The question we have been asking since the tender years of our youth.  What is Spam?  It has been unlocked for you.  You are welcome.

(HT - Sandy Young) 

 

Alvin Plantinga, John A. O'Brien Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, has written a scathing critique of Richard Dawkins The God Delusion.  You can read the review from the current version of Books and Culture Magazine.

My favorite little zinger is the following:

You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is (grade inflation aside), many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a sophomore philosophy class. This, combined with the arrogant, smarter-than-thou tone of the book, can be annoying. I shall put irritation aside, however and do my best to take Dawkins' main argument seriously.

A great read for all those who are following the new more aggressive bread of atheists today.  For those interested in the title of this post, to Plantingize was once defined by atheistic philosopher Daniel Dennet as "making something that was believed in the middle ages sound very compelling again."  Alvin gets after it for theism.

 

Many of you heard yesterdays announcement of Jame's Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici's "documentary" entitled Jesus' Family Tomb which will air on the Discovery Channel Sunday March 4th at 9:00 EST.  There is a book, a DVD, and lots of hype.  As this is simply a bunch of selective and sensational "evidence" re-told from an archaeological find in the 1980s I think we need to look at the truth involved with this "new" discovery.  The documentary is a 4 million dollar project and from seeing the previous work of Cameron and Jacobovici it will be a fine production though based on fiction.  The problem here, unlike the fictional Da Vinci Code nonsense, this one is presented as fact.  The Toronto Star has a good summary of the story as well as the myriad of conjectures made in order to "prove" this thesis.  The last few lines of the story is quite revealing.

Several New Testament Scholars have weighed in so I wanted to link everyone to the reality about all of this goofiness.  Read these to see past all the connections and assumptions that will be made in this film.

Dr. Darryl Bock - Research Professor of New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary weighs in with Hollywood Hype: The Oscars and Jesus’ Family Tomb, What Do They Share?

The tomb is an old story now being recycled in an effort to make far more of it than the evidence really requires. I was allowed to see a version of the story to air in March, but had to agree to a non-disclosure. I also wrote a summary report on it, some of the concepts I will now share on this blog, since I can now talk. There is no need to fear such discussions. The same evidence is there for all of us. We all want to discover the truth.

Dr. Craig Blomberg - Professor of New Testament, Denver Theological Seminary - Did They Really Find Jesus' Bones?

Recent works by Darrell Bock, Craig Evans, Ben Witherington, Tom Wright, and a host of others all rely on solid, sober scholarship of a kind Dan Brown, National Geographic and the Discovery Channel will apparently never care to publicize. Bolstering conventional belief about anything has never made much money and that’s all it’s really about in these endeavors. (Lest you think I’m being too cynical, Darrell Bock has shared stories with me of what representatives of the major networks told him face to face he’d have to raise in millions of dollars before they’d ever consider doing it.). In a postmodern world, post-Communist world truth gives way to fiction to fuel capitalism.

Dr. Paul Maier - Professor Department of History, Western Michigan University posts an e-mail to friends and readers.

Alas, this whole affair is just the latest in the long-running media attack on the historical Jesus, which – we thought – had culminated in that book of lies, The Da Vinci Code. But no: the caricatures of Christ continue. Please, lose no sleep over the Talpiot “discoveries” for the following reasons, and here are the facts:

Dr. Ben Witherington Research Professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary records his THE JESUS TOMB? ‘TITANIC’ TALPIOT TOMB THEORY SUNK FROM THE START over at his personal blog

So my response to this is clear--- James Cameron, the producer of the movie Titantic, has now jumped on board another sinking ship full of holes, presumably in order to make a lot of money before the theory sinks into an early watery grave. Man the lifeboats and get out now.For those wanting much more on the historical Jesus and James and Mary see now my WHAT HAVE THEY DONE WITH JESUS? (Harper-Collins, 2006).

Dr. Andreas Köstenberger Professor of New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary comments in his blog post The Jesus Tomb.

It is hard to know whether one should dignify this kind of warmed-up sensationalist commercial ploy with a serious rebuttal. Why would an orthodox Jew and an unbelieving Hollywood producer time the release of a television documentary denying Jesus’ resurrection just prior to Easter? Because of serious scholarship or maximum personal profit?

Finally, Dr. Al Mohler president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary was on Larry King Live discussing this with Cameron, Jacobovici, Tabor, and Bill Donahue (Catholic league) - The transcript can be found here. 

As I said, there is no doubt this will be a flashy, highly produced, dramatic documentary which will no doubt "sound convincing" - yet its claims are so specious as to be laughable.  I hope the following links are helpful to you if you have friends and family who watch the Discovery Channel production.

Director James Cameron is at again with his friend Simcha Jacobovici.

This duo earlier produced a controversial documentary on the ancient Exodus which entertained possible natural explanations for the 10 plagues associated with the Exodus event.  That documentary was an entertaining ride, though some of the theories are a bit specious (especially the deal about the destruction of the 1st born).  I recommended watching that one for its cool CG effects and discussion of the Exodus narrative.  My little review is found here.

This time around the topic of their newest documentary is the so called "discovery of the remains of Jesus." Time magazine has a brief treatment of the deal which I have copied in below:

Brace yourself. James Cameron, the man who brought you 'The Titanic' is back with another blockbuster. This time, the ship he's sinking is Christianity.

In a new documentary, Producer Cameron and his director, Simcha Jacobovici, make the starting claim that Jesus wasn't resurrected --the cornerstone of Christian faith-- and that his burial cave was discovered near Jerusalem. And, get this, Jesus sired a son with Mary Magdelene.

No, it's not a re-make of "The Da Vinci Codes'. It's supposed to be true.

Let's go back 27 years, when Israeli construction workers were gouging out the foundations for a new building in the industrial park in the Talpiyot, a Jerusalem suburb. of Jerusalem. The earth gave way, revealing a 2,000 year old cave with 10 stone caskets. Archologists were summoned, and the stone caskets carted away for examination. It took 20 years for experts to decipher the names on the ten tombs. They were: Jesua, son of Joseph, Mary, Mary, Mathew, Jofa and Judah, son of Jesua. Israel's prominent archeologist Professor Amos Kloner didn't associate the crypt with the New Testament Jesus. His father, after all, was a humble carpenter who couldn't afford a luxury crypt for his family. And all were common Jewish names.

There was also this little inconvenience that a few miles away, in the old city of Jerusalem, Christians for centuries had been worshipping the empty tomb of Christ at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Christ's resurrection, after all, is the main foundation of the faith, proof that a boy born to a carpenter's wife in a manger is the Son of God.

But film-makers Cameron and Jacobovici claim to have amassed evidence through DNA tests, archeological evidence and Biblical studies, that the 10 coffins belong to Jesus and his family.

