MacBook Screen Problems

It seems my screen/VPU problems are visiting others in the computing world as well. This time the MacBook Pro (the one where you can't replace the battery yourself) is having screen crazies.  Article over at MacRumors for those who have this saucy aluminum bodied MacBook Pro. Solution is being offered...

It seems packing all these thin, light, high horsepower components close together brings heat issues that can be very finicky.  I am sending my Dell off tomorrow to the doctor to be fixed and switching to a new Inspiron 15 for two weeks. Hopefully no more Dell screen hell is before me - this really took a bunch of time to deal with this week.

POC Bundle 3.25.2009

A few nuggets for the road mid week.

• The Church - The Wall Street Journal has an interesting short article on church planting in my home state of Virginia 
• Apologetics - Yes, Peter Singer teaches at Princeton University - just down the road from my house. He is a very consistent atheist as Dinesh D'Souza makes very clear.
• Technology - Palm Pre appararently has some in the software community a bit excited. See article in Business Week. Now I just hope it has decent battery life and a less than ridiculous price (for the phone and touchstone).  Some have been whispering that Dell might be interested as well.  I don't know about Michael, but I am interested and already a Sprint customer.  Also, the inevitable comparisons with the Apple phone are continuing. Fear not Apple phone users - you are still the coolest!
• Technology/The Church - How to move a Logos install to a new computer - moving to a new laptop for a couple of weeks because mine is having screen issues.
  
• Philosophy - Society of Christian Philosophers - new web site is an improvement
• Theological Reflection - hoping to write an essay this week on Christians and government - pray that I can get that done...thanks guys.
  

Palm Pre, Jimmy Fallon and Engadger High Fives

There is a great segment up from the Jimmy Fallon show featuring Engadget editor Josh Topolsky and a short demo of the Palm Pre. To watch these two contemporary human beings negotiate a high five was classic.  Guys, it ain't supposed to be that hard, but we appreciate the laughs.

Full coverage at Engadget

A Sci Fi Summer

This summer looks to be a pretty interesting one for fans of Sci Fi films. X-Men Origins:Wolverine, Abram's Star Trek, Terminator and the Transformers are all making an appearance in a few months. Which one(s) are you looking to see?

On a similar topic, The City Journal has an interesting look at the Sci Fi genres recent forays into things Spiritual and even things gospel.  For me the connection has been easy to make over the years...if the grand story of all of history is redemption through a chosen savior...Sci Fi has no choice but to rip off the grand narrative for its own purposes. 

We all agree on the following basic facts and this is where Sci Fi tends to tread quite often

• The world is jacked up 
• It needs to be fixed or somehow "saved"
  
• It seems we fight between cynicism and hope - recently I have realized that there is even a rightful place for a cynical hope.
• The world will end up being saved OR end up in some hell (nuked, climate catastrophe, cold heat death...)

The problem with the secular view today is that it has no Savior.  It logically leads to nihilism, which is hopelessly resisted by existentialism (try to think you are a super hero or just indulge pleasure to get by) and ends up in despair. We are all just dancing along to our DNA in a blind, mindless universe that simply does not care. So the western secular mind is left hoping and fearing with no path ahead save the perennial political saviors which promise the world and take your life and your money.  Or maybe defending our "rights" to freely indulge in every sort of base behavior invented by men. 

To be honest, I love the Sci Fi genre - my friends at Jacob's Well tease me about it - but to me the saving stories are not simply hopeful fancies of far out futures, they are the fabric of reality.  We are living in a fallen story, a world of madness, but walking in hope towards a world redeemed for a Savior has come and in invading the present through good news.  One of the ancients put it this way we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe...One thing is sure, this salvation is much better than terminator salvation.

Wolverine, Star Trek, Terminators or Transformers? Lots of back story type narrative coming it seems; so what are you looking forward to?

Book Review - Sammy and His Shepherd

 

I have just about finished reading and discussing the book Sammy and His Shepherd with my two oldest kids.  The book by Susan Hunt is an explanation of Psalm 23 by using a story about Sammy, who is a sheep, and his shepherd.  The story also includes another sheep who begins the story without a name but is simply called "My Friend" by Sammy. 

