OK, I just watched this video with my wife.  She had seen it before but I had not.  Lets just say somebody was all teary eyed watching this...great love, great theology, great God.  I'm not saying who was the crier...I'll keep his identity under wraps.

Some of you have probably seen this already but in case you haven't click play below:

Over the past few days I have been in Seattle with a group of men beginning Mars Hill Seattle's first class of its new Pastors Training Program. Mars Hill is investing in men from around the country to provide training for planting churches in the coming year. We will fly out every six weeks or so, with assignments in between to walk together towards launching churches in 2009. 

It has been a great four days and I have greatly enjoyed meeting the guys and being invested in by the staff at Mars Hill Church.  Many thanks to Scott, Gary, Tyler , and Dave of the church planting office of Mars Hill.  Many thanks to Mark for the few hours he invested with us on Friday.  Many thanks to deacon Adriel Ifland and her tireless work pulling all the details together. Adriel writes of her passion for this program over at the Reforming the Feminine Blog - Her passion to see godly men raised up who will treat women with honor is quite amazing.  You can read her post here - 16 men in my life - I highly recommend it.

And last, and most important, many thanks to the risen Jesus who leads us forward in gospel centered, culturally engaged church planting in our day.

Introduction

Every now and again I come across books which do two things.  They provide great food for thought and they make me laugh out loud.  It is a very rare convergence of events but nonetheless there are some authors out there which succeed at uniting the horns of thought and humor in my life. This summer I just finished reading one such book, one The Devils Delusion - Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions by David Berlinski.  For those of you who are not familiar with him Berlinski is a sort of rogue academic who is involved with the work of the Discovery Institute (shhh...they are involved with intelligent design...shhh). Slate recently did an interesting piece on him if you want some background on the man described in that article as "a critic, a contrarian, and—by his own admission—a crank"

He holds a PhD in Philosophy from Princeton has taught at numerous institutions of higher learning and has published books on Mathematics and the history of science.  He is a bit of a rogue because he is a skeptical secular Jew who most recently has been writing against the overconfident reach of the the Darwinian establishment.  He also is an American academic who lives in Paris...which seems to point to "rogue."  I don't think he is too much of a troublemaker but he is a bit punchy and mischievous in his writings.

The book is another work which addresses the arguments of militant (perhaps obnoxious?) atheists such as Sam Harris, Daniel Dennet and the now infamous Richard Dawkins (aka Dick to the Dawk). This book, however, has a particular idea in its cross hairs; the idea that only atheism can lay claim to being "scientific" as well as some of the more ridiculous things atheistic thinkers claim in the "name of science." It seems that the likes of the new atheist posse have big love for him as well.  From Slate:

The atheists, meanwhile, can't stand him: According to Daniel Dennett, Berlinski exudes a "rich comic patina of smug miseducation"; Richard Dawkins implies that he may be wicked to the core; and blogger-ringleader P.Z. Myers has called him a "pompous pimple" and a "supercilious snot." 

How nice of these fellows! In reading this book I can see why they might find Berlinski a bit maddening.  For one, he is spooky smart, erudite, irreverent towards their cause and quite pithy in his deconstruction of their cherished religion of scientism. Quite frankly, I have found Berlinski to be quite adept at the lost art of polemics.  With a society that is either too squeamish to oppose any ideas or is so ridiculously uncivil in dealing with opponents, a nice intelligent polemicist is a treat to read. 

In this review I will summarize the book's argument using many of Berlinski's own words.  I will then share some of the things I enjoyed in Berlinski's book as well as few times where I felt him just a little bit unfair - well, ok, maybe only one time.  I also have a few questions for Dr. Berlinski which I will ask here in closing.

Summary

In beginning his book, Berlinski provides a great preface that summarizes succinctly his aims in writing.  He quite frankly wants to call the scientific hegemony on its bluff - that it, and it alone can answer all of life's questions...if given enough time of course. In addition, he wants to dismantle the belief that religion is bankrupt as a system of understanding things which science seems hopelessly empty in addressing.  In his own words:

No scientific theory touches on the mysteries that the religious tradition addresses.  A man asking why his days are short is not disposed to turn to algebraic quantum field theory for the answer.  The answers that prominent scientific figures have offered are remarkable in their shallowness.  The hypothesis that we are nothing more than cosmic accidents has been widely accepted by the scientific community.  Figures as diverse as Bertrand Russell, Jacques Monod, Steven Weinberg, and Richard Dawkins have said it is so.  It is an article of their faith, one advanced with the confidence of men convinced that nature has equipped them to face realities the rest of us cannot bear to contemplate.  There is not the slightest reason to think this so.

While science has nothing of value to say on the great and aching questions of life, death, love, and meaning, what the religious traditions of mankind have said forms a coherant body of thought. The yearnings of the human soul are not in vain.  There is a system of belief adequate to the complexity of experience.  There is recompense for suffering.  A principle beyond selfishness is at work in the cosmos.  All will be well.