Ever the showman, (Why does this remind me of the impresario in another movie,"King Kong", whose hubris blinds him to the dangers of an angry and very large ape?) Cameron is holding a New York press conference on Monday at which he will reveal three coffins, supposedly those of Jesus of Nazareth, his mother Mary and Mary Magdalene. News about the film, which will be shown soon on Discovery Channel, Britain's Channel 4, Canada's Vision, and Israel's Channel 8, has been a hot blog topic in the Middle East (check out a personal favorite: Israelity Bites) Here in the Holy Land, Biblical Archeology is a dangerous profession. This 90-minute documentary is bound to outrage Christians and stir up a titanic debate between believers and skeptics. Stay tuned.

The entry already has drawn over 1500 comments on Time's blog - you can read it here.

Sounds like some more fantastic speculation which will be well written and a quality production.  In our day where lies can be spun if the production looks cool and emotionally grabs people, this will be a stumbling block to some people.  This has no scholarly support from Jewish or Christian scholars, but Cameron apparently wants the buzz and will throw his money at it.  I'll link to some responses by scholars in the blogosphere as they come.

Pop Culture - Ubiquitous advertising...not sure if this is a real ad, but it is creative...and obnoxious.

Just for Fun - I definately misspell this word all the time.  Or is it definitely? Also, these are some very, very cool photos from around the world taken from the air.

Technology - Firefox just released an incremental version - 2.0.0.2 - sounds like if you have Vista you should get it.  Though I'm not a gamer, those who follow the Xbox, PS3, Wii wars, this video is pretty funny (warning, there is some language which may be objectionable to some - nothing terrible, but one word at around 40s)

On Science - We need to see research like this succeed and form marketable sources of energy.  This is actually research I pray for.  Good for the planet, good for the wallet.  Greens and Supply Siders happy together as one big family.  Finally, some good news out of Florida for old people and brain function...Florida, too funny.

The following were notes given along with the message God...Are Your God? given at the Inversion Fellowship on February 22nd 2007.

The Self-Revealed Creator God

Habakkuk introduces his second question to God by reflecting briefly on the nature and character of his Lord. In verses 12 and 13 he reflects back to God what he believes about God’s identity and attributes. The language he uses reflects God as he truly is, God as he reveals himself to us in the Bible. I will briefly comment on each of the ways Habakkuk describes our great creator God and the significance each attributes holds for our lives.

The Eternal God–From Everlasting

Habakkuk uses an interesting word in reflecting on God’s nature. He says that God is “qādam” which literally means to be “before or to go in front of all things.”1 It is derived from the word which means “from the east or the direction of the sun at the dawn”2 and figuratively says that God is before or in front of even the place where the day begins. To say God is from everlasting is to say that he existed before space and time and will never cease to be. Many times people will get into a discussion about creation and ask the following question. If God created all things, who then created God. Although polytheists and Mormons3 might be tempted to answer this question, Christians will give no answer because one does not exist. When we say “GOD” we mean the being that has no beginning, is uncreated, uncaused, and necessary for anything to exist at all. Nobody created God, he is from everlasting, he is eternal without beginning and without end.

Our Holy God

The Scriptures frequently refer to God as holy, completely set apart from sin and devoted to his own honor. The concept of holiness throughout the Bible is something set apart for the use and worship of God. This world is stained with sin, imperfections, and is quite broken. God is not. When we cry “holy, holy, holy” in worship, we are affirming that God is unlike anything in this world. He is unique in his being and as Habakkuk says here, God is of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong. Part of God’s holiness means that he purely understands who he is and offers himself to his creatures for worship. He seeks his own glory and honor because of his radiant goodness. The very best thing for us is to be in relationship with and to be made like the holy God.4

God, My God

One of the fascinating truths about God is that he is a personal God. This is unique to the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. Eastern religions have a concept of deity which is largely impersonal. God simply is the all encompassing reality that we are all part of– all is divine and all is one. Classical Sunni Islam presents Allah as a God who is completely separated from us such that the only way we relate is through submission and obedience to his will. The God of the Bible however is a God of personal love, grace and interaction with his creatures. He is Immanuel, God with us. Habakkuk calls God, “my God” - what a privilege to know the God who cares about us intimately and is not distant in our darkest hours.

YHWH–Our Faithful Covenant Keeping Lord

Habakkuk uses the name YHWH (Yahweh) for God in this passage. This is the unique name God reveals to his own people as their covenant keeping Lord. In Deuteronomy 7:9 Moses tells the people of Israel “Know therefore that the Lord (Yahweh) your God is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and steadfast love with those who love him and keep his commandments, to a thousand generations” It is the unique name of the God of the Bible–he is the one who is the absolute unchangeable one, the existing, ever-living, God.5

Our Just God–He is Intolerant of Evil

Contrary to some popular notions of God today, God is not the great therapist sky fairy, who approves of all the actions of human beings and just feels sorry for us. The God of whom Habakkuk speaks does not like human evil. In fact, his eyes are so pure he cannot even look at it. What Habakkuk’s metaphor is teaching us is this. Far from being tolerant of evil doing, God is profoundly the opposite. He is highly intolerant of evil, so much so that he will hold us accountable us for our sins. This of course is only part of the story – the rest is what gives us hope and relationship with this holy and just God.

Our Saving God–We Shall Not Die

Though not as explicit in Habakkuk 1, the message of this book, and of the whole of Scripture, is that God is a god of grace and mercy and has provided the way to life and forgiveness. Habakkuk states here “we will not die.” What he is acknowledging is that God’s people will be ultimately saved because of God’s promises and faithfulness to save repentant sinners. In fact, Jesus promised life, even to those who die yet trust and follow him. In John 11:25 Jesus said to a woman grieving the death of her brother, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, 26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?” Good question, no?

Sovereign–He establishes, He ordains

We touched on this last week, so no need to go on and on about Sovereignty again. But Habakkuk’s language here is that God ordains and establishes people and nations for his purposes. I know we like to think we are in charge of things, but the Scriptures remind us that it is God, well, who is God.

Our Struggles with Evil

With God’s attributes on display in Habakkuk, I want us to see how this actually contributes to his second question. I want it to be clear why he (and us) goes on to ask God “can you really raise up a wicked people and allow them to do evil for your purposes.” Let me start by giving an example. Suppose for a moment we thought God’s character to be “Unknown” that we do not know that he is good, loving, and just. When we see the evil that is in the world, we may be right to conclude that the creator of the world is a demon. Or even worse, if we thought that God was evil, there would be no questions in our souls when we see all the junk going down in us and around us. It is precisely because God is good, loving, and sovereign that the evils of the world perplex us as much as they do. Human struggles with the world being broken, shipwrecked, and containing evils are universal affecting us all. In other words, when you see a child dying of inoperable cancer, the ache is not reserved to certain kinds of human beings. No, we all wrestle with these issues and seek to find an answer. There are many answers flying around in the world, and equally as many questions. For our brief purposes here I want to look at how different people seek to provide an answer to the problem of suffering. These are not comprehensive,6 as I only have about a page of tiny font text to treat this subject–smile, but I do think that these are some of the most common explanations offered to our questions. 

