

Stand to Reason  - STR just entered the podcasting world but has quickly picked up a good following. Last week they had climbed to #1 in the religious/spirituality category in the iTunes Podcast directory. The show is a big two hours long and contains the audio from Greg Koukl's weekly call in show. For those interested in discussions of ethics, theology, philosophy, culture and apologetics, add this to your queue.

Feed URL:http://www.str.org/podcast/weekly/rss.xml
Click Here to Subscribe Using iTunes

Now for the newbies. The following was written by my friend Neal Joseph and tweaked by yours truly. I think it is a good overview for non techie people who are new to podcasts.

What Is a Podcast?

A podcast is a subscription format designed to deliver audio or video content directly to your computer. The advantage to podcasting is that you don't need to remember to go back download the newest media from your favorite online source. Once you subscribe to the podcast it will automatically update new content to your reader as it becomes available. The readers are usually free or low cost. The most common podcasts deliver audio files in the MP3 format, syndicated through an RSS (XML) file. Other formats and other types of files, such as video, are increasingly being podcasted. The content is downloaded to your PC, Mac or mobile device. It's not streamed, so you can access the content whenever you want. You may subscribe to podcast feeds by using a Podcast client program. Once it is installed on your local computer, the program will regularly check for and automatically download the new audio content to which you have subscribed. Any computer with audio-playing software can play podcasts. You can also download the mp3 files to any portable mp3 player to take it with you.

Finally, here are the URL's for the Podcasts from Fellowship Bible Church, where I serve:

• For Sunday Morning Messages, use: http://www.fellowshipnashville.org/messages.xml
• For Inversion (this is where my teaching lives), use: http://www.inversionfellowship.org/inversion_podcast.xml

What Would They Say About March Madness and Bracketology?

[Updated 3/20/06 : Due to UNC's recent loss to lowly George Mason University (no offense), the illustrations below of the philosophy of the great thinkers lose some force.   However, not being a fair weather fan, I stand by the arguments below.  Though I may have to be an antirealist to hold the one that says Dook sucks...they still look pretty good]

Christ beside me, Christ before me, Christ behind me, Christ within me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me.

I didn't want to heap another St. Patrick article on top of the pile today, so I figured I would link to some that were well done.  Being an Irishman myself I wore my green today and thanked God for the historical contribution of the Irish to the mission of the gospel.  These two have a different tone and angle, but both are a look at a man greatly used of Christ in ages past.

• Michael Haykin - EMINENT CHRISTIANS: 6. PATRICK OF IRELAND
• Mark Driscoll -  Vintage Saints: Saint Patrick

Charles Barkley was being interviewed on David Letterman this evening.  Barkley always seems to speak his mind and does not appear to be fearful of foot in mouth disease.  To be honest I like his candid way of talking about race; don't agree with all he says, or think he is a role model (he told us all that) but I think lots of white folk need to here from a Large Black Man from time to time.  Anyway, here is the quote of the night from Barkley in reference to why he "retired" from golf:

If you are a man and you cannot beat a woman or the "smart kids" in a sport, you are not any good. 

So he said after a girl beat him in celebrity golf tournament it was time to retire from playing golf.  Pray for Sir Charles; like me, he needs Jesus.

The last several days I have been in a real fog.  I think this is a very important part of God's providence for us, that we learn to hold to his hand in the midst of our own dark days.  I wanted to ask everyone a question:

When you are depressed, how do you wrestle with it and what sort of things have you found good for the soul? 

For me, reading (particularly the Scriptures), exercise and sleep are usually the paths which help me find hope in God...but the last three days I have slept very poorly, not read much, and not exercised a lick.  I think this contributes to an overall low state of the soul.   Thoughts about the unity and interconnectedness of body and soul come quickly to mind.  I also find the dark night of the soul to be accompanied by temptations of a more intense variety.  In the midst of the fog, I always try to remember that the sun's existence is warming and giving energy to the earth, even when veiled.  So in the days where the warmth of the rays of the beauty of God feel far from me, I am reminded by the eyes of faith that he is still upholding all things and bringing all about for the good of his people - even using despondent days.

I would love your thoughts. 