I do not know whether any of this is true.  I am certain that the scientific community does not know that it is false. (Berlinski, xiv)

So Berlinski's task is simple - show that science is full of itself and overstates its case against religion all the while making some pretty impressive leaps of faith of its own.  The book covers a diverse range of topics from philosophical arguments for God from Thomas Aquinas and others, to a rebuttal of Richard Dawkins' sophomoric argument against God's existence related to "complex entities", to some dense chapters on the standard model of quantum physics and the infinitely inventive purveyors of string theory.

I found Berlinski to be quite well read on the subjects he treats and seemed to skip around within them with both a feeling of delight and ironic skepticism.  Now on to a few things that I really found enjoyable in the book.

Enjoyable

I found many things enjoyable in The Devil's Delusion the first being his calling the almost infinite arrogance of certain thinkers to account. In recounting the words of chemist Peter Atkins, Berlinski exposes this posture: 

So much for that old fashioned human virtue known as humility. Additionally, he exposes the way that some scientists (after all, Berlinski is quite the fan of science) present their views as the only admissible discussion in any human affairs.  What Berlinski has found in reading the literature of science is that some men have created a new religion and one that demands all people submit to its tenants of the faith.  Again and again he shows that many times science has attempted to flee from certain ideas (such as design, God, morality, human uniqueness in the universe, big bang cosmology, etc) by cooking up strange explanations to avoid the obvious.

The second enjoyable aspect of the book is that it is extremely funny.  Now, I will say that you might need a bit of a background in the sciences to understand just how funny some of his prose actually is...but nonetheless the humor is transparent enough in most places for even the uninitiated reader.  Let me just drop some of his lines in for your enjoyment as well...

On the fact that "religion is the source of all violence and carnage" Berlinski has this to say:

It is religion, Christopher Hitchens claims, that is dangerous, because it is "the cause of dangerous sexual repression." Short of gender insensitivity, what could be more dangerous than sexual repression? (18)

In the same chapter, he brings one of the more blunt uses of humor when speaking of the heinous atrocities invented by atheistic thinkers and certain creations of modern scientific understanding. This was in some commentary he made on the words of physicist Steven Weinberg:

"Religion," he affirmed, "is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.  But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion (italics added by Berlinski) In speaking thus, Weinburg was warmly applauded, not one member of his audience asking the question one might have thought pertinent: Just who has imposed on the suffering of the human race poison gas, barbed wire, high explosives, experiments in eugenics, the forumula for Zyklon B, heavy artillary, pseudo-scientific justification for mass murder, cluster bombs, attack submarines, napalm, intercontinental ballistic missiles, military space platforms, and nuclear weapons? If memory serves, it was not the Vatican. (21)

Touche! If you are interested in a few more pithy quotes click the "continue reading" link at the end of this review. So let me move on to my final enjoyable aspect of the book; his exposing of the naive positions of the likes of one Sam Harris.

Harris has the habit of reducing things to simple rants and platitudes.  A quick reading of his "letter to a Christian nation" will suffice to show that he does not treat serious subjects with much rigor.  Perhaps he is just writing out of field and we need to show him charity.  Yet Berlinski is right to call him on much hot air.  One example is the atheistic treatment of human sin and behavior.  It is quite common for Harris and the like to present smart people as good people and that if we only could get rid of religion all people would live in perfect harmony.  Here is Berlinski calling them on this nonsense:

I am under most circumstances the last person on earth to think Richard Dawkins a Pollyanna, but in this case I defer to his description.  Why should people remain good when unobserved and unpoliced by God? Do people remain good when unpoliced by the police? If Dawkins believes that they do, he must explain the existence of the criminal law, and if he believes that they do not, then he must explain why moral enforcement is not needed at the place where law enforcement ends.

To the scientific atheists, the ancient idea that homo homini lupus--man is a wolf to man--leaves them shaking their heads in poodle-like perplexity.  Sam Harris has no anxieties whatsoever about presenting his own views on human morality with the enviable confidence of a man who feels that he has reached the epistemological bottom.  "Everything about human experienc," he writes, "suggests that love is more conductive to human happiness than hate is." It goes without saying, of course, that Harris believes that this is an objective claim about the human mind.  

If this is so, it is astonishing with what eagerness men have traditionally fled happiness. (34, emphasis in original)

Yes, human beings are more complicated than simply thinking we will all do right and good with one another once we have studied brain and biology. Some of the smugness and confidence of these men is amazing in light of the 20th century carnage brought about by atheistic regines (Stalin, Mao, Khamir Rouge).  It needs to be called out.

One finanl chapter is worthy of note. Chapter 8 - Our Inner Ape, a Darling and the Human Mind does a masterful job and explaining and demonstrating the actual difference between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom.  The chapter is worth the price of admission and is a needed argument in light of the atheistic mantra than human beings are nothing special in the universe.  I tell my own kids that you don't see alligators, or chimps for that matter, launching a mission to Mars.  The difference between man and ape is massive and Berlinski gives a great treatment of this subject.

Questions

Now, there are a few problems with the book and a puzzle I find in Berlinski himself.  First, there are a few places that he seems a bit unfair to his opponents.  Now, I know, Sam Harris is a big boy and can take it but it does seem he gets thrown into a bit of a guilt by association argument in aligning him with holocaust denying David Irving. Though Harris' views that the Jewish people's beliefs and actions could have brought on their suffering, making him an ally of source with Irving seemed a bit unfair (see Berlinski, 28). 