Some Answers Given to the Question of Evil

• The Pantheist Answer–See past the question, evil is an illusion Pantheism is a common worldview that flows out of eastern philosophies such as Hinduism, Taoism and some flavors of Buddhism. It is a philosophy that all of reality is “one” and that all is divine. Rocks, trees, birds, bumblebees, human beings, and stars are all part of one mysteriously divine reality that we experience together. The goal many times in pantheistic views is to become enlightened to remember that you are indeed divine and at harmony with the larger cosmos. The problem is we don’t realize this and persist in believing in illusions such as individuality and the existence of good and evil. Pantheists solve the problem of evil by denying it–evil and good are mere maya or illusion which keeps us from seeing that all is just part of the same whole. The yin-yang symbol is the most familiar signifier of this teaching. Darkness and light, good and evil are two intertwined sides of the same coin. Evil isn’t really “real” so don’t ask the question, only see past the illusion. The problem I see here is that evil and suffering are quite real. A child in Chechnya whose Mom was just destroyed by a terrorist bomb does not think it to be an illusion. Evil is far too real, to deny it in order to escape from painful truths
• The Atheist Answer–There is nobody to ask, God does not exist On the opposite extreme is the answer of the atheist. In this view, the reality and existence of evil should tell us that there is no God in existence. It is just wishful thinking to posit a good God behind this evil cosmos. There are major problems with this view which go beyond the scope of these notes. To put it simply, to declare something “evil” the atheist betrays himself in that he knows both good and evil. If there is such a thing as evil, then there must be good, if there is true and real goodness, there must be a way to discern the difference. If atheism is true, then the cosmos is a random, a-moral occurrence, where there is no real good and evil. There is just stuff we like and don’t like. We are left in a bog of relativism with the atheist having nobody to be angry at for all the evil in the world, nobody to question, no real definition what “evil” even is. We are all just random blips of energy in this worldview–but we know we want to ask the question. To whom shall we bring our complaints?
• The Christian Answer – We wrestle with God and live in hope7 The Christian believer understands the world to be in a temporary fallen state where a good God is active in achieving his purposes for the world. He is saving people who are themselves evildoers while holding back his hand of judgment until his appointed time. He will then judge all evil fully and eliminate it forever. While we may not know the ultimate “WHY” for everything that happens, we trust the character of God amidst our suffering. At the same time there are many reasons given in Scripture as to why evil currently exists. The moral choices of human beings cause much of it, the design of the physical world which operates according to natural laws teaches us responsibility for our actions and has resulting dangers, and the truth that our present suffering has a transforming power in our lives which drives our loves and allegiances towards God and away from temporary things. It is precisely this last answer we see in the book of James 1:2-4 Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.
  

Should we ask the questions we feel when confronted with evil? Yes, it is more than an illusion, evil is a display that something is wrong with the world, there is a good that is missing in things.
Should we deny the existence of God because we do not understand his purposes for a world that contains both good and evil? No, we should come to him in repentance of our own evil and for his comfort and grace to live in a shipwrecked world. Should we live in the tension? I think yes. From Habakkuk’s wrestling with God we see both a good and just God and a very gritty world full of his goodness and our evil doing. At times this world causes us to scream, but we do have the company of one who weeps with us (see John chapter 11). He sees and knows our pain – he subjected himself to it with the sacrifice of his own beloved Son. For our evildoing and by our evildoing he was slain. For our salvation and his glory he redeems and will judge. We will do well to close with the words of the apostle Peter: He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

Trusting Him With You,
Reid

Notes:

1. Ludwig Köhler William Lee Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: Brill, 1971), 313.
2. James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament), electronic ed. (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), HGK7710.
3. Mormons believe that the god of this world was once like a human being in this world. The god of this world, according to Mormon theology, has a creator. For more see Frank Beckwith, The Mormon Concept of God, available online http://www.equip.org/free/DM410.htm, accessed February 22, 2007.
4. For more on God’s holiness in relation to God seeking his own honor/glory see Chapter 12, Section 9–Holiness in Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Bible Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995) or John Piper, God’s Passion for His Glory (Wheaton: Crossway, 2006)
5. Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver and Charles Augustus Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Strong's, TWOT, and GK References Copyright 2000 by Logos Research Systems, Inc., electronic ed. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 2000), xiii.
6. For more on the Problem of Evil see the following resources. Lee Strobel, The Case for Faith– see Objection 1, CS Lewis’ The Problem of Pain, Ron Nash’s Faith and Reason , and for answers from more of a Reformed perspective see John S. Feinburg’s Chapter Why I Still Believe in Christ in Spite of Evil and Suffering in Geisler and Hoffman’s Why I Am a Christian, Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe and John Piper’s restating of Jonathan Edwards thought, Is God Less Glorious Because He Ordained that Evil Be which is available online at http://www.desiringgod.org/
7. Other theistic faiths like Judaism and Islam also see God as having good purposes for permitting evil. However, the cross gives the Christian story a unique view of God’s relationship to evil. He does not conquer in spite of evil and suffering, he conquers through the suffering of his own Son at the hands of evil people.

Over the last several days our lives have been a bit crazy.  It started with a few crazy hours in my wife's life on Thursday.  During the course of 90 minutes Kasey was bombarded with tough news.  First, we found out that one of our good friends' babies has a large amount of fluid on the brain at 20 weeks into the pregnancy.  The prognosis was not good.  We are praying.  Then she got word that her maternal grandmother had a catastrophic stroke and it looked like a severe situation.  Next, Kasey helped paramedics assist our next door neighbor who himself had a stroke - this turned out to be minor. Hours have now turned to days. 

Over the weekend I traveled to Virginia to preach and teach four messages with a group of college athletes from the Mid Atlantic region.  It was a great weekend extending the hope of the gospel - the imminence of eternity fresh on my mind.  Kasey remained with our kids and in close contact with her family who were closely monitoring her grandmother's condition.  Over the course of the last three days, her condition has shown extreme damage to the brain and it looks like she will not recover.  We are now waiting for news of her grandmother's passing.  Tomorrow I will put my wife and Tommy on a plane and take the mantle of leading our girls for a few days. Kasey will spend time with her parents and other family to be there when her grandmother dies.  We are so thankful that Mamaw's deepest trust is in Christ her savior who will shortly escort her home. 

I believe death makes all people pause and think about what is going on under the sun.  It is a shrill breaking into the everyday where we go about our business as if life will rotate on forever for us.  Mortality beckons and speaks to us to wrestle with life, turn the soul towards God, hope towards the future, and remember the urgency of the mission to which we have been called. There is nothing as normal as death - while at the same time there is nothing as foreign to life.  It indeed is a great enemy, an abnormal encroacher on what we know to be good - life.  The final enemy has been defeated - even the sting of death is different for those who have fallen asleep in Jesus.  So tonight I am ever convinced of the importance of the gospel - and our call to extend it into our worlds. 