This little ditty has led to some fun daddy dancing with my 4 year old and 2 year old daughters. And one beautiful lady as well. The sound out of these little guys is pretty amazing. 

Science of the Soul: Scientific Evidence of Human Souls
Kevin T. Favero Edina: Beaver’s Pond Press, 2004

The nature and makeup of human beings has long been the source of questioning wonder and curiosity. Just what are we? What is the nature of consciousness? Are you human beings merely bodies and brains or is their something that our forebears and many today call the soul? The very fact that we do think, ponder and wonder about such things is in itself a truly amazing phenomenon, unique in what we know about the created universe. In this book, The Science of the Soul, Kevin Favero, an electrical engineer by training, tackles a unique question. Is there good scientific evidence for the inference that human beings have supernatural souls as well as physical bodies?

What is at stake in this debate is very important. If there is no soul, no transcendent reality, no god; if matter/energy is all that IS, then what do we lose? A quote from the Center for Naturalism will help demonstrate what is at stake

Naturalism as a guiding philosophy can help create a better world by illuminating more precisely the conditions under which individuals and societies flourish, and by providing a tangible, real basis for connection and community. It holds that doctrines and policies which assume the existence of a freely willing agent, and which therefore ignore the actual causes of behavior, are unfounded and counter-productive. To the extent to which we suppose persons act out of their uncaused free will, to that extent will we be blind to those factors which produce criminality and other social pathologies, or, on the positive side, the factors which make for well-adjusted, productive individuals and societies. By holding that human behavior arises entirely within a causal context, naturalism also affects fundamental attitudes about ourselves and others. Naturalism undercuts retributive, punitive, and fawning attitudes based on the belief that human agents are first causes, as well other responses amplified by the supposition of free will, such as excessive pride, shame, and guilt. Since individuals are not, on a naturalistic understanding, the ultimate originators of their faults and virtues, they are not deserving, in the traditional metaphysical sense, of praise and blame. Although we will continue to feel gratitude and regret for the good and bad consequences of actions, understanding the full causal picture behind behavior shifts the focus of our emotional, reactive responses from the individual to the wider context. This change in attitudes lends support for social policies based on a fully causal view of human behavior.

Center for Naturalism Internet Site, accessed April 10th 2005. Emphasis Added.

In a naturalistic view there is no person who is responsible for their faults or virtures and therefore no one is truly deserving of praise or blame. We then must configure reality, through politics or force, to “make people” the way we want them to be. One ought to question the one who says he has the ability to "control environments” in order to control the behavior of others. This has been envisioned by many who have taken a naturalistic view as utopian scheme after utopian scheme has oppressed people for the last several hundred years.

If naturalism/materialism is true, then many questions arise. How is matter “good”? How does a purposeless universe give rise to purpose? How does non conscious matter give rise to true meaningful human volition? How do we know that the bumping together of matter and energy in our brains arrives at anything that we would call “true”? These questions find no satisfactory answer from within a naturalistic framework and rightly put the worldview in question.

Favero’s effort in this book is to provide an argument that falsifies naturalism; a most worthwhile pursuit. For if there is something that is beyond matter and energy, indeed supernatural (i.e., beyond or outside nature), even our own souls, then truth, free will, and morality become very meaningful. Now we turn to the argument presented in The Science of the Soul and the attempt to infer the existence of souls from science and logical thought.

The Thrust of Favero’s Argument

The thrust of Favero’s argument for the existence of souls is laid out in the introductory chapter. His basic thesis is that if matter/energy is all that exists, then this matter/energy must by necessity interact according to the laws of physics. We know of no matter that has a mind of its own and decides what it will do autonomously. All matter/energy must follow a natural course including that which makes up human beings. All that we are, our brains and central nervous systems, must up operate by predetermined natural laws. It is then a logical implication that human beings do not have free will. Favero argues that if it can be shown that human beings do indeed have free will, then this volition requires an explanation that is not natural, which is not operating according to the laws of nature. In logical short hand his argument is this:

• If matter/energy is all there is then there is no free will
• There is Free Will
• Therefore matter/energy is not all there is

• If P then Q
• Not Q
• Therefore Not P

With
P = Matter/Energy is all there is and Q = There is No Free Will

With the conclusion being not P = “it is not the case that matter/energy is all there is.”