The book contains eleven chapters each treating a small portion of the classic Psalm.  The narrative unfolds as My Friend understands and experiences the leading of Sammy's shepherd.  The illustrations are modern and gritty which I really enjoyed.  Furthermore the illustrations are not tame and really give some contour to the story.  They are also friendly to all cultures as the shepherd is not presented as having blond hair and blue eyes.

Each chapter is paired with a discussion section which is found at the end fo the book.  The section has Scripture readings, reading comprehension questions and thoughts for living in light of what has been discussed.  This is a great addition to the narrative and my kids like the discussion aspect of the book more than anything.

Overall, I found this a welcome addition to our childrens library which addresses a wonderful Scripture in a way that is very contoured and real.  Popular Bible verses sometimes make it on to coffee cups and thereby loose their intended meaning - this is not so with Sammy and His Shepherd.  Remember, the valley of the shadow of death is not a happy place.  One final note, the book uses the ESV translation - always a plus for me.

Recommended...

What you really want...is a Jetpack!

Yeah, you know you want your $90,000 jet pack...planes are so 20th century

Who is in Charge around here?

As human beings we are in love with the idea that we are in control of things.  I think it is an especially acute problem for human beings in America. We think we can make it happen, win the day, command our destinies...it is a fun ride until reality smacks us around a bit.  The truth of the matter is that much of life is utterly out of our control.  We did not choose where we would be born, who would be our parents and a myriad of other things about our lives.  Yet we want to be in control and we know that our choices do matter greatly in how our lives turn out.

In Daniel chapter four we witness the final chapter of God's education of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar.  The lesson which is taught is quite clear: God rules in the affairs of people and nations on the earth.  Theologically we use the term Sovereignty to describe God being the highest rule and authority known.   There is simply no throne or power above that of the creator God. Yet this does bring questions.  If God is Sovereign and is accomplishing his purposes how do my choices affect the outcomes of life?  Are my choices subject to God's direction as well?  How free is my free will? If God is Sovereign, then why does he permit certain things to go down?

In a previous junk drawer we discussed God's sovereignty and rule over both good and evil.  You can read that online if you like. This week we want to do something just a bit different; we want to discuss the relationship of God's Sovereignty and our responsibility.  In other words, how does God's rule over all things interact with my choices to do some things.  To do this I want to begin by defining what we mean by these two terms.  I will then discuss the scope of these and how we avoid any sort of contradiction by setting one authority above another.  Next I want us to chew on the nature of our free will and several philosophical definitions.  Finally, we will close by discussing our nature as creatures and how we respond to God in humility , faith and following.

Some Definitions

Sovereignty of God- As briefly stated above, when we say God is sovereign, we mean that there is  no higher rule, reign or authority that exists.  God is in control of all things and by providential leading brings them towards his desired ends.  There is great wonder, glory and mystery in the Sovereignty of God.  It is a teaching that brings great comfort to believers as well as a deep sense of human dependence.  Yet when seen in a skewed manner, God's sovereignty can cause some to think that his rule makes our choices, our lives, our journeys as somewhat inconsequential or unimportant . 

Human Responsibility- Though God is sovereign, he has created human beings, male and female in his own image (Genesis 1:26, 27).  Furthermore, God calls us to co-rule and reign with him on the earth as stewards.  He has vested us with dominion in the created order and we are to follow him in what he has called us to be.  By our very nature, we have been created to be responsible to God for how we represent him and steward our lives and the created order.  There is high human responsibility to a Sovereign God which is taught in the Scriptures.  

In Scripture we see God's sovereignty and our responsibility clearly taught in many places.   In the narrative of Daniel we see quite plainly that God is teaching us as well as various players in the story that he rules and reigns supreme over all.  He is the one who changes the times and seasons and sets up kings and removes them (Daniel 2:21).  His is the dominion which is an everlasting dominion and his Kingdom will last through all generations (Daniel 4:34).   Additionally, the prophecy of Isaiah teaches us that  there is no God but God who rules over all things and declares the end from the beginning in the story of history (Isaiah 45).  His purposes will stand, all that he wishes to accomplish will be accomplished (Isaiah 46); he is the Sovereign Creator God. 