I would not have desired to be doing anything other than what I was able to do this weekend.  Share the majestic living Christ with the coming generation - and now there is no other place I would rather be than home.  To love my family and send Kasey out to her loved ones.  And I pray that we all join Mamaw some day in that celestial city - which one day will come down when the earth is recreated anew.  The day when the Kingdom invades this earth with fullness and finality.  Then creation will be set free from this bondage to sin, death and decay and will will revel and bask in the glory of our great King.

Here is part two of our Men of the Old Ways Video - Should a man wear pink when out on the town? The best of these is coming up soon.

If one company removes Digital Rights Management systems from its music content I believe their stuff will sell like crazy...this is interesting stuff and something to watch.  The first huge company to do this will either end up a long run hero or the goat who gave away the farm.

EMI mulls unprotected Web Song Sales 

Rodney Stark, Cities of God The Real Story of How Christianity Became and Urban Movement and Conquered Rome (San Francisco, Harper SanFrancisco, 2006) 280pp.

Introduction

Rodney Stark brings a unique perspective to the history and development of Christianity. Not only is he a responsible scholar who seeks to construct reliable histories, as a sociologist he looks at the events, times, places with an earthy human perspective. Stark’s most recent book, Cities of God, (henceforth COG), is an interesting analysis of how the Christian faith spread first through the urban areas of the Roman Empire. Stark tests his urban hypothesis with several available samples of social data from the first several centuries of the movement. His use of quantifiable social data from the first three centuries of Christianity makes this book unique in its treatment of the subject. Rather than reading a theory onto data, Stark’s attempt is to form a hypothesis and then test it using quantitative methods. I was interested in the book for a few reasons. First, it is looks seriously at the Christian faith as an urban phenomenon. With the populations of the world continually moving towards large urban centers, Christianity as an urban faith is of paramount interest today. Second, the book places the fledgling Christian movement in its proper social/cultural world, neither idolizing the early days of the church, nor minimizing the faith commitments of the early propagators of the gospel. In this review I will briefly summarize the work, look at what I considered some of its strengths and weaknesses, and then draw a short conclusion. At the outset I want to make my position clear. I am looking at the work primarily as a practitioner, albeit one who is scholarly interested. I am not an historian or sociologist and will make no such intimations in my review. Others will likely want to evaluate Starks work on the grounds of his statistical methods, sociological assumptions, and historical conclusions. This is not my goal. I will simply look at this work from a standpoint of one interested in history and what we might learn from the church’s past.

Summary of the Book

Stark’s main thesis in the book is very interesting indeed. His claim is that the meteoric rise of the Christian faith in the ancient world can be accounted for by the following factors. First, that religious conversion takes place through existing social networks and relationships. Second, these networks primarily took root in the densely packed urban centers of the Roman Empire. Third, the growth of Christianity in a relatively short time span can be accounted for by a moderate rate of conversion in these major population centers.

To support his thesis he first develops a sociology of conversion from research done with the Moonies in the United States during the second half of the twentieth century (COG 8-13). He then uses this to reinforce the idea that conversation comes first through relational connections and only secondarily through ascent to new belief systems. Stark goes on to support his thesis by researching social data in 31 major cities of the empire. He first models how moderate rates of conversion in cities and spreading through travel/commerce could easily account for the flowering growth of the faith. Along the way he adjusts and supports his conclusions by looking at various social conditions and their affect upon acceptance of Christian beliefs. These additional factors are a literal tour de force of ancient religious practices in the Roman Empire. He spans the influence of eastern religions (Isis and Cybele worship), thoroughly factors in the rich response to the gospel in Hellenized Jewish communities of the Diaspora, and dances through the influence (or more accurately lack of influence) of the various Gnostic heresies so popular with religious scholars and pop fiction of our day. He finishes with a brief chapter on the last days of Paganism before closing with an exhortation towards the use of quantifiable data in testing our historical hypotheses. The book also includes a thorough appendix highlighting the data underlying his research – all the sociology research geeks will rejoice in this I am sure.

Critical Analysis

In evaluating this work I will do so by briefly looking at what I considered to be the strengths and weaknesses of the book. I will look first at the strengths as they occupy most of my analysis, and then move to one major drawback I found in the book. I consider the latter minor in comparison to the strengths, but it does involve serious theological assumptions which affect our understanding of the progress of Christianity.

Strengths

I found Stark’s analysis to have many benefits to both our historical understanding as well as application to contemporary life and ministry. To look at the positive aspects of his work I will first comment on his emphasis on social networks and conversion. I will then look at the relationship of this emphasis to Christianity as an urban phenomenon. Next I will comment on his focus Paul’s missionary activity burgeoning from Hellenized Diaspora Jewish communities before closing with Stark’s analysis of historical studies in the ancient empire (City Abstracts, Gnosticism, Isis/Cybele worship).

Conversion as a Sociological Phenomenon

Stark’s argument is based upon a certain social understanding of conversion. I found this to be both helpful and a bit theologically shallow. First, expanding on research on conversions done with those moving over to Sun Yung Moon’s Unification Church (Moonies), Stark establishes that people move from one religion to another distinct belief system through relationships in social networks (COG 8-13). Only when strong social bonds exist in the new religion, do people find the courage and strength to move out of their traditional religious setting. In concluding his summary of recent research on conversion he makes the following summary statement:

By now dozens of close-up studies of conversion have been conducted. All of them confirm that social networks are the basic mechanism through which conversion takes place. To convert someone, you must first become their close and trusted friend. But even your best friends will not convert if they already are highly committed to another faith. (COG 13.)

I found this to be a helpful understanding for those seeking to share the gospel with others today. Evangelistic methods that are not highly relational, that do not include opportunities to love and do life with others, may be perceived as inauthentic and they may not be very effective. There is a mammoth shortcoming in this view in that almost relegates God to the sidelines of the act of conversion. This is primarily due to the author’s theological views, which color his understanding of conversion. This will be a feature of the work which will be addressed in a moment, but for now I will only say that a social network understanding of evangelism to be very helpful. Finally, while Stark does make mention of the strength of monotheism in providing both missionary zeal and long term commitment to “the one true God” his focus is clearly that conversions happen when the non committed are connected relationally with the faithful. It is in this ground that conversions take place and such soils were readily available in the urban contexts of the Roman Empire.

The Urban Spread of Christianity

Stark’s treatment of the role of urban centers in early Christianity is also very insightful. Cities in that time (as are cities today), were centers of commerce, greater population density, diversity of peoples, and the movement/exchange of ideas. In the Roman Empire travel increasingly took place via sea routes with the Roman road system being difficult to pass with commercial goods. The roads were a great network throughout the empire, but they were designed primarily for the nimble movement of roman soldiers throughout the provinces (COG 74). As a result the major port cities became the preferred urban hubs for commercial travel. Christian believers committed to the new faith would carry their beliefs with them establishing social networks in the port cities where they lived and did their work. Believers saw discipleship to Jesus as a new way of life, at times being known simply as followers of the way (Acts 9:1, 2). They lived and travelled the empire in the normal courses of life taking the message of the gospel with them into new social networks, precisely the contexts in which conversions take place. Stark traces the early movements of the gospel through the larger, Hellenized, port cities of the empire, with those being closest to Jerusalem becoming Christianized first (COG 76-83). Stark also connects the success of early Christianity to cities which had prominent religious diversity and acceptance of other eastern religions (namely Cybele and Isis worship). His idea here was that cities with these religions were already accepting beliefs that were different than those of the classical paganism of Greece and Rome hence making religious movement easier. This focus on the successful mission to cities should also encourage Christians who are interested in the mission of Jesus to focus on urban social networks for making disciples in the post Christian west.