The bulk of the evidence he then marshals is necessarily in support of the premise that we do indeed have free will. He then argues that the source of the free will we have must come from something other than matter/energy operating according to the laws of Physics. Hence his conclusion, the reality of free will demands a super-natural source, which we call the human Soul.

Support in the Sciences

The middle section of the book is a survey of various scientific fields and their contribution or detraction from the idea that human beings have free will. Each chapter surveys a discipline of science and interacts with the nature of human free will from the perspective of that discipline. The four covered are biology, quantum physics, philosophy and science (soul-brain interface), and mathematics. I will treat each section briefly in turn.

In the chapter on Biology he lays out several views, theistic evolution, special creation, and intelligent design without saying definitively which view he holds. His only contention is that each view does not contradict the existence of supernatural souls and the reality of free will. Only the naturalistic/deterministic evolution of matter + time + chance is incompatible with free will. One of the chapter’s strengths is that all who believe in the soul will find their view fairly represented, yet I did find it a bit contrived that God would at some moment make a pre-Adamic hominid into a “real human” by putting a soul there after the purely natural process of evolution. I think the secularist and some of religious persuasions will find difficulty with such a scenario.

The chapters on Quantum Physics and the Soul-Brain Interface I found to be fascinating and very helpful. Following the work on Sir John Eccles, Favero’s discussion is about how certain quantum phenomena could be the mechanism by which the Soul works out its decisions in the brain. I found this to be a refreshing attempt at explaining in scientific terms what happens as the conscious soul thinks and acts through the brain and the central nervous system. He is very clear that attempts to explain free will by saying quantum reality is the source of such volition are destined for failure. Again, if matter/energy is all there is, then it must follows the rule or laws of physics, even if the probabilistic rules of quantum mechanics. Though quantum fluctuations, and the bundling (or collapsing as some prefer) of the wave function of the electron may be the mechanism of free will, it could never be the source. I find this line of thinking to be a great frontier of study in the science of consciousness.

The final supporting chapter dealt with the discipline of mathematics. The discussion here centered around non-computational aspects of human thinking, namely insight and intuition. This chapter closely follows the work of Roger Penrose in his mathematical study of human thinking. Penrose, though a naturalist himself, stands out against the reduction of human thinking to be analogous to that of a digital computer (see Dennett and Kurzweil). Penrose demonstrates that there are “noncomputational” aspects of our thought that a computer can simply not perform. If one finds halting problems, tiling problems and Gödel’s Theorem of interest (and I must admit I loved this chapter) then the chapter on Math will be a delight.

Weaknesses of the Book

Overall I found the book interesting and a helpful debate on this issue of human anthropology. I did however see a few minor drawbacks. First, the writing style was sometimes a bit redundant with the same thing said in various places. At first this appeared to me a strength, yet I found myself thinking, “you said this already, several times.” Reinforcement is helpful, but after a few repetitions I felt like we were beating the proverbial dead horse. Second, there were a few anachronisms in the history of philosophy that I feel could be corrected. One example is on page 43 where the following statement was made:

During the Age of Reason in the 1600s and 1700s (also known as the Enlightenment), some scientists and philosophers identified the ability to reason as the characteristic that separates humans from other animals.

This is true, but this idea was present in Plato, Aristotle, Augustine and many thinkers much earlier than the Enlightenment. This is not a huge mistake, but can appear a little incomplete. Finally, I noticed a few of the quotations in the book were not footnoted (see quotation from Weinberg on page 253). This was rare as the documentation in the book was otherwise fantastic. These minor drawbacks aside, I now turn our attention to the many strengths I found in the book.