At the same time, our lives are lived actively by either following him or in rebellion against  him.  To bow the knee, to follow him, to love him, worship him, trust him is an act of our wills, but our wills are hardened so that we need his enabling grace.   We are truly guilty before God for our sins and we are responsible for the choices we make.  We are responsible and God is still in control of all things.  At this some might think that sovereignty and human decisions are at odds with one another or produce some sort of contradiction.  There is no contradiction as long as we are not ultimately free and God ultimately sovereign.  The scope of our freedom is either limited by God's rule or God's rule is limited in some sense by the scope of human freedom.  I think is helpful to look at the scope of sovereignty and our freedom as a way to understand this a little better.

Scope-What's on Your Plate?

If we think in terms of ownership and responsibility the tensions between sovereignty and our responsibility resolve much more easily.  It is clear from Scripture that God created and is therefore the owner of all things.  Psalm 24:1 teaches us that the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein.  Furthermore, Scripture teaches us that all things were created by him and for him (Colossians 1:16).  If God is the owner of all things, then he is responsible for all things. 

• Everything is on God's plate-he is responsible and sovereign in all things
• Some things God places on your plate-we are responsible for our lives and that which is entrusted to us as his stewards

Think about it.  If I were absolutely free to do anything and everything, then God could not accomplish anything in my life contrary to my will.  Absolute human freedom and absolute sovereignty actually are contradictory.  Yet if God is absolutely sovereign and I am responsible for what he puts before me then we have no contradiction.  Yet the nature of human free will and responsibility has puzzled thinkers in every age and I think looking at some things philosophically is appropriate.  So I want to pose what may sound like a crazy question-do we really have free will?

Do we have Free Will?

A question such as this can usually be a bit unnerving to us as we know we set alarm clocks, choose to get up (mostly), go to work and make decisions about how we act and treat others, et al.  It seems that I will likely choose to buy a new Palm Pre smart-phone some time 2009.  It is just self-evident that human beings posses something that many times is called free will.

As we begin a discussion of free will, it should be known that among secular philosopher types the belief that we have free will is laughable.  Most people who do not believe in God or any spiritual reality such as human souls, simply believe we are biological machines predetermined by causal chains of events determined by the laws of physics.  For instance the Center for Naturalism, an organization dedicated to promoting naturalistic thought and policies, makes the following statement on their web site:

Practically speaking, naturalism holds that an individual's development and behavior are entirely the result of prior and surrounding conditions, both genetic and environmental. Naturalism, therefore, denies that persons have contra-causal free will - that something within them is capable of acting as a first cause.

As a Christian, I do not believe we are simply determined by genetics and environment and that the world itself is not a closed system of cause and effect based on the laws of physics.  We hold that both God and human beings are capable of meaningful actions in the world.  Yet this quote brings up a distinction in discussions of free will in that it uses the term contra-causal free will to distinguish its views.  This brings up an important distinction in discussions about human choice, one that even Christians differ with one another about.  First two quick definitions:

• Contra Causal or Libertarian Free will...this is a version of free will you might call: really, really free, free will.  It holds that that a person can make genuinely free decisions without any other causation but the person's will.  Christian philosopher J.P. Moreland defines it this way: "When an agent acts freely, he is a first or unmoved mover; no event causes him to act.  His desires, beliefs and so on may influence his choice, but free acts are not caused by prior states in the agent."¹
• Compatibilism-Our choices are in accord with other factors and never uncaused or unconditioned.  Past choices, our environment, our character development and virtue, God's working, our current desires all weigh into our decisions. 

While the naturalistic determinist believes our choices are compatible (or more precisely dictated to us by) with genetic and environmental determinism, there are also Christians who believe our choices are free, yet God may guide them when he chooses to do so in order to achieve his purposes.   Another way of looking at this is that God has freer, free will than we do.  I do not find this troubling as it seems evident that God is God and we are not.  

In arguing that human freedom and God's sovereignty are compatible, Christian philosopher and theologian Bruce Ware makes an excellent point:  "human freedom that is compatible with God's meticulous sovereignty², then, cannot be libertarian or contra-causal freedom, but must instead truly be a freedom of one's strongest inclination, desire, and volition. That is, our freedom consists in our choosing and doing according that what we are inclined most, or what we desire most, to do."³ Dr Ware's contention is not that we do not choose to do anything, but rather human beings choose what they are most inclined to do or what they desire most.