Finally I have one question for Dr. Berlinski.  Why don't you go ahead and leave the skeptical place in your views about God and come on over to the team.  He defends theism masterfully, seems to understand the biblical message and spent quite a bit of time in the book making a pretty good case for the theistic arguments.  There is a place for skepticism, in seeing through things.  But as CS Lewis once said, if you see through everything you lose your ability to see.  So I hope Dr. Berlinski would accept that which he seems to have some good knowledge thereof.  That there is a God, who created us in his image, who orders the moral universe and to whom we will give an account. 

Conclusion

Overall, I enjoyed this book quite a bit.  I particularly enjoyed the discussions of various scientific theories as I still remain a huge fan of the scientific enterprise.  This is no anti-science book, but rather a book which will not allow the smuggling of atheistic philosophy into the room by putting a lab coat on its back.  Science is the empirical study of repeatable causes, it is not the sum of all knowledge and human experience.  All of us have some sort of faith commitment from which they launch into daily life. Some trust in the creator, others trust that they themselves will solve every problem and explain away all spiritual reality and every mystery when science is given enough time.  I find such an existence absurd and quite boring.  Science from a theistic perspective is quite fascinating and I commend the young minds of the world to take up science and give glory to God.

Continue reading "The Devil's Delusion - A Refreshing and Witty Polemic" »

 
Graeme Goldsworthy, According to Plan - The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible - An Introductory Biblical Theology (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2002)

There are very few books that I recommend that everyone who is a follower of Christ read.  I am particularly careful in how I go about recommending books that have "Theology" written somewhere on the cover.  I found out after moving to Nashville that the word "Theology" can cause some church folk to twitch in fear that you are about to split hairs about some meaningless thick book you have read. I think many times theology is just not presented well to normal folks and I find this tragic.  So today I want to recommend According to Plan - The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible - An Introductory Biblical Theology by Graeme Goldsworthy.

I remember one of the challenges I faced as a young Christian was looking at the big book called the Bible and knowing how it all fits together...understanding what the whole book was about. I could read various books in the canon but I needed a big picture view of how the many parts made up the unified whole.  Goldsworthy's book does just that - it gives a unified thematic view of the Scriptures centered on the person and work of Jesus Christ. 

Biblical Theology

One the strong points of this book is that it succeeds greatly in its goal to introduce the reader to Biblical Theology. In differentiating this form of theology Goldsworthy does the reader a great service in chapter 2 by introducing the various forms of Christian theological inquiry.  I'll summarize some of this here (and add my own take) for the readers of the POCBlog

Systematic Theology

"Systematic Theology asks: What should Christians believe now about any aspect of Christianity.  Its results: Christian Doctrine" (Goldsworthy, 30).

Systematic theology takes up the task of seeing what every relevant passage of Scripture teaches on a various topic.  It looks at all the passages in order to form a clear and succinct statement of Christian teaching. Any time a church or a Christian person says anything about God it is an exercise in systematic theology.  Mistakes can often be made by not looking at ALL the texts relevant to a topic and thereby teaching a reductionist view of a subject.

Historical Theology

"Historical Theology asks: What have Christians believed about their faith at any given time?  Its results: A record of the development of Christian doctrine." (31)

Historical Theology is looking at what various Christian people and traditions have taught at various times in Church history.  Historical Theology is helpful in that it assists us in our understanding of the faith as we look at what others who have gone before us.  It is not authoritative, but helps us see the truths and errors of the past.

Pastoral Theology

"Pastoral Theology asks: How Should Christians minister to one another so that they grow to maturity in Christian living? Its results: Care and growth in the local church." (31)

Pastoral theological is the application of biblical truth and the study of how the gospel shapes and changes people's lives.  It focuses on the importance of a theology of ministry and how we rightly relate to God in shaping one another's lives.

Exegetical Theology 

"Biblical Exegesis asks: What was the text intended to convey to those for whom it was originally written? Its results: Understanding the intended meaning of the text." (34)

Exegesis is the unpacking and explaining of particular passages of Scripture in their original historical, grammatical and literary contexts. 

Biblical Theology

"Biblical Theology asks: By What Process has God revealed himself to mankind? Its results: The relating of the whole Bible to our Christian life now" (32)

Biblical theology looks at large themes in various sections of Scripture.  It treats major themes in the Old Testament, the New Testament or the major sections of the biblical corpus.  I find the best way to understand the subjects treated by biblical theology is by example.  The following I hope you find helpful as well:

• What is the focus of sacrifice in the Pentateuch?
  
• What is Paul's theology of Grace?
• What do the Gospels teach about the Kingdom of God?
• What is the central theme of the entire Bible?

Whereas systematic theology is concerned with Christian Doctrine treating all passages relevant to a topic and teaching it for today, biblical theology brings to us the major themes of Scripture seeing its subject as a unified whole. Systematics break down the teaching of Scriptures into its parts to unify doctrine, whereas biblical theology steps out to see the big picture.  One makes sure you do not miss some of the trees that are actually in the forest (Systematics) the other makes sure we don't miss the forest from closely examining the trees (biblical theology). Both are extremely valuable and important to the church and the believer.