Strengths of the Book

The strengths of the book were many and the following are those which I found outstanding. First, Favero lays out well all the implications in the denial of free will in great detail. He clearly shows the effects on law, morality, relationships, even one’s own internal life, when free will is denied. He connects a denial of free will with naturalistic assumptions or presuppositions about the world rather than a scientific or phenomelogical demonstration that human beings lack free will. In other words, people deny free will because of bias, or prejudice against non-material explanations of the world. The inconsistency of materialists denying free will yet then appealing to people to make choices, decisions, etc. was brought out with clarity and force by direct quotations from the literature. Secondly, the author has clearly done his homework. His survey of the relevant literature was copious and the bibliography is an invaluable resource for those interested in the mind/body problem and physicalist debate. The minor footnoting problem aside, the book is very well documented and expansive in its handling of the subject matter. Third, Favero made great effort to make the work accessible to the layperson. In this goal I think he partially succeeded. For those with any scientific background, even a few college courses, will be able to work through the book. Yet to fully grasp some of the concepts a cursory knowledge of some of the sciences is helpful. Fourth, he makes a great distinction between theological determinism, the idea that God predestines and brings about certain things and naturalistic determinism. The former view supporting some manner of real choice and free will while maintaining God as an active chooser and actor in the world and the latter being a completely closed system of cause and effect with no room for free will in us or in God. This discussion, though brief (see pages 39,40), qualifies “free will” enough where one who holds libertarian free will or theological compatibilism could be in concord with the main argument of the book.

Concluding Thoughts

Overall, I really enjoyed The Science of the Soul and its contribution to the debate on the mind/body problem from a scientific point of view. I was greatly encouraged by the level of research and effort put forth by the author and enjoyed some of the mind puzzles brought forth in the book. The study of consciousness, the nature of humanity, and the resulting societies we will create based upon such knowledge is of utmost importance. People have long assumed they had a self, a soul, which is the true person which they are. This is now questioned in the halls of learning and many are asleep as to the debate and the consequences of wrongly assessing human nature. I thank Mr. Favero for bringing forth the debate with both rigor and passion which is seen clearly in a quote from the book’s conclusion.

It is my hope:

• that all people can recognize there is overwhelming evidence that leads to the conclusion that they have supernatural souls;
• that this recognition and the hope for eternal life will help relieve at least in part the depression and suffering experienced by some people;
• that belief in a supernatuality reality and a supernatural Being is a source of healing for guilt
• that people will realize how wonderful free will, life, and existence are; and
• that these realizations will result in an attitude of awe and thankfulness and will renew the joy of living in many people.

Finally, I hope that a recognition that each human soul is made in the image of a spiritual God will help human relations at all levels and lead to a spiritual millennium.

The Science of the Soul, 325 

To this I would only add that these are possible and described by the term “salvation” in the Christian Scriptures. A great truth of the Christian worldview that souls need redemption, reconciliation to God, forgiveness from sin, and thereby be set free to love God and one another. And such was purchased on the executioner’s cross where the Son of God, by his own free will, gave his life as a ransom for many.

The book may be purchased directly from: http://www.scienceofsouls.com/ 

This year I have had the privilege to speak to student athletes at Brown University on two occasions.  It has been fun getting to know the crew at Brown and encourage them towards faith in Christ and continued impact on their campus. 

Recently, Jarred Lynn, intern at Brown, forwarded me this story which recently ran on a local Boston television station.  Well done and encouraging.

You can view the video here Cover Story: Religion in the Ivy League

Many have probably heard by now of the passing of Ronald Nash.  Dr. Nash was a philosopher and a teacher in both secular institutions and evangelical seminaries.  I did not know Dr. Nash and was exposed to his work just recently through his excellent works Faith and Reason and Life's Ultimate Questions.  Both are fine introductions to Christian thought and philosophy in general.

Nash's emphasis on worldview and conceptual schemes coupled with his modified Augustinian epistemology was a fresh breeze to my mind this past summer.

I regret that I did not have the chance to study with him, but the Lord of Nash's philosophy saw fit to call him home.  Pray for the Nash family.  The church has lost a great defender of the truth and a looming figure of evangelical thought. 

 [Updated - Russell Moore now has a tribute online to Nash]

Stand To Reason is now podcasting a weekly audio show.  The current edition is on the Da Vinci Code.  Greg Koukl is a fine ambassador for the gospel.  Add this to your podcast list and update it often.  Koukl mixes the mind of a philosopher with wit and compassion.  His concern is that people grasp truth and give the gospel hearing amidst the flux of contemporay thought and culture.  Check them out:

Stand to Reason trains Christians to think more clearly about their faith and to make an even-handed, incisive, yet gracious defense for classical Christianity and classical Christian values in the public square.