We do not wish to say that our choices are not free in a limited sense; we do make choices and we are responsible for them.  Yet we do want to say is that God can indeed act in the lives of human beings, changing their minds and wills.  In fact, Scripture teaches us that human beings, if left to their own desires, will not seek God and will not submit to his rule.  People become followers of Jesus precisely because he intervenes to change us and give us new desires and inclinations (See Romans 3 and Romans 8 in particular).   Whereas one day we did not desire to love God, read Scripture, worship Jesus, etc. something happens and we are changed.  We now find Jesus to be a treasure and we actually desire to love and follow him.  This is not dependent on our free will but is rather a sovereign work of God.  Jesus told his closest friends on earth: you did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to bear much fruit, fruit that will last (paraphrase of John 15:16).  We are indeed chosen by God, saved by God and changed by God to become followers of Jesus.  All of this is by grace, not because of anything we are or anything we do (Ephesians 2:1-10). 

Unlike the secular determinist, we do believe that God can act in the world and we can make choices.  Yet we also believe that God is in control and bringing about his will, a purposeful working in history.  So in some sense, God is sovereign and determines everything, yet uses the choices of our lives as means to accomplish his ends.  

How God's Sovereign rule and our choices and responsibility interact is a puzzling mystery around which followers of Jesus have wrestled for years.  We do not intend to solve the issue here.  Yet as we see in the story of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, God wants us to know without question that God rules and his Kingdom will be established despite our pride and rebellion.  We far too often think we are the masters of the universe and the captains of destiny; we are not, and it is good news to realize this and follow the one who graciously leads all things.

Our Response to God's Initiative

One of the  most difficult things about becoming a follower of Jesus is realizing that you are not in control.  It sometimes makes us afraid to let go of the steering wheel of life and trust someone else with ultimate things.  Yet our wise and loving Creator desires for us to come to him by faith, to put our hand of trust into his and then follow. The irony of it all is that by yielding to a sovereign God we find our greatest joy.  We may go to sleep at night knowing that God is on point and that we can rest.   We need not persist in our self-deception that we are the little god of our own lives; such small deities always disappoint.  Yet knowing the God who made us, leads us and forgives us in Christ leads us to a place of life and peace forever.

God freely came to the earth in person of Jesus to show us who he is.  God freely came to the earth in Jesus to die for rebels and bring them home into a relationship that truly satisfies.  God loves freely, he is calling to you, if you sense his Spirit beckoning you to come home, then freely respond with the desire and the grace he is giving.  

Notes

¹ J.P. Moreland and Garrett J. DeWeese, Philosophy Made Slightly Less Difficult (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2005) 124. Emphasis added.

^2. Meticulous Sovereignty means that God is in control of all things in life, not just a few things here and there.

^3. Bruce Ware, God's Greater Glory-The Exalted God of Scripture and the Christian Faith (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005) 27.  Dr. Ware's discussion of Sovereignty and Free will in this book is a must read for Christians who desire to take seriously the teachings of Scripture regarding the sovereignty of God.   See pages 24-26 in summary and  chapter 3 in detail.

A Quote from my favorite Catholic friend...

GK Chesterton, one of the most enjoyable authors I have read, has these wonderful paragraphs at the close of his classic work Othodoxy.

The mass of men have been forced to be gay [happy] about the little things, but sad about the big ones. Nevertheless (I offer my last dogma defiantly) it is not native to man to be so. Man is more himself, man is more manlike, when joy is the fundamental thing in him, and grief the superficial. Melancholy should be an innocent interlude, a tender and fugitive frame of mind; praise should be the permanent pulsation of the soul. Pessimism is at best an emotional half-holiday; joy is the uproarious labour by which all things live. Yet, according to the apparent estate of man as seen by the pagan or the agnostic, this primary need of human nature can never be fulfilled. Joy ought to be expansive; but for the agnostic it must be contracted, it must cling to one comer of the world. Grief ought to be a concentration; but for the agnostic its desolation is spread through an unthinkable eternity. This is what I call being born upside down. The sceptic may truly be said to be topsy-turvy; for his feet are dancing upwards in idle ecstacies,while his brain is in the abyss. To the modern man the heavens are actually below the earth. The explanation is simple; he is standing on his head; which is a very weak pedestal to stand on. But when he has found his feet again he knows it. Christianity satisfies suddenly and perfectly man's ancestral instinct for being the right way up; satisfies it supremely in this; that by its creed joy becomes something gigantic and sadness something special and small. The vault above us is not deaf because the universe is an idiot; the silence is not the heartless silence of an endless and aimless world. Rather the silence around us is a small and pitiful stillness like the prompt stillness in a sick-room. We are perhaps permitted tragedy as a sort of merciful comedy: because the frantic energy of divine things would knock us down like a drunken farce. We can take our own tears more lightly than we could take the tremendous levities of the angels. So we sit perhaps in a starry chamber of silence, while the laughter of the heavens is too loud for us to hear.