The Mission within Diaspora Communities

Another strength of the book is Stark’s focus on Hellenized Jews of Diaspora communities which were found in the port cities. These Jewish communities had become very Greek in culture with many leaving some of the strictures of The Law (COG 125) prior to the arrival of the Christian gospel. These were Greek speaking Jews who were almost living between cultures; quite ready to accept a new way which is in many ways are middle ground between Athens and Jerusalem. Stark sees the Christian mission to these communities a significant factor in much early Christian conversion. His conclusion:

For many Hellenized Jews, a monotheism with deep Jewish roots, but without the Law, would have been extremely attractive (COG 126)

Hellenized Jews and “God-fearers” who were associated with the synagogues would be the beachhead in many major Roman cities. The result of the conversion of Diaspora Jews would be vehement opposition from the Jewish traditionalists holding onto their culture – precisely what we observe in the book of Acts.

A few final strengths

There are a few other features I want to mention before closing my remarks on the strengths of the work. First, the brief abstracts on the 31 prominent ancient cities were very valuable as an educational experience. It was interesting to see each geographical region of ancient Europe and the major cities that propelled it into the middle ages (See Chapter 2 – The Urban Empire). Additionally the background and theology of the ancient near eastern religions of Isis and Cybele were very interesting and bit bizarre. I will just refer the reader to page 91 of the book for some spooky weird stuff on the Cybelene priests. I will just say that I would have been a quick drop out from Cybele Seminary and that modern drag queens have nothing on these ancient enthusiasts of the eastern goddess. Finally, the chapter treating the history and influence on Gnosticism is worth the price of the book. For those who have read the Ehrmans and Pagels of the world on the so-called alternative Christian communities in the early church, this chapter is extremely helpful. Stark demonstrates sociologically that these aberrant and heretical sects were not major players in the expanse and propagation of the faith. They were heretics practicing a different religion than the Christian faith which spread through the urban centers of Rome. For those interested in discussions of the heretical Gnostic sects, chapter 6 of Starks work is a welcomed addition to that discussion.

One Glaring Weakness

Reading Theological Presuppositions into Research

My main frustration with Cities of God was not sociological but theological in nature. Starks is not a theologian, but he presses his theological perspectives a bit awkwardly into some of his research. The place this surfaces is discussing the way conversions take place and what God can and cannot do in the process. The problematic sections surface in the chapter on Christianization. He begins with a discussion of a phenomenon known as mass conversions which are recorded in the book of Acts and thought by some historians to be the only explanation for the massive growth of the church in its first 300 years (COG 64). Stark finds these mass conversions (including those recorded in Acts) dubious for four primary reasons – theological, sociological, historic, and arithmetic (COG 65). For my purposes I will focus on his theological objection to mass conversions, which in fact he literally applies to all Christian conversion in general. I will quote him at length so as to not misrepresent his view:

Harnak was right that mass conversions would qualify as miracles. And that’s precisely the theological basis for rejecting their occurrence. God could have created human beings incapable of sin and in no need of Christ’s sacrifice. But he didn’t. God could have caused all human beings to accept Christ. But he didn’t. Either act would have violated free will. It was in this spirit that, as scripture reports, Jesus charged his followers to go and “make disciples of all nations.” So why would God perform a lot of little conversion miracles? Intervention in human affairs to compel even one person, let alone a few thousand people, to embrace Christianity is inconsistent with essential Christian doctrine. (COG 65, emphasis in original.)

I find this quotation almost unbelievable in light of both church history and the witness of the New Testament. First, there are vast Christian sources from history which teach precisely that conversion is in fact a work of God This tradition can be traced through all Christian sects and is found prominently in reformed groups represented in the works of Spurgeon, Edwards, Bunyan, Knox, Calvin, and St. Augustine of Hippo. Yet even outside of the reformed line others consistently give God at least a role in conversion. The great Catholic doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, a strong proponent of the freedom of the will in conversion, readily taught that man cannot be converted but by an act of God. A brief citation from his Summa Theologica will suffice.

Likewise, the order of nature can only be restored, i.e. man's will can only be subject to God when God draws man's will to Himself, as stated above. So, too, the guilt of eternal punishment can be remitted by God alone, against Whom the offense was committed and Who is man's Judge. And thus in order that man rise from sin there is required the help of grace, both as regards a habitual gift, and as regards the internal motion of God. (Summa Theologica – Question 109 – The necessity of Grace, Article 7 - Whether man can rise from sin without the help of grace?)

It seems that Stark’s view here is at odds with, at the very least, large segments of Christian thought and history; it seems equally out of step with the New Testament. John’s gospel describes conversion as a new birth and that birth as being from the work of God. Additionally, Jesus taught clearly “all that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (John 6:37) and additionally “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). Paul uses the metaphor of Christians being made alive by God to describe conversion in Colossians 2:13. Finally, Paul’s treatment of calling in 1 Corinthians 1 and Romans 8 also seem to indicate God’s intervening work in conversion. I do not want to go into the detailed debates surrounding the doctrines of election and effectual calling in this book review, I only want to say that Stark seems to fall radically to one side of the spectrum in describing God’s role in conversion. Stark’s view is almost completely naturalistic, a conversion based only on sociological factors, needing little if any work from the Spirit of God. Additionally, the dismissal of the accounts in Acts of mass conversion is also suspect for all who maintain a high view of the inspiritation of Scripture. Scholars who research the effects of preaching in historic revivals may also find the statement:

One sermon, no matter how dynamic, does not prompt the fundamental shift of identity essential to a religious conversion; even after these listeners had been baptized, there would have been a great bit still to be done before any of them could have been claimed as Christian. (COG 64, 65)

to be a bit problematic. I acknowledge that Stark may be using the term conversion in a more holistic fashion, but when dealing with theological issues I would have preferred greater clarity. Stark’s theological views of conversion and freewill perhaps bias him against supernatural explanations of early church growth which would perhaps compliment his conclusions based on helpful sociology. I found this to be the most glaring weakness of the book.

Conclusion

Overall, I highly enjoyed Cities of God and recommend it highly as a useful study for those thinking about missional engagement in complex cultural settings. His insights into the importance of social networks and urban centers will prove helpful to church planters and missionaries who take the message of the gospel into our world today. For those who can see past his theological perspective (read – relax intensely reformed brethren), I commend this book to those interested in studies pertaining to early Christianity and missiology.