 
[Updated - Justin Taylor notes that STR's podcast is #1 in Religion and Spirituality]

A couple of months back Mark Driscoll recounted listening to Chuck Colson speak. He spoke of Colson's influence on his life as an early Christian and then posted the following poignant questions for Colson:

• Is Christianity at war for culture?
• Is it beneficial for Christians to speak of themselves in military terms such as war when speaking of their engagement with lost people and their ideas?
• Does the concept of a culture war cause Christians to fight moral and political battles rather than gospel battles?
• Does the greatest threat to Christianity come from forces outside the church, or from inside the church, through leaders who are more like Judas than Jesus?
• Do Christians have the right to continually claim the moral high ground when they are statistically no more moral than the average pagan?

Yours truly responded to the questions earlier here at POC but I am sure Chuck Colson's answers would probably be more interesting.

Just in case you are not sure about that, Colson has now actually responded to the questions over at Resurgence: Chuck Colson 2.0 | Resurgence

William Dempski has a post recording Alvin Plantinga's thoughts on Judge John Jone's arguements against Intelligent Design being science. You can read the post here.

If you happen to be new to Plantinga the wiki on him is a good place to start. Many of his works are linked here.

Fun little web site:

SoYouWanna.com teaches you how to do all the things nobody taught you in school.

A fun little web site with some advice - whether it is "good counsel" or not you'll have to check each article. Seems very helpful for the most part.

Link - SoYouWanna.com home

(HT - Evangelical Outpost)

An article from the UK has some strange reasoning about a Turkish family that walks on all fours.  Apparently, some scientists think that studying these modern humans may explain something of our evolution from quadraped to the bipedal folks we are today. I guess if we go and find the people who still climb trees and swing in the branches we would make similar conjectures...very strange logic in my opinion.  Here are a few excerpts

An extraordinary family who walk on all fours are being hailed as the breakthrough discovery which could shed light on the moment Man first stood upright.

Scientists believe that the five brothers and sisters found in Turkey could hold unique insights into human evolution.

The Kurdish siblings, aged between 18 and 34 and from the rural south, 'bear crawl' on their feet and palms. Study of the five has shown the astonishing behaviour is not a hoax and they are largely unable to walk otherwise. Researchers have found a genetic condition which accounts for their extraordinary movement.

Two of the daughters and a son have only ever walked on two palms and two feet, but another son and daughter sometimes manage to walk upright.

The five can stand upright, but only for a short time, with both knees and head flexed.

To read the rest of the article continue here.

HT - Geoffrey Lessel

Business Week Online has some fun technology slides shows they feature from time to time. This week they have one on new moblile phones which are coming out. These are not rumored phones, but devices being launched...most in early 06. One of them is 800 bucks - for corporate big dogs with too much cash.

Link - Mobile Phones: The Next Generation

Brett Kunkle at Stand to Reason has pulled together a great listing of summer worldview training for young people in America.

See his link at Stand to Reason Blog: Worldview Training for Youth

Dook goes down again. At home, in JJ's last game, the crazies in Cameron are shut down!

Mark Driscoll has a good post over at Resurgence on the effect of theologically conservative, gospel preaching, Bible teaching practice in churches.

I concur with him on one major point. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, many denominations scampered around to become "more Modernist." In other words, the recrafted their doctrine in the image of the spirit of the age. So they removed all the miracles from the Bible, removed the idea of sin and judgment, and presto, they looked just like the world around them. What was left was simply a form of godliness which denied its power. An empty shell of ritual and ceremony devoid of the gospel which is the power of God for salvation of all who believe.

Today's Emergent crowd is on a familiar path. They cry out like those who came before "The church must change its doctrine/theology to concur with the spirit of the age - lest we die!" Not realizing this is precisely what kills churches. What we need is cultural engagement, winsome evangelism, thoughtful believers who swim in the cultural worlds we inhabit, without swallowing the hook of the philosophy of the age at the expense of gospel Truth

A quick exerpt from the Resurgence Post:

In conclusion, the way out of this sort of mess calls for theologically conservative Bible teaching, real church members actively doing ministry, drifting from national denomination leadership to more local authority, raising up pastors from within, and ignoring the parade of fools who will shrill at such changes.