Joy, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of the Christian...

Orthodoxy turned 100 last year and I did indeed celebrate its birthday. If you have never read this work, you would be most blessed to pick it up...even available FREE on the Amazon Kindle (of course if you have one of those you spent 359 bucks already)

NYT Recession Map

The New York Times has an interesting interactive map online showing the change in unemployment rates across the nation...the breakout is by county. Here is the linkage.

(HT - JR Vassar)

Dawkins and Myth

It is amazing how the most strident critics of theism can believe some pretty amazing things as well. I think if we all stop and look at where we believe we come from you can find all sorts of interesting stories.  For me, I'm a rather simple guy and believe that "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" is pretty good stuff.  Of course, those that disbelieve in a creator (suppress the truth of a creator I might say) have some pretty interesting stories of their own.  Usually disproved ideas like "spontaneous generation" or fun sci-fi stories like "the aliens made us." If you like both of these stories you will love Melanie Phillip's account of Richard Dawkins' views  Enjoy!

For example, I put to him that, since he is prepared to believe that the origin of all matter was an entirely spontaneous event, he therefore believes that something can be created out of nothing -- and that since such a belief runs counter to the very scientific principles of verifiable evidence which he tells us should govern all our thinking, this is itself precisely the kind of irrationality, or ‘magic’, which he scorns. In reply he said that, although he agreed this was a problematic position, he did indeed believe that the first particle arose spontaneously from nothing, because the alternative explanation – God -- was more incredible. Later, he amplified this by saying that physics was coming up with theories to show how matter could spontaneously be created from nothing. But as far as I can see – and as Anthony Flew elaborates – these theories cannot answer the crucial question of how the purpose-carrying codes which gave rise to self–reproduction in life-forms arose out of matter from which any sense of purpose was totally absent. So such a belief, whether adduced by physicists or anyone else, does not rest upon rational foundations.  

Even more jaw-droppingly, Dawkins told me that, rather than believing in God, he was more receptive to the theory that life on earth had indeed been created by a governing intelligence – but one which had resided on another planet. Leave aside the question of where that extra-terrestrial intelligence had itself come from, is it not remarkable that the arch-apostle of reason finds the concept of God more unlikely as an explanation of the universe than the existence and plenipotentiary power of extra-terrestrial little green men?

Touche! Ms. Phillips.  I love the little green men who created me!  Seriously, if you watch any sci-fi (and I confess that I partake quite a bit) you will see that many humans have placed their greatest HOPEs and FEARs in the existence of ET. He will either save us or destroy us...maybe because some believe he made us.  Hmm...as a follower of Jesus I have "placed my hopes in the living God, who is the savior of all people" - I'll just watch movies and TV shows about ET. 

Full story is available at the Spectator.  Is Richard Dawkins Still Evolving?

Hudson River Landing Animated

This has been going around a bit and is quite an amazing look at how the Hudson River plane landing went down.  I believe this is real time audio...pretty amazing how the pilot keeps his cool.  Some up here on the NY local news called it "serendipity" - I call it a kind and gracious providence.

(HT - a bunch of folks)

Free ESV Study Bible Online Access

 

The ESV Study Bible online companion site is giving FREE accounts out during the month of March.  The online site is a companion to that wonderfully chubby study Bible from Crossway.  Highly recommended for students of the Bible and those who find an easy home online.

Here is the link - http://www.esvstudybible.org/online

Revealing Comedy...

Comedian Louis C.K. had some insightful things to say about the spirit of our age on late night with Conan O'Brien. 

(HT - Don't Eat that Fruit  

How to self-destruct...

This guy has a good promo video for helping people write resumes, find jobs etc.

(HT - a link from JR Vassar led me to this)

Palm Pre - Feature Hub...

 

Engadget has launched a new feature on their site called...er, feature hub. Anyway, it is sort of a mega page dedicated to certain tech supernovae.  One of the first out is a "hub" dedicated to the coming Palm Pre. A great place to start for history and latest news on the Pre.