The following were notes given along with the message "More Sovereign Than We Believe" given at the Inversion Fellowship on February 8th 2007.

Who are the Chaldeans?

The people mentioned as the coming judgment upon Judah were known to the Hebrew people as the Kasdim which is translated “The Chaldeans” or at times “The Babylonians.” They came from an area known as Chaldea which was southeast from modern day Baghdad. The empire rose very quickly to power and prominence in the ancient near east conquering the vast Assyrian empire by 612 BC. The Chaldeans are sometimes called the Neo-Babylonian empire which was founded under a dude named Nabopolassar (626-605). The empire grew and found its high point under the leadership of Nebuchadnezzar (605-562), a person many are familiar with from history. The first part of the book of Daniel is set in Babylon under the rule of this great Babylonian king. R.L. Smith wrote the following about the Chaldeans:

Kaldo was a country situated along the Euphrates and Tigris rivers between the Persian Gulf and the southernmost cities of Babylonia. It was a region of swamps, canebrakes and lakes with few urban areas. The inhabits seem to have relied on fishing, hunting, small-scale agriculture and some cattle-breeding for their livelihood. The region was divided into tribal areas. The people lived in loosely organized tribal groups and were fiercely independent of each other and especially of the major cities of the north, such as Babylon and Nineveh.1

They would just raid, pillage, and destroy all that got in their way. Then as a result of their “success” they became that which they despised. Then almost as fast as they grew to prominence on the near eastern stage, they exited being conquered and over run by the Persians under the leadership of Cyrus in 539 BC. Both the fast ascent to power and the subsequent decline of the Babylonians achieved God’s purposes. First, to bring judgment on the nation of Judah which was in a state of chaos. Second, to fulfill the words of Jeremiah who prophesied that Judah would return to the land a mere 70 years after its exile (Jeremiah 29:10). The Persians were to issue the decrees to repopulate and rebuild Jerusalem and send the people of God back to the land.

Sovereignty and Providence

You may have heard the words Sovereignty and Providence thrown around from time to time and wondered what the terms mean. To be honest sometimes the two ideas get a bit jumbled together. Though the terms are certainly related they actually refer to slightly different emphases in the teachings of Scripture. Let’s look at both ideas and see how they are related. When we speak of the Sovereignty of God we are referring to the Bible’s basic teaching that God’s dominion or rule in the world is total: he wills as he chooses and carries out all that he wills, and none can stay his hand or thwart his plans.2 In other words when we speak of God as Sovereign, we declare that there is no other power or authority higher than his. He is the supreme ruler extending over human governments, spiritual beings, and each individual life. In looking at Providence, Dr. Bruce Ware provides a concise and helpful definition for the concept that captures the Bible’s teaching.

God continually oversees and directs all things pertaining to the created order in such a way that 1) he preserves in existence and provides for the creation he has brought into being, and 2) he governs and reigns supremely over the entirety of the whole creation in order to fulfill all of his intoned purposes in and through it. 3

The two concepts to keep in mind are preservation and governance—Providences involves God’s sustaining and governing all things. When we speak of God’s providence we think of the ways in which God is involved with creation, in directing all things to accomplish his purposes for the world. Now lets put these two together. In the Bible we see that God is the supreme sovereign authority in the world who works things out in and through creation through providence. Sovereignty tells us who is in charge, providence describes the ways in which God does his thing in the world. Many, many scriptures describe God’s sovereign providence, I will list some here for your further study.

• God’s rule in the actions of people and nations history (Daniel 2:20-23, Isaiah 46:8-11)
• God’s rule in our lives (Acts 14:16-18; 17:24-28 Matthew 6:25-34; 10:26-33)
• God’s rule over both good and evil – each with its own purpose (Story of Joseph Genesis 48-50; specifically Gen 50:18-21; Isaiah 45:5-7; Acts 2:22-23. I will expound on these in a second on the following page.

One of the great struggles we have as human beings is perceiving God’s work in the mundane of every day life. It just looks to us that sometimes this world is out of God’s control and that evil is triumphing amidst the silence of God. This is in fact what provoked Habakkuk's first question of God. As human beings we forget how narrow a view we have on life and history. We only see right before our faces. God is not like us in this regard. He sees end from beginning and wisely knows how to accomplish his purposes. Sometimes we need blessing and joy in our lives, other times we may need sorrow and suffering in order to see life properly. God is merciful and gracious to do whatever it takes to lead us to that which is life. We are not puppets of God, but we must remember that we are indeed creatures, not sovereigns. God is not the co-pilot of the world, he is the pilot and also the builder of the plane. He is not a passive God who waits to see what you tell him to do. He is God, high and exalted God. Yet the beauty of the gospel teaches us that God is not distant and aloof from us directing the affairs of his world from afar. On the contrary he calls us friends, leads us as his very own children, loves us enough to discipline us, and desires intimate relationship with us. In the Cross of Christ we see God himself dying for our sins. It is a statement of love in that God wants us to have himself and did all that was necessary to reconcile us to him.

Yet sovereignty and providence can also have a bitter edge for some of us. For indeed it places God right in the midst of our suffering. It also provokes questions: If God is all good and all loving, how does he use evil things as part of his plan? To this complex question we now turn.

God’s Sovereignty over Good and Evil

 If God is Sovereign, why do bad things happen? How Can God be good if he permits heinous evils to occur? Maybe God is only in control of the good things and not the bad? Maybe God is not in control at all? Maybe we are?

The questions pour out when thinking of the complex realities of good and evil in our world. Philosophers have discussed these issues for ages. Believers and unbelievers see the very same circumstances in very different lights. One man suffers immensely and meets God right there, while another curses God for the pain that he sees all around him. This week I am not going to answer what many have termed the “Problem of Evil” — perhaps we will touch this next week in the Lesson Notes. This week I am concerned with a different question, based on a conclusion. If we concluded that the Scriptures teach that God is sovereign and providentially “works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Ephesians 1:11) how does God use evil without being evil himself. I find the teaching of the Bible to be that God indeed is sovereign over both good and evil. We see this in the classic statement ending the narrative of Joseph’s life in Genesis 50.

His brothers also came and fell down before him and said, “Behold, we are your servants.” 19 But Joseph said to them, “Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? 20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people? should be kept alive, as they are today. 21 So do not fear; I will provide for you and your little ones.” Thus he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.

Additionally in Isaiah 45:5-7 the prophet tells us that God makes both “well-being” and “calamity” (Hebrew word—Ra-which can be translated evil). Finally and most persuasively there are striking truths in the book of Acts describing God’s using the sin of people to accomplish the most glorious act in all of human history—the crucifixion of the Son of God. The following is an excerpt of a sermon from Peter, one of Jesus’ first followers.