Now the post does have some of Driscoll's concern with "large churches" - but the rest of the post is very good. To read the whole deal go on over to Resurgence Those Bloody Presbyterians | Resurgence

Many times over the last ten years of Christian ministry I have interacted with this generation over the topic everyone loves today.  Reading.  In 2000, one young man who went with me to Eastern Europe said:

I don't like reading, becasue that would involve...well, reading.

With a generation coming up that is saturated with media, ingnorant of their own history (both the evil and the good chapters), oblivious to our intellectual heritage, and generally resistance to turning a page, I have made it a prayer and calling to encourage others to read.  I wanted to take just a moment and share why I feel reading is so important.  Important today, in the 21st century.

Reading Slows and Quiets the Soul

The pace our our generation is one on the move.  We hop from website (or in my case blog to blog), we surf channels, we function with background music in just about everything we do, we have our own headphones, little kids have little DVD players for the back seat of the car. See this article on the MediaWise Web Site for good reasons to slow down the torrent of media.

And then, we try to read a book.  We try to read the Bible.  Oh, how we need to turn off, slow down, pause, remove the noise and train ourselves to read.  I know the pace of my soul greatly changes when I linger in the Scriptures or a good book. Our brains function differently when reading, and the soul may pause before God.  I believe the quietness of reading the Scriptures to be one of the reasons God gave us a book.  To speak to us - to have us be still and know he is God.

Reading Keeps a Mind Sharp and Helps us to Learn how to Think Critically

The ability to construct an argument, to connect thoughts in an order, to persuade, to filter all we hear is a skill which is being lost upon a generation.  Reading and following a train of thought can be difficult to do with information flying around us in short sound bites.  Reading allows us to follow along with someone who is attempting to make a point; it helps us see when someone makes mistakes or fails to make her case.  Reading just makes better thinkers.  Some basic understanding of logic (I know there are logic haters abounding today as well) doesn't hurt either.

A Fight for Language and Its Artful Use

Language is a gift from a speaking God.  We use language because God has given it to us.  God himself speaks, so of all people, we ought value language highly.   Language has taken a beating over the years, be it from Wittgenstein or Derrida.  Yet, it is still the only tool we have.  Many are keen to quote the research that 90% of communication is non-verbal.  I always find this statistic strange.   I believe it accurate - with body language, posture, facial expression, and tone being indespensible for good communication.  But that 10% seems to be the most important in the process.  I can get by with gestures, facial contortions, but combine all thes with words I think the communication is much more complete.  Clear and artful writing needs CPR, no it needs a kiss from God.  May we ever take seriously the words we write and read - yes, even in e-mail.

As a Protest in a Distracted Age

John Piper recently remarked that our age is one which is running to alternative forms of communication (video, etc) and telling a generation that it needs to be spoken to in pictures rather than words.  He encouraged all the young people, when they hear this sort of thing, to stand up in protest and say "I'm going to the Library."  I agree.  Young people, reject the patronizing nonsense that you are idiots who cannot tackle a book.  Challenge that in yourself, grab a dictionary, grab a friend who wants to change.  Have reading hour in protest of those who would belittle your intellect. 

Making friends with others from a different age

In his introduction to Athanasius' work On the Incarnation, CS Leiws exhorted us in his work On the Incarnation:

The only safety is to have a standard of plain, central Christianity ("mere Christianity" as Baxter called it) which puts the controversies of the moment in their proper perspective. Such a standard can be acquired only from the old books. It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.

Every age has its own outlook. It is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes. We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books.

One of the great blessing is to walk with the great minds of the past.  I have been so encouraged and blessed by reading Augustine, Anselm, and Aquinas.  I have been brought up into heavenly visions reading Owen, Bunyan, Edwards, and the letters of Spurgeon.  Breathing air from different ages is a pleasant undertaking; don't miss the fresh breezes of history by always chewing on the spirit of the age.