Goldsworthy does a fantastic job introducing the discipline of biblical theology but also convincingly laying out the central theme of the Christian Scriptures...namely, the person and work of Jesus who is called the Christ.

Central Theme of The Bible - Jesus Christ

Many times Christians have been so exposed to systematic theology that they can recite certain doctrines or somethign learned in Sunday school, but find it difficult to see how the whole Bible is relevant to the faith.  What does a man cutting off the foreskins of his son have to do with me?  Biblical theology explains just how integrated Scripture is and the unique unfolding of God's purposes throughout redemptive history.  Just what does circumcision mean? Why was this given?  How does it relate to God's ways of dealing with people?  How does this continue today? Or does it? 

Biblical Theology sees a beautiful line of continuity in God's revelation in Scripture which reaches its zenith in Jesus Christ and then sees our life as the church as his sent community continuing his mission until this age comes to a close.  If you ever wondered how the big Old Testament narratives reveal God's purposes in Jesus Christ I cannot recommend this volume enough.

Book Structure

Another strength of According to Plan is the way in which the material is structured and laid out.  After each major idea or paragraph the author porvides a succinct summary of the major point.  These are so well done that you could get the entire thrust of the book by just reading these summaries.  Now I did read the book and did not attempt said path, but I will say that after reading a section and then the summary I continually thought - what a great way to review this book.  Additionally each chapter has a summary, listing of main themes, keywords and a preview of what is ahead. Also each chapter includes a study guide at the end for further discussion.  Finally, the book also has several helpful illustrations and diagrams though you need to follow how the diagrams "build" up throughout the book.  Overall, the structure of the book makes it very helpful for learning and review; the author goes to great length to help a more popular audience find traction in biblical theology. 

Conclusion

In conclusion I want to commend this book to anyone who wants to investigate the theological teaching of the Scriptures as a whole.  Read it slowly, enjoy it greatly and see what the Bible is really about. His name is Jesus.  If you have ever been bogged down by what seems like the excessive minutia of Systematic Theology (let alone speculative theology) then take biblical theology a spin. Rather than a naive trust in Scripture, the discipline of biblical theology gives a robust and deep faith in the wonderful message of the Holy Bible. There were and are not accidental stories in redemptive history, they all have a purpose in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ and the Kingdom of God.  This book has helped me marvel at the unity and glory of the story of God...and it has helped me love him more deeply.  For this I thank God and give According to Plan a hearty POCBlog recommendation.

The Church

• I guess Frank Beckwith has gone activist as he went to Rome.  Some of you know that Beckwith was the recent president of the Evangelical Theological Society that returned to the Roman Catholic Church - the church of his youth. He has a new book coming out from Baker entitled Return to Rome - Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic.  My guess is the title "Evangelical Catholic" may be one of interest to both Catholics who want to be more Protestants and Protestants who find Rome a bit alluring. Beckwith is a first rate philosopher and I commend his work in that arena...I do not find agreement with his recent theological reconciliations.
  

Technology

• Apple says "I'm Sorry to all those Me's who are Mobile" - Apple's much hyped and oddly named cloud computing system MobileMe had a tough time getting off the ground.  Word is it is still a bit troubled.  Apple has graciously responded by giving 30 days free. But hey, no Mac person will say a word like "MobileMe is terrible" - such would be sacrilege. What we can say is this - "MobileMe is way better than .Mac!" - for we all know about the glories of .Mac. In all honesty - MobileMe (despite the name) looks pretty cool - should be free though.
  
• Engadget dares to suggest that iPhone is less than the most perfect device ever created by human kind.  Does your iPhone suck? OK, don't answer that - of course not.  But are you having any of these cool issues?
  

History and Biography

• World Affairs Journal is wondering if the fall of America is upon us...or not.  See Falling Upwards - The Box Set by Robert J. Lieber. 

Just for Fun

• Anyone up for a Bicylcle Roller Coaster? This is pretty sweet looking. 
• The Carver One - The Nicest Tricycle on the block
  

(Illustration by Polly Becker)

The crowd who set off to see the wizard once echoed their fears of lions and tigers and bears...The Atlantic Monthly shows no fear as it touches upon the rather touchy subjects of feminism, motherhood and the nature work in a woman's life.  The article is probing, pithy and a bit punchy at times. It wrestles openly with the complex issues of the feminist movement and motherhood in modern times. 

The article, entitled I Choose My Choice - The fruits of the feminist revolution? Sisterhood, empowerment, and eight hours a day in a cubicle, is an interesting push back against some of the radical feminist rants offered by the likes of Linda Hirshman...who is featured prominently in the article.

I think that Sandra Tsing Loh has provided some probing thoughts about a woman's liberation in our day.  You might be surprised at from what she sensing her own liberation.  An article worth your time for both men and women.