Here is the link

Jacob's Well...Slowly Moving Out...

This past week my friend Travis, resident humorist and photographer at Jacob's Well took some pictures at our house gathering.  I forget to take pictures so I asked him to snap some shots so we could look back at God's faithfulness. Though we have only been gathering our team and equipping for our mission ahead for six months, God's faithfulness is fun to see in pictures.

Pray for our small band of sojourners who are praying for God to do something special in and through us in the years to come...in NJ and beyond.

Our First Gathering in Fall 08

 

November 2008

 

February 2009

Blessings JW peoples, anyone who would like to join us is welcome...

Reid

Debt is Dumb...

I have mentioned this segment of a message Matt Chandler gave at the Desiring God pastor's conference a few weeks ago to some friends.   I find it sad, very funny, strong and very true...here is to keeping the gospel, sound doctrine and thoughtfulness in Christian preaching (you think?)

Link to the full message (audio and video) is here.

(Thanks to Desiring God for excellent video recording of the event)

To Obey, or Not to Obey...That is the Question

In Daniel 3, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were given an order to obey a law which demanded all leaders of the Babylonian empire to bow down in worship before a golden image set up by Nebuchadnezzar.  They willfully disobey the order and get themselves into a bit of trouble for doing so.  This brings up an important question for followers of Jesus in every time period.  Is it right to disobey governing authorities?  As Americans, who revel in individualism and whose country was born by throwing off the rule of a European monarch, this is hardly a question.  Yet there is a great tension in the teaching of Scripture and in human society in general. 

Practical Tensions

In order to have a culture that experiences anything less than chaos, there must be some order.  It has been demonstrated time and again that human beings are quite capable of bringing havoc upon the world.  In light of this, government has been necessary.  Yet at the same time, governments are made up of the same human beings who can tyrannically and unjustly oppress those whom they serve.  Hence we have a tension that must be resolved.  First, we need government and we need to follow certain rules or laws in order to have a peaceful and meaningful existence.   Second, it is true that a government can be wicked or ask its people to do unjust tings.  In such cases that government's rules ought to be disobeyed. Or should they?

Biblical Tensions

There is clear teaching in Scripture regarding obeying government and the nature of rebellion.  Many are surprised that the Bible actually commands followers of Jesus to obey governing authorities.  For instance, Romans 13:1-5 gives this strong exhortation:

¹Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. ²Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. ³For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, ⁴for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.

It also goes on to say we should pay taxes, but that is painful to read being a resident of New Jersey.  The point is that we should follow the laws of our land because the state is appointed by God to  correct and punish wrong doing so a peaceable society can flourish.   Furthermore, to go against right authority appears to be sin in light of God's strong words about rebellion (1 Samuel 15:22, 23) That is one side of the tension.

The other side of the tension arises from some clear biblical examples of people who in fact disobey governing authorities.  The Hebrew midwives disobey Pharaoh's commands to destroy Hebrew babies in Exodus 1.  In Acts 4 the early leaders of Jesus' church disobey a command from the ruling council in Jerusalem.  They are asked by the authorities to no longer preach or teach about Jesus; their response was clear:

Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard. 

Equally clear was the response of our guys here in Daniel 3.  Their response to Nebuchadnezzar was strong and resolute:

O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. 17 If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. 18 But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.

So it seems we have to reconcile God's commands to obey government and some clear cases where God has displayed his blessing upon the disobedience.  The solution to this problem is actually quite simple, the application of that solution can be quite complex requiring wisdom.  Is it OK to disobey the government? Yes, it seems, when it wants you to sin against God. 

Higher Authority

It is clear from Scripture that we are to listen to God's word above the commands of human beings.  We are to submit to a law that transcend the borders of nations and cultures. As the apostles in Acts 4 show us, we are to live in a manner that pleases God and not blindly obey a sinful law from government.   How we are to live this injunction in a world of complex situations and circumstances must be considered.  Additionally, whether the law of the land should be the law of God is a difficult subject which various Christians approach differently.  To proceed into some of the complexity of this I will take two paths.  First, we will simply look at the relationships of God's law to the laws of the state.  This is necessary if we are to be able to compare the two and if the state is to rule justly.  Finally, we will look at two different camps regarding civil disobedience and close by giving a positive encouragement from Scripture.