Not being led and held captive by "They"

In the 1997 space alien comedy Men in Black (Tommy Lee Jones, Will Smith) Agent Kay (Jones' character) makes the following statement:

You will dress only in attire specially sanctioned by M.I.B. special services. You'll conform to the identity we give you. Eat where we tell you. Live where we tell you. From now on, you'll have no identifying marks of any kind. You will not stand out in any way. Your entire image is crafted to leave no lasting memory with anyone you encounter. You are a rumor, recognizable only as deja vu, and dismissed just as quickly. You don't exist. You were never even born. Anonymity is your name, silence is your native tongue. You are no longer part of the system. You are above the system, over it, beyond it. We're "them." We're "they." We are the Men in Black. 

Too funny! But there is a truth we must get to as well.  Our culture is so addicted to "they say this, they say that."  If "they" say something why does this make it true?  We need to ask who "they" are - then read what they say.  We are all too believing at times of the experts, we must learn to understand what they say and whether it is so.  The Bereans could teach us much in our day 

Communion with God

Finally, and most importantly, we read to have communion with God.  His words must guide us, his truth most be upon us.  God has given testimony to himself in many ways; the Scriptures, the Bible, the Good Book, being primary.  The Scriptures testify to us as to the nature and will of God, the nature and mission of Jesus, how to walk these roads with him on our way to the celestial city.  If reading continues to fall out of repute among the people of God, all manner of error, confusion, false teaching, and hell will be unleashed in our midst.

7 The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the Lord is sure,
making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the Lord are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the Lord is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the Lord is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the Lord are true,
and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.

12 Who can discern his errors?
Declare me innocent from hidden faults.
13 Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins;
let them not have dominion over me!
Then I shall be blameless,
and innocent of great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in your sight,
O Lord, my rock and my redeemer.

O Father, have your children drawn to the Scriptures for their lives and communion with you.  And do Lord call us continually to wonderful, God exalting, soul stirring, passion inflaming, service inspiring, suffering sustaining, Christ worshipping books.

Think Secret has a report about a possible next iPod.

How about this for a little weekend project:

Link at Engadget: Man builds 60-foot tower to nab some wireless broadband - Engadget

Field trip to Berkeley to interact with the best of secular thought and Unitarian religion.

Great idea Brett Kunkle, may your tribe increase! Stand to Reason Blog: The Berkeley Mission -- Part 1

Michael Haykin has decided to keep the ALL CAPS TITLES on his blog - See Historia ecclesiastica

He offers an excellent reason (Design. It just looks better. I think I agree) and a fine argument from Gordon Woods who applied net courtesy with more wisdom. All Caps is not a Sin. Plus, he is not writing the titles to or at people - that would be yelling. So, for the sake of design and good looking headers I conceed the point. Just use all caps with wisdom within posts and comments and never all cap anyone in e-mail unless you really want to yell.

Dr. Haykin is no yelling 21st century church historian - he just wants his blog to look cool. And I'm cool with that.

A couple of fun geek pages over at engadet.com  

• AI Attack Helicopter Beware of unmanned mini helicopters pouring down fire from heaven.
• Fun with Apple - Designers and photoshoppers offer their futuristic designs for the next Apple products.  Fun.

Enjoy

In Leadership Journal, in answering the question "What is the Church for" Brian McLaren makes the following claim:

Most of us have our "theologically correct" answer. The church's purpose is worship, or evangelism, or making disciples, or some combination. But deeper than our conscious answers are our unspoken, unexamined, perhaps even unconscious beliefs—four of which are especially powerful these days:

The church exists to …

1. Provide a civil religion for the state
2. Preserve and promote certain social values
3. Provide a living for religious professionals
4. Promote the satisfaction of its members.

It is on this deeper level that the emerging/missional conversation has, in my opinion, the most to offer.

While I happen to agree with many of the things McLaren bemoans in this article (slavery, racism, even some flavor of environment concern - though I would not use the personified language of "care for creation" which he chooses), it is a bit frustrating that he places beliefs in others that they may not hold. In fact, to say others have "subconscious" beliefs about what the church is for, and then to list them is facile and seems to me to be just a rhetorical device.

First, nobody thinks that Christianity is or should be the state religion by talking about a "Christian nation" - we do not have a national state church (though some of the "states" did in the early days). He is right to remind us of some of the evils perpetrated by Christians in America, but I know very few people he could be referring to (I can't think of one right now - maybe some Theonomists in Idaho?) that want an official civil religion.