This week a gathering of Anglican bishops is creating more discussion about the global controversy within that communion regarding homosexual clergy and biblical authority.  The openly gay bishop Gene Robinson, of the episcopal church in New Hampshire was not invited to the event but has decided to go to London to be present during the proceedings. 

You can see the story from the BBC here and the footage of a protestor shouting out "repent, repent" during the bishops sermon at a London church. A text story of the account can also be found here. Many bishops, particularly from the large and growing Anglican churches of Africa, have objected to what they perceive as the Western Anglican departure from biblical authority. 

Gene Robinson was quoted as saying "the Archbishop of Canterbury was in an "almost untenable" position as he tries to retain unity in the Church." I agree with bishop Robinson on this - it seems the division is deep in the Anglican communion with both sides of the debate seeing themselves as fighting for what is good, right and true.  

When Scripture is no longer seen as revelation from God and the authority for the church, common ground is difficult to find on many pressing issues.  We need to pray for the Anglican Church and its leadership to find strength and wisdom in difficult times.

Do you want to read the sort of thing that people are writing about and calling it science these days.  Science was once a way towards empirical knowledge based upon testing sound hypotheses with reproducible experiments.  This article entitled Bisexual Species: Unorthodox Sex in the Animal Kingdom - Homosexual behavior is common in nature, and it plays an important role in survival. The story begins with an account of "gay penguins" and moves into a discussion on the evolutionary value of same sex animal behavior. 

It appears in Scientific American and seems to be a pack of speculation, just so stories and the bizarre reading of human behavior on to animals.  Of course humans now look to animals to see what is acceptable behavior.  If you can find some sort of creature doing it somewhere then it becomes plausible for human beings. In fact, if you want to justify just about any sexual configurations - just look to the Bonobos - as they seem to be real freaky primates.

This, for whatever it is, is not the scientific method I learned as a student of science...Of course I was in the Physics and Applied Science departments - not in evolutionary psychology or ethics.  In this realm, anything can be explained by such story telling.  Just make up a story as to why an animal does such and such and how "it might aid survival." We can do this any time and the animal will not be able to refute the thesis.  They can't speak for themselves.

Here is just a sample of some of the just so stories found here.  I have added the emphasis in the text.

Such behavior seems to ease social tensions. In Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape (University of California Press, 1997), Emory University primatologist Frans B. M. de Waal and his co-author photographer Frans Lanting wrote that “when one female has hit a juvenile and the juvenile’s mother has come to its defense, the problem may be resolved by intense GG-rubbing between the two adults.” De Waal has observed hundreds of such incidents, suggesting that these homosexual acts may be a general peacekeeping strategy. “The more homosexuality, the more peaceful the species,” asserts Petter Böckman, an academic adviser at the University of Oslo’s Museum of Natural History in Norway. “Bonobos are peaceful.”

In some birds, same-sex unions, particularly between males, might have evolved as a parenting strategy to increase the survival of their young. “In black swans, if two males find each other and make a nest, they’ll be very successful at nest making because they are bigger and stronger than a male and female,” Böckman says. In such cases, he says, “having a same-sex partner will actually pay off as a sensible life strategy.”

This seems to be some very strange logic at work...I am saying nothing here about human sexuality - though it seems that this article is more about this than mere animal behaviors in their natural habitats.

I am visiting some friends in Blacksburg sans family - so I have been reading a bit on the net today...some interesting things to share.

Apologetics

• Lots of stuff from William Lane Craig on Christianity Today - Craig's book Reasonable Faith (one of my favorite books) just went to a 3rd updated edition. Here a couple of good articles: 1)God is Not Dead Yet - 2) A New Day for Apologetics 3)
  

Technology

• iPhone 3G is selling by the millions, Apple AppStore by the Tens of Millions - very nice.  Soon it will be an Apple dominated world.  And we'll all be happy - you know, we love Big Brother when Big Brother loves you!  On the iPhone 3G, On the AppStore
• Palm just launched a new Windows Mobile Smartphone - Yawn.  I love Palm though. Yawn. Wait - CNET says it is quite good.  OK, yawn.

Just for Fun

• Stuff White People Like has a Facebook app and a new book version...also available by audiobook.  If there is one book to listen to for laughs this week in the car - it would be the Stuff White People Like audiobook.

• NY Magazine reviews a book on the history of booze.  The book is entitled Drink A Cultural History of Alcohol. Seems like strong drink has a long history...

This morning I took a short jog - OK, a run some, walk some, jog some time around the neighborhood.  During this time of physical training (or at least some movement) I listened to a message by CJ Mahaney from the recent Resolved 2008 conference.  The message was on the cross and I was so engaged by the work of Jesus on our behalf.  After being so moved I thanked God for this man's ministry and headed into my day.  Then I began to think - this guy has said something recently that I just do not think is true!

I have heard CJ Mahaney claim on at least one occasion to be an average preacher.  In fact, I believe it was at the Resurgence conference where he said that all average preachers should be encouraged by his life and ministry. Now, I have listened to CJ's preaching a few times now, both online and in person and think I want to challenge this statement about the "averageness" of his calling and craft.