“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know— 23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

Why was Jesus crucified? It was the definite plan and foreknowledge of God! Shocking. How was this accomplished? He was murdered by the hands of lawless men. So my conclusion is that God uses both human good and human evil to accomplish his will in the world. Yet if this is so, how does God control evil without being the source of it? This is an important question. For it is clear that God is completely good and has in him no darkness at all. If this be the case, he cannot be the cause of evil even if he uses it for his ends. To help with our closing thoughts, I want to give a very brief (and no doubt insufficient) definition of what I mean by evil. As God is the source of all goodness, all that is a direct turning away from God and his will would be deemed evil. All that reflects or accords with his nature is seen as good.

Many see the following as helpful to understanding God’s providential relationship to good and evil.4

• Direct Causative — God has a direct causative relationship to all things good. God brings about all good things in the world and everything that is good reflects something of who he is and what he desires for the world. James teaches us that every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights (James 1:17).
• Indirect Permissive — God has an indirect permissive relationship to evil. The evil that we do comes from the inclination of our desires to live apart from and turn away from God and his commands. God is not the direct cause of this, we are. Yet God guides human sin to his greater ends in order to accomplish his purposes. He is not the source of the sin, but he chooses in some cases to allow it.

These questions are perhaps some of the deepest in all of Scripture, but let me close on a more personal note. Many would say that God has no control, no say, no active role in our pain. I think those who say this want to make it easier for us to approach God, that we know it is not his fault. As I think about all the wrongs I have done and all the wrong which has been done to me is it better to think “God had nothing to do with it?” I know these are immensely painful questions. Over the years as I have watched the suffering in the world—both mine and those close to me—I have slowly begun to believe that it is all ordered by a loving God. I have embraced that I do not understand everything, but I cherish his presence in my pain. I have realized that it just might be the case that redemption is seen in a world with both great good and great evils. That it just might be the case that God is transforming situations that begin hellish and tragic to bring people into joy, hope and peace with him. Adoniram Judson, the first missionary from the United States once said something about his own immense suffering5 which offers me perpetual hope. He once recounted “If I had not felt certain that every additional trial was ordered by infinite love and mercy, I could not have survived my accumulated sufferings." God indeed is near to the broken-hearted and he has not abandoned his children. All suffering will one day have served its purpose and it too will end. We live in hope, we live under his loving care, and we embrace the path of Jesus, even suffering for others in his name.

The Lord be with you, Reid S. Monaghan

Notes:

1. Quoted in David Prior, The Message of Joel, Micah, and Habakkuk (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1998) 215
2. J. I. Packer, Concise Theology : A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House, 1995, c1993).
3. Bruce Ware, God’s Greater Glory—The Exalted God of Scripture and the Christian Faith (Wheaton: Crossway Books 2004) 17.
4. The best work today on God’s Providence is the aforementioned work God’s Greater Glory by Dr. Bruce Ware. These concepts are expanded on in this work on pages 105-109. The book is a bit technical but I recommend it highly for all struggling with the ideas of Sovereignty and Providence.
5. Judson buried three wives, 7 of his children, and underwent unspeakable physical pain living in foreign lands.
6. Quoted in Giants of the Missionary Trail, (Chicago: Scripture Press Foundation, 1954), 73.

Our guys with Inversion Media have rolled out Episode I of "Men of the Old Ways" - a fun little knock off on the Man Law commercials.  Here is the first episode...simply entitled hair.

All our past video productions are now on YouTube on our Inversion Media page. 

 

CBS.com has a page up featuring some of the super bowl ads from last night's game - Here is the link - and skip the Go Daddy ad will you.  My favorites where the Bud Light fist bump, the Garmin Navigation battle with the giant maposaurous, and the careerbuilder.com battles.

Music shapes so much of our lives, as does film in our days. This semester we just began a teaching series entitled "Lessons from the Old School: The Prophecy of Habakkuk" - To have a bit of fun with the "Old School" we tracked through TV/Film/Music of the last 30-40 years.  For those of you who were born in the seventies and grew up in the eighties, this is a fun 1 min trip down memory lane. Here is the video from YouTube.

Now for all of you Indie rockers don't complain that this is all mainstream music - we wanted the stuff from previous decades to be recognizable to all...but if you must you can watch it and then go rage against "labels" and "the man" 

 

General News

• Yes, we all know that paganism (real polytheistic worship) is on the rise, especially in places like Europe.  Well, now the old Greek gods of Bulfinch's Mythology are being worshiped again today.  The Guardian has an interesting article about those today who worship the thunderbolt hurling Zeus and the faithful God of the sun Apollo.
  
• Superbowl parties at churches can now legally go forward due to a clarification given by the NFL.  I think the use the really big screens was a problem and even that looks to be OK now.  I remember doing SuperBowl parties with college students and we would show a half-time video with Christian testimonies.  We always had to "turn off the game" then we could share the gospel.  Then, we would stop the message, and then "turn back on the game."  It is goofy that the NFL even tries to control these things.  But alas, we tried to play by the rules.  Article at WorldNet Daily.  Apparently someone put together a video saying that the church has prohibited either team from using a "Hail Mary" at the end of the game.  Too funny.

Just for Fun

• Find out How Stuff Works
  

Technology 

• I think I found my reason for staying with Windows/PCs and not jumping to the Macinslosh.  The new version of MS Office for Windows just rocks.  The UI is very different, but I think it is a huge improvement for most tasks.  I was concerned I would not like the Ribbon, but now after living with it for a bit I think it is great. Wikipedia has a bunch of details.
  
• Speaking of Microsoft - check out the original MS Mouse. 

The following were handed out along with the message "Shipwrecked Earth and the Sovereignty of God" given for the Inversion Fellowship on February 1st 2007.

Is Our World Shipwrecked?

The book of Habakkuk begins with a prophet reflecting on the chaos of his world and questioning God as to how long this state of affairs will continue without God intervening. His world was a world of violence, injustice, strife and contention. In short, his world is our world, a world that is fallen and broken with sin. Some today would debate the reality that we live in a shipwrecked world, that this world is fractured and not the way it is supposed to be. Some say that humans are by nature nice and good people, that we just have bad education and we can fix all our problems given time. While I do find reasons in this age for optimism (not in education, but in the work of God) I am also a realist in relation to the condition of the world. The world is indeed full of goodness but it is also deeply marred by sin. GK Chesterton, a prolific writer in the early 20th century, once poignantly wrote about the current state of affairs which is our world. He describes it as the aftermath of a shipwreck and his language is insightful

And my haunting instinct that somehow good was not merely a tool to be used, but a relic to be guarded, like the goods from Crusoe's ship - even that had been the wild whisper of something originally wise, for, according to Christianity, we were indeed the survivors of a wreck, the crew of a golden ship that had gone down before the beginning of the world.1

There are many things one could point to as “evidence” for the world indeed being a shipwreck, being fallen from a good state. I will briefly list a few and make some comments.