Second, the church should promote godliness and holiness in its people and should propehtically call the state to justice. This I think I agree with Mr. McLaren.

Why he patronizes "theologoical correctness" I am really not sure. Other than to poke at people who care about having sound doctrine. Yes, we do not all agree on "correct" but we should all care to move towards that reality. There is incorrect theology, we ought to avoid it. This exhoration is repeated over and over in the New Testament.

I guess my overall frustration with the article is why McLaren chooses to interact with the "unstated, unconcious beliefs." This seems to me to only be the creation of a rhetorical world, to create a world in which emergent can play the hero.

My question is why does emergent have "the most to offer." Obviously it is not because it is a better view, or "more correct" - perhaps just because it is in the middle.

Finally, I want to point out how emergent consistenly uses language like "deeper" and "beyond" and "most to offer." One uses metaphors when there is no arguement offered for why a view is "better."

GK Chesterton once remarked about Nietzsche's use of metaphors (ie Beyond Good and Evil - to avoid saying "better" than good and evil) when he wrote:

Had he faced his thought without metaphors, he would have seen that it was nonsense

McLaren does this often. In his powerpoint presentation from the Emergent Convention (which is no longer on his web site as far as I can tell - I have it downloaded though) he calls us to go "beyond" relativism and absolutism. I just don't know what that means. I think Chesterton would call this nonsenese.

Full article is here Underneath the Cosmetics - LeadershipJournal.net

Jeff Hawkins, who gave the world the PalmPilot in 1996 (I had one of those first little gems) and the founder of Handspring (who gave us the Treo) is now on to looking ot produce a computer based upon his theories of brain functioning.

An interview with Hawkins is available on NPR - NPR : PalmPilot Creator Models Computer on Brain.

Hawkins new company, Numenta , has this as their mission:

Numenta is developing a new type of computer memory system modeled after the human neocortex. The applications of this technology are broad and can be applied to solve problems in computer vision, artificial intelligence, robotics and machine learning. The Numenta technology, called Hierarchical Temporal Memory (HTM), is based on a theory of the neocortex described in Jeff Hawkins' book entitled On Intelligence (with co-author Sandra Blakeslee).

Just kiidding. I like the Mac. Would get one as my next computer perhaps if it could open and effectively convert all my MS Publisher files. But it is funny that the "PC's are a security hazard, Macs never have viruses" schmack is now not so true. You sell enough boxes, somebody will want to attack and hack them. Really, I do like Apple...Especially iPod.

I am off to Brown University today to speak to a group of college athletes. My topic for the evening is Living as a Christian Athlete in College. Brown has a fairly new Athletes in Action ministry which has been a privilege to connect with. I was able to speak there in November and I am looking forwarding to seeing the crew again.

A new book is soon to hit the streets following the emergence of the contemporary Intelligent Design Movement.

Looks like one for the wish list

Michael Haykin has a great little post up on Martin Lloyd Jones. Now we just need to get Dr. Haykin to stop YELLING in all of his post titles.

The Wiki of Netiquette states:

Typing in all capital letters usually denotes screaming or yelling.

Here is the link - Historia ecclesiastica: EMINENT CHRISTIANS: 4. MARTYN LLOYD-JONES

Many of us are very familiar with Wikipedia, the Internet Encyclopedia, edited and maintained by some good citizens in cyberspace. Wikis are very common on the net today, and there is a growing Wiki dedicated to the highest of persuits.  As a quick aside, the reliability of Wikipedia has been questioned as mistakes can creep in...yet some are saying that on certain topics, Wikipedia does pretty well.

Enter, Theopedia...

Theopedia is an online encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity edited by a group of net users over time.  Like any Wiki, it is very much a work in progress, but the intial effort looks very good.  I look forward to seeing Theopedia grow and expand over time.  As theological astude Theopedians serve up a course of good teaching to the rest of the world, may their goals be realized:

To centralize the efforts of thousands of net-savvy theologians (armchair or professional) into a comprehensive encyclopedia on all things Christian.

<