For one, I think CJ is a great preacher and one a voice that is engaging and touching many people in many networks of pastors and church planters.  He is consistently, and rightfully so, invited to address audiences large and small around the globe.  His passion is contagious and his sincerity of heart is compelling.  His earnestness and Cross-centeredness honors God and inspires men of all stripes.  So my question is this - why average? 

I think after reading Pastor Mahaney's book on Humility a couple of years back I think I know why he feels just "average."  For one, he cannot say he is a terrible preacher, this would disdain the work of God in his life and it would seem to be false humility...this sort of thing does not come from Mahaney.  Second, he would never say he is a "great preacher" for he knows his own sin, the immeasurable grace of God in Christ, and the utter God-centered calling of a pastor.  In other words, I think I hear true, heartfelt humility from CJ Mahaney when he says he is "average."  Furthermore, I truly think he respects some of his colleagues' preaching so much that he does not think he plays in the same league.

So, I have a plea for CJ Mahaney.  Stop saying you are an average preacher.  Over and over again I am blessed when listening to this man speak of God and Jesus Christ.  I find him to be a great preacher.  Additionally, if CJ is average, then I certainly would fall in the "sucketh really bad" range of preaching.  Of course, the gospel is sufficient and comparison is not of grace as all true biblical ministry is of God not of the preacher. Yet I still think CJ's claim to averageness does not fit with reality of preaching and preachers I have heard. 

One more story to close about the ministry of CJ Mahaney.  First, let me say that I do not know CJ and I have never met him.  This adds to the story.  Some time ago he gave a generous gift to the Acts 29 network to faciliate church planting.  Some of the Acts 29 pastors heard about it on a pastor's forum and were quite moved by his gracious gift.  I decided to write a thank you note to Pastor CJ for his gift to the network and thank him for how much he is an encouragement to church planters like me.  A few weeks later I received something back.  What was it you may ask?  It was a box of books from CJ Mahaney's office all personally signed.  So I write a thank you note and GET a big box of free books back!!??  Such graciousness is not common today.

So I thank God for the ministry and example of CJ Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries...but I refuse to believe Mahaney when he claims to ascend to the middle realms of avergeness. I cannot see how this claim corresponds to reality - it is simply not true.

Now, this video by my boys Rhett and Link has me perplexed this morning.  It either makes me nostalgic for this part of the country or it makes me pretty happy to be moving to New Jersey. I'm looking forward to "barbecuing" some asparagus and shitaki mushrooms once we become northern people here soon. 

Warning - this video is funny.  And who the heck told people in South Carolina to put Mustard on BBQ meat.  Just to settle the issue - Tennessee and Memphis barbeque is the best.  Period.  No debate, discussion necessary.  Yet do watch this video...my dear friends in the Northeast, I cannot explain these people to you.  I just can't.

This weekend was a mixture of blessing and difficulty for me.  I had a wonderful Saturday morning with just my son Tommy (aka Thomas, Tom-Tom, Tommy-Reid) as my little girls went fishing with their Grandpa and Great Grandpa and Kasey spent most of the day with her Mom.  That night Kasey and I had a great time getting dinner out and catching a movie together.  At the end of the night we had some tension as we are working through a decision together that we are having a hard time finding common ground.  Anyway, Kasey is my best friend and I just don't enjoy it when we are bit crusty with one another.

The next morning we were getting the kids ready for church and were running a bit late.  To be honest, I was a bit frustrated and driving too fast.  Yeah, you know what is coming.  On the way into downtown Raleigh the speed limit drops to 35 pretty quickly which I did not notice.  Let us just say I was going quite a bit faster than that and a kind gentlemen in blue decided I needed to pull over.  Kasey looked at me and said "I think our plates expired in June" - a byproduct of our crazy summer not being able to get to New Jersey at this point.  So I was waaay speeding, with expired plates, crusty with my wife and sitting in the seat just utterly discouraged as I awaited the typical "license and registration" - Oh yeah, I got a speeding ticket in Raleigh when I preached at the same church in March (In my defense, I don't get a lot of tickets and have a great driving record - that was my first ticket in almost 10 years).

So the the kind police officer asked if we were from out of town.  I said yes...more than he knew.  He took the address where we were living down, gathered my license and expired registration and walked slowly back to his squad car.  I looked at Kasey and said "this is going to cost us, affect insurance, etc." I felt utterly deflated.  Kayla Joy, my six year old, murmured a question from the very back corner of our silver mini van.  "Daddy, is this going to cost us money?" she said.  I replied in a soft broken voice "Yes, probably quite a bit of money..."  She then got out a few words, which Kasey said was "oh no, we are not going to have enough money for Jacob's Well," and begin to sob quite heavily. I teared up myself as the cop came back towards the car.  My kind wife, with whom I was having some tension, gently stroked the back of my head as to affirm me in the moment.

The policeman asked "I am guessing that the tags are expired because you are new to town and living with your in-laws? Are you guys just getting settled in to North Carolina?"

I replied "Actually, we are heading to New Jersey"  He followed with a typical response we get in the south "Dear God, why are you doing that." 