The history and actions of human beings — The history of the human race is one littered with war, oppression, murder, and mayhem. Many would have us believe fanciful narratives about the grandness and goodness of people, but the evidence is shockingly to the contrary. The British Journalist Steve Turner once wrote the following satirical lines in his poem entitled Creed

We believe that man is essentially good. It's only his behavior that lets him down. This is the fault of society. Society is the fault of conditions. Conditions are the fault of society.2

Of course this is a satirical take on the modern mindset revealing an evident contradiction. Societies are nothing but relationships of human beings. So let it be clear—the reason why things go bad in human communities and relationships is because of us. The history and actions of human beings repeatedly shows us that we are not the way we should be.

The mingling of good and evil in the world — Life is a mingled reality of many good things haunted with many evils. Our own lives, the cycles of nature, the realities of disease and sickness, and the eventuality of the great enemy of death all point to a world which is a mixture of good and bad. My life—some days it is full of great joys, others...not so much. The weather—we cannot live without rain, wind, etc. but these same forces can destroy and rack our lives with grief. Disease—anyone who has suffered or watched loved ones suffer with cancer and the myriad of other perplexing conditions knows that something is wrong. Life itself ends with the shocking and abrupt finality of death. Death is universal, it should be seen as the most normal thing in the world. Yet it is not. Every funeral is indeed a testimony that something is wrong, that death is as the Scriptures teach—the last enemy which needs defeat.

The moral training of children - If you ask any parent, they will quickly tell you that no one has to teach them how to be selfish, how to take stuff from other kids, how to lie, how to pull hair, or punch another kid in the nose. To the contrary, everyone knows that we have to consistently teach kids what is good, right and true. This must be constantly and consistently reinforced in order to teach kids to behave. Yet even when the good is known, we do not always do it, for there is a problem with the will. In the book of Romans we see the great struggle that happens in us when we know the good and fail to do it. It is a condition from which we need rescue.

There are many ways that the fall is evidenced around us even when it is denied by many, these are but a few. So what is the biblical view of the world? Is it just a pessimistic, this world sucks, type of attitude. By no means! For the fall and the shipwreck are but part of the story. For we are radically optimistic because this is God’s world and he is at work in redeeming it! Permit me if you will to quote Chesterton one more time at length as his imagery is so powerful.

I know this feeling fills our epoch, and I think it freezes our epoch. For our Titanic purposes of faith and revolution, what we need is not the cold acceptance of the world as a compromise, but some way in which we can heartily hate and heartily love it. We do not want joy and anger to neutralize each other and produce a surly contentment; we want a fiercer delight and a fiercer discontent. We have to feel the universe at once as an ogre’s castle, to be stormed, and yet as our own cottage, to which we can return at evening. No one doubts that an ordinary man can get on with this world: but we demand not strength enough to get on with it, but strength enough to get it on. Can he hate it enough to change it, and yet love it enough to think it worth changing? Can he look up at its colossal good without once feeling acquiescence? Can he look up at its colossal evil without once feeling despair? Can he, in short, be at once not only a pessimist and an optimist, but a fanatical pessimist and a fanatical optimist? Is he enough of a pagan to die for the world, and enough of a Christian to die to it? In this combination, I maintain, it is the rational optimist who fails, the irrational optimist who succeeds. He is ready to smash the whole universe for the sake of itself. 3

The story of the gospel, the narrative of the gospel is one in which all of creation is redeemed by the work of Christ. Human communities will be made right, evil has been and will be finally thwarted in every form, and the last enemy of death is also a defeated foe. In fact, the apostle Paul does something very interesting when reflecting upon the death and resurrection of Jesus. He proclaims Jesus the victor over our sin, death, and the powers of hell—and he even talks junk to the great enemy of the grave. A selection for your meditation:

51 Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53 For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. 54 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.” 55 “O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?” 56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:51-57 ESV

It is not wishful thinking—it is Old School gospel truth...remember the work of Jesus and rejoice—even amidst a world that is indeed a shipwreck, and then join him in the revolution to turn the world upside down redeeming it in a revolution of love, grace, and forgiveness. Live as an irrational optimist in the midst of wars, terror, disease, and death...even in light of your own besetting sins. Choose to live upside down—it is the more excellent way.

Questioning God 

If you ever wondered about the appropriateness of questioning God Habakkuk can put that to rest for you. In this book we see a prophet, who we assume was a righteous man, openly questioning God about the condition of the world and where he found his life. As one author has put it: Habakkuk raises openly the kind of questions any thinking and believing person ought to ask.4 We see him questioning, this is not surprising, but we also see God answer him twice. But what are we to do with the overwhelming biblical evidence that we are to have faith and not doubts? Let me put forward the suggestion that one can question God in faith. Let me explain.

If we come to God with questions, we may come in several different postures. First, we can come in a doubt that is not in faith accusing God of wrong doing, speaking arrogantly about things which we are ignorant, effectively putting God on trial as a guilty criminal. This does not honor him. I call this coming to God with a clinched fist. Secondly we can come to God out of spite, declaring our independence of him, effectively denying him and choosing to go our own way. I call this coming to God with our middle finger. Personally, I have interacted with some atheist types who are literally hacked off at the God which they deny even exists. It is a strange phenomena but very real. Finally, there is a way to question God in faith. By this I mean we come to God confused, in pain, yes even angry at him. We come to him because we are in need, we are perplexed at life and cry out to him seeking an answer. I call this coming to God with the open hand. We need not put on a fake, happy-clappy Christian mask in our lives. We desire all the real, authentic, messiness of our souls to be poured out before our Father. We come like the man in Mark’s gospel5 who says to Jesus—”I do believe, help me in my unbelief” Such questions honor God, they come because we truth him and know him; we believe he is good and that he cares for us. So Habakkuk the prophet comes to God and says “What the heck is going on!!? and “God, why don’t you do anything about this evil!!?” and God answers him with truth. Then Habakkuk asks another question about God’s answer, and the dialogue continues. This is our dance, to honor and trust a Sovereign God who rules our lives while relating to him in honesty, authenticity, and the gritty real of life in the shipwrecked world. We walk that road together—in our sins and yet in the grace of God.

Notes:

1. GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy (New York: NY, Image books, 1959) 80.  Originally published: New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1908.
2. Steve Turner, (English journalist), "Creed," his satirical poem on the modern mind. Quoted in from Ravi Zacharias’, Can Man live Without God?  (Nashville: Word, 1992) 42-44.
3. Chesterton, 71.
   
4. David Prior, The Message of Joel, Micah & Habakkuk: Listening to the Voice of God. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1999, 212.
5. See Mark 9:14-29. In this passage a man brings a demonized boy to Jesus for healing. Jesus tells him that all things are possible for him who believes. The man responds in human frailness and trepidation. “I believe! Help me in my unbelief” - I think this is life with God—passion and faith! Yet we doubt and need his help to believe...

The guys who were responsible for this, decided to speak, well, uh, sort of, speak to the media about their involvement in a publicity stunt for a cartoon network show that mobilized counter terrorism efforts in Boston. 

I would love your opinion on this.  Do you think this is harmless fun?  Wise guys who need to be slapped around? Guys that crossed lines and ought to be prosecuted as criminals?