Laws, Higher and Lower

Both church and state have been called by God to govern and have authority in the lives of Christians.  The church is a body of believers called out by God together as a covenant people by the gospel.  As such, the highest authority in our lives is the Word of God, the Scriptures.  Yet each church is in a realm of state authority as well so the lines of separation must be discussed.  Historically, the Roman Catholic Church and the magisterial reformers (Luther, Zwingli and Calvin) held to a unification of church/state.  The state was legitimized by God and the church endorsed this legitimacy.  Additionally, the state enforced and permitted the establishment of religious authority and unity in a realm. This view had long standing back into Greek and Roman times.  A state and its gods were one.  However, this was questioned by many reformers and evaluated in light of Scripture.  Did not Jesus teach that the rule of Caesar was different than the rule of God?  Does not a marriage between worldly power and the church have a corrupting influence on both?  Such questions in Western culture led the founders of the American experiment to articulate clearly the relationship between church and state.  It is found in the well known establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment of the US Constitution.  Here is how it reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  The meaning of this statement is quite clear but the implementation has always been a bit fuzzy.  What it means is that there will be no official state religion or church in our country.  Additionally, the government will not prohibit law abiding citizens from freely practices their religion.  It does not make a religion free zone in any portion of society nor does it create a religion of which all citizens must participate.  It means we have freedom of religion - a gracious gift to the people of America.   I take this to be a just solution but it leaves unanswsered how the authority of the church and state are grounded.

The Authority of State - Natural Law

Many thinkers in history, particularly Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas and John Locke have taught that there is a law built into human existence which dictates to conscience basic categories of a just society.  I do not have time here, but I discussed various types of law elsewhere¹.  Natural law would be defined in the Christian tradition as follows: Natural law is the law "written on the heart" (Romans 2:13) - the conscience by which people know good and evil - right from wrong. Sin mars this faculty in man, but it remains none the less. These are things that people "can't not know" which flow from the moral nature of God and presses upon the conscience. People suppress this and hold it down in wickedness, many becoming callous as to be seared against God's witness in conscience (See Romans 1,2). This is shared by both Christian and Non Christian. Some recent works on Natural law would be found in the writings of Princeton scholar Robert George and J. Budzizewski of the University of Texas at Austin.²

The state then governs in accord to the law written on the heart expressed in basic morality found in all cultures.  The so called "second tablet" (commands 5-10) of the Ten Commandments is reflective of such basic moral foundations.  The natural law is an expression of God's authority on all peoples and we disobey this moral law to our own peril.

The Authority of Church - The Word of God

Christians however are called to a higher authority than even the state, the authority of the Word of God.  Scripture is the Supreme Court in all matters of life and teaching for Christian believers.  It is to be obeyed and heeded out of love for Jesus Christ who is revealed in this Word.  It reveals the laws of God which demonstrate to us our sinfulness and need of grace.  It reveals the gospel by which we are saved and restored to right relationship with God.  It reveals the mission of the church in the world as the in-breaking of the ultimate rule and reign of God in the Kingdom of Heaven.  It reveals that we are citizens of two realms...the Kingdoms of earth and the Kingdom of God. Scripture instructs us as to when civil disobedience is warranted while simultaneously calling us to submit to just and reasonable laws.

In this age church and state are separate spheres of authority with Scripture guiding the church.  When Jesus returns he will set up a perfect divine monarchy with himself as King of Kings.  Aristotle once wrote that the best government would be by a perfect and virtuous ruler.  Yet none of this metal is to be found among the sinful throng of humanity.  In the current state of affairs it has been said that democracy is the best of all bad forms of government.   Yet a day will come when authority will be always good, kind and just. 

In summary, the state is called to have just laws and believers are called to follow all such laws.  When the state passes unjust laws we are compelled to obey a higher standard.  The question of the application of this principle has typically found Christians in two camps.  We should disobey a government when it promulgates unjust laws or we should only disobey when it compels us by law to act in a sinful manner.  Let's close by looking at this distinction.³

Promulgation or Compulsion?

The Antipromulgation Position-this position simply states that the law is king and the state is not above the law.  If a government rules contrary to just laws than it is illegitimate or tyrannical, failing in its God given duty to promote and protect the common good.  Such governments that promote and promulgate evil should be resisted by protest and self-defensive force if necessary.  Some advocates of this view have even gone as far to recommend revolution against such tyrannical and unjust governments.