"To plant a church" Kasey added in "He is a pastor" and I said "I actually seem to only get speeding tickets in Raleigh as I got one while preaching at this same church in March" He chuckled. He then handed me the printed citation; I feared to even look at it as I did not know the fines and laws for being over the speed limit as much as I was.  Let alone driving on expired tags. 

What followed was a flood of sheer grace.  The officer said "I sensed you needed a warning ticket this morning" - Kasey and I sat in silence as he drove away, our kids as well.  I just thought - God, I needed that this morning.  I did not need a warning ticket, I did not need to save my driving record, I didn't even need to save my bank account which I thought was going to take a dent.  I needed grace - kindness extended to the guilty freely by one who had the power and authority to do so.

We wept and thanked God for the reality of grace - for us, to us, through Jesus.  We then drove slowly on to Vintage 21 to worship the God of grace. Providentially enough, the pastor preached from John 8 where Jesus deals with a woman caught (framed) in the act of adultery.  His voice was clear - "Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more." I was guilty, dead on guilty but received mercy instead - the gospel. Simple - unbelievable truth.

I thanked God for a kind policeman who reminded me of the grace of God which is infinite in Christ.  A small gift to our family echoed of the great gift God has given the human family in Jesus.  Indeed, as I looked at my wonderful wife and friend Kasey I thought to myself what is proclaimed in the beginning of John's gospel:

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

Grace indeed...

Just so people know the actual costs as well - here are some quotes...the first on the hardware costs is from Engadget, the second on the total costs is from Gizmodo:

There's not much that's surprising here -- new customers and those eligible for an upgrade will be able to nab the phone for $199 (8GB) or $299 (16GB), while "early upgraders" will have to fork over $399 or $499, all with a two year contract and $18 upgrade fee, of course. The telco says a no-commitment version of the phone will be available for $599 and $699, though it looks like that will come after the initial launch.

Yes, the iPhone 3G will cost you $160 more than the original iPhone over two years. If you don't need 3G at all (or GPS), you might not need to upgrade if you've got an old one. Otherwise, $160 is a small price to pay—for us at least—over the course of two years to drastically increase your email and browsing speeds.

Enjoy the new iPhone guys! I like it quite a bit - but will pass again. I just don't want to use AT&T and not be able to type.

Just when you thought it could not get any better on this July 11th, iPhone 3G day, a day that new Apple idolators were born.  A new accessory arrived unexpectedly. The iPhone videoconferencing kit!

More information available at Gizmodo - when looking at this, you may even see how to mod your iPhone for videoconferencing with products found in any household bathroom.

[HT - Jason Seville]

Harry G. Frankfurt, On Truth, Knopf, 2006.

[Disclaimer - this review features discussion of a book entitled "On Bullshit" and its companion volume "On Truth" - I realize this word is offensive to some and want to let you know up front that it is coming.  Hopefully the review is not in this category.  Thanks]

A few short years ago I ran across a book with a somewhat odd title which was written by a Princeton philosopher (emeritus) named Harry G. Frankfurt.  At the time was climbing the Amazon.com best seller lists and creating some pretty big buzz.  The book was titled On Bullshit and I clicked my friendly Amazon "add to cart" button and wanted to learn what the philosopher had to say.  Much to my delight (and to the chagrin of others) the book was an actual philosophical essay which was seeking to develop a theory of BS - just WHAT it is and WHY it is so harmful to truthful discourse...even more harmful than lying.  Let me let Frankfurt describe it in his own words from the introduction

One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize bullshit and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern. We have no clear understanding of what bullshit is, why there is so much of it, or what functions it serves. And we lack a conscientiously developed appreciation of what it means to us. In other words, as Harry Frankfurt writes, "we have no theory."

As far as the person engaged in the activity of BS his description about it being worse than lying is quite compelling:

For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose...

Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of the one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the response of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.

On Bullshit, 56, 60-61

So I ordered 10 more copies and sent them to friends and kept some in the office as gifts. I think it may be that I am a closet philosophy geek that I found it somewhat hilarious...and truthful. So that book took up the task to give the world of theory of what our world of spin, media, pandering, politicking and profiteering has come to know; our world is full of it.   

What Frankfurt failed to anticipate is that people may not feel why truth is so important to a culture at all.  Maybe there are so many people among us spouting BS because we do not see the importance of truth for our lives together in our society.  So a sequel was in order and that sequel has arrived in the form of a shiny little gold volume in the same diminutive 154x106mm hardback. In this installment Frankfurt goes back to lay some ground work to bolster his bullshit argument in the previous volume.  In On Truth, his goal is to explore just why truth is so important to a society.  Let me allow him to explain his purposes.

At the time (of writing On BS), that seemed like enough.  I realized later, however, that I had paid no attention at all in my book to an issue with which any adequate discussion of bullshit must certainly deal.  I had made an important assumption, which I had offhandedly supposed most of my readers would share: viz., being indifferent to truth is an undesirable or even reprehensible characteristic, and bullshitting is therefore to be avoided and condemned. 

On Truth, 5.

Dr. Frankfurt, boy were you wrong...welcome to my generation.  You ever watch Big Brother or the Real World?  Not too much truth loving my friend. 

The book does a good job in exploring the issue of why truthfulness is so important while calming down the postmodernist and the truth deconstructors along the way.  Some unfamiliar to philosophical essays may struggle with why he takes so long to state the obvious, but hey, this is actually fun stuff to many of us.  About a third of the way through the book, Frankfurt does a good job at summarizing his conclusion.  It reads as follows:

For these reasons, no society can afford to despise or to disrespect the truth.  It is not enough, hwoever, for a society to merely acknowledge that truth and falsity are, when all is said and done, legitimate and significant concepts.  In addition, the society  must not neglect to provide encouragement and support for capable individuals who devote themselves to acquiring and to exploiting significant truths.  Moreover, whatever benefits and rewards it may sometimes be possible to obtain by bullshitting [like winning big brother], by dissembling, or through sheer mendacity, societies cannot afford to tolerate anyone or anything that fosters a slovenly indifference to the distinction between true and false. Much less can they indulge in shabby, narcissistic pretense that being true to the facts is less important that being "true to oneself." If there is any attitude that is inherently antithetical to a decent and orderly social life, that is it.

On Truth, 33.

Pairing this with his explanation of what bullshit is in the first volume and why it is injurious to truth, we now know once again that we should cut the BS and as Jan Hus, my old dead friend from Bohemia, once said "search for Truth, hear Truth, learn Truth, love Truth, speak the Truth, hold the Truth, and defend the Truth til Death." 

Amen!?

Interestingly enough Frankfurt, while beginning with a rather consequentialist view of truth, does attempt to move past this to penetrate the concept of Truth and why it brings such utility to life.  In a great pass at boldness he seeks to call us all into the light of truth:

The problem with ignorance and error is, of course, that they leave us in the dark. Lacking the truths we require, we have nothing to guide us but our own feckless speculations or fantasies and the importunate and unreliable advice of others.  As we plan our conduct, we can therefore do no better than to spin out uninformed guesses and, shakily, to hope for the best.  We do not know where we are. We are flying blind.  We can proceed only very tentatively, feeling our way.

On Truth, 60-61

This reminds me of the words of the word who is called Truth "Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit" and again "So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

For those who know the names, there are treatments of some philosophers in the work.  Kant is featured of course, what modern philosopher can't mention the patron saint.  Aristotle, as in most works of philosophy, gets a little guest appearance in a discussion of why lying is hurtful. Strange enough there is an odd little chapter on Baruch Spinoza's view of joy, love and their relationship to truth. Interesting enough, but to be honest I find Augustine's meditation on the supreme good of human beings to be a much better treatment on these subjects than Spinoza.  But I digress.

So in the tradition of On Bullshit, I found Frankfurt's companion essay On Truth to be both helpful and hilarious.  Though when it gets right down to it he and I might find one another's major views and positions on life and reality...well, quite full of it.  He and I both seem to be the children of western thought - with the understanding that reality and truth is "out there to be discovered" not simply who I am or what I wish the world to be.  The Secret is not dominated and domesticated by us; it is found elsewhere and must be found.  Or it might just find us.  In this we discover who we really are and what we are here for. 

So let me say that though I enjoyed these two essays and find some common ground with them I do find one major issue with Frankfurt.  He is caught in a world of facts, truth, bullshit and "society."  For him truth has value to the person and to the society as it allows us to live in reality and pursue what we are.  Yet I feel he does not go far enough, for truth is more than simply "reality" - it is the reality as seen and known by the one who is the Truth.  The rabbit hole is much deeper than he thinks for truth is lived not only in relationship to facts or bullshit, but in relationship with the one in whom there is nothing false...and if you give me the liberty to say so, no bullshit either.  In him we move past truth living into worshiping the one who is the Truth.  It is here that our eyes are opened, the chains fall off, and we are set free.  So, as a third volume I suggest to my readers "On Jesus" which is the subject of another set of books, the ancient Scriptures.  This book, I suggest we all read.  John's writing on the life and meaning of Jesus is a good place to begin.  

The the fine People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have enlisted some hollywood star power to offer tight reasoning for animal rights. 

I think that we should tell the Coyotes about animal rights...obviously we need to tell them that they should not eat other animals...particularly cats. The tightly reasoned logic will have me ridding myself of all leather products and forsaking meat forever...nah, scratch that - I'm still not convinced.

I have a few simple questions for the radical animal rights activist:

• If human beings are but animals ourselves, why do we have a moral duty to care for other animals - they all do eat one another you know.
• If we DO have a moral duty to care for creation, including kind treatment of animals...are we not distinct from mere animals?
• Yet a purely naturalistic worldview does not support human beings as being distinct or afforded any special status from other animals. So why can't we do whatever we want to survive and pass on our genes? Including using baby seal skins as coats?

It seems to me that only a view that holds that human beings are created in the image of God as co-rulers and stewards with him over creation could have a moral responsibility for how we treat other creatures. I remain unconvinced that certain animal rights positions are coherent, let alone worthy of such radicalism as exhibited by the good people of PETA.

Many of you have read, heard about and watched Matt.  His videos are cool, his dancing style is unique...but is Matt cool?

I'm just not sure what to think? I think Matt is cool.