The Anticompulsion Position -  this view holds that a Christian should submit to a government until it actively compels a person to follow an unjust law or disobey God.  In this view the follower of Jesus can submit to the just laws of the state while not participating in the evil behavior the state permits.  A modern example would be a doctor refusing to obey a government which might compel him to perform abortions against her conscience. Typically, non violent⁴ resistance is the path followed by the person resisting  an unjust state in this position.⁵ The following table from Norman L. Geisler illustrates the differing views⁶:

Antipromulgationist	Anticompulsionist
When it permits evil	When it commands evil
When it promulgates evil laws	When it compels evil actions
When it limits freedom	When it negates freedom
When it is politically oppressive	When it is religiously oppressive

In closing, it is my conviction that Christians should be good citizens of any realm in which they are living (See 1 Timothy 2:1-3). We should be seek to be helpful to all who govern justly and even do good to those who treat us badly (Matthew 5:43-47). The only trouble we should be starting is the sanctified kind.  If we get in trouble for proclaiming the love of God towards sinners, the forgiveness of God the repentant and the salvation of God which comes through Jesus Christ alone-bring it on.  If we get in trouble for disobeying an evil law, then throw us in the flames.  But if you suffer for law-breaking and doing stupid things...well, that's on you.

As to the myriad of questions surrounding the use of force in self defense, or for a people to wage a violent rebellion against an unjust state...that will have to be junk left for discussion on another day.  

For Jesus,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes

¹ See my Christianity and Nation States...Law and a Just Society at http://www.powerofchange.org/2005/5/3/christianity-and-nation-stateslaw-and-a-just-society.html

² See J. Budzizewski Written on the Heart-The Case for Natural Law and What We Can't Not Know-A Guide  and Robert P. George The Clash of Orthodoxies-Law, Religion and Morality in Crisis.

^3. This is a synopsis of the treatment in Norman Geisler's Christian Ethics-Options and Issues (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1989) 241-246.

^4. Note: This is a separate issue from the discussion of just war vs. pacifism. 

^5. For a good treatment on why Christians should not favor the use of violence see John S. Feinberg, Paul D. Feinberg Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1996, c1993), 402-405.

^6. Geisler, 243.

My next phone?

I sure hope they don't price this ridiculously high...

Larger version available on Palm's site here

Pluralism(s), Universalism(s) and the Gospel

In Daniel chapter 2, Nebuchadnezzar receives a dream and Daniel explains it to him and gives its interpretation.  Relieved to know the mystery that had troubled his psyche, Neb then begins to give props to Daniel and unexpectedly mad props to Daniel's God.  In verse 47 he makes the remarkable statement:

⁴⁷The king answered and said to Daniel, "Truly, your God is God of gods and Lord of kings, and a revealer of mysteries, for you have been able to reveal this mystery."

All religious traditions on the earth that are theistic in orientation have always believed in a most high God.¹ Whether it was Zeus of the Greeks, Odin of the Norse, RA of the Egyptians, Baal of the Philistines, the Great Spirit of Native Americans thinking that there is a "God of gods" is quite common in the earth.  The difference between these beliefs and that of Jews, Christians and Muslims is that they are all polytheistic-believing in a myriad of "gods."  However, Daniel is monotheistic and the Babylonians were aware of the Jewish religion and its belief in one, true creator God.  Nebuchadnezzar's exclamation is that Daniel's God is both  preeminent and sovereign.  He is above the other gods and rules above earthly kings.

In every age there has been a plurality of "gods" and I do not imagine this will ever really change.  One Bible teacher during the Protestant reformation declared that the human heart is like an "idol factory" always cranking out little gods for us to worship out of our own imaginations.² So plurality in religions is simply a fact of human experience.  The truth of all of these crafted and created deities is another matter all together.

Pluralism(s) and Universalism(s)

In our day we have moved beyond the belief in the simple fact of plurality in religious ideas, we have embraced a pluralism in their truth.  Each faith tradition believes in various Gods and nobody is to question their existence or reality.  If someone believes in pink bunny rabbits who rule the world, or little white mice for that matter, we should just all smile.

There are actually several flavors of pluralism today, some religious, some very much opposed to religious ideas.  The religious version of pluralism would say that all gods are equally valued expressions of the human attempt to reach the divine or ultimate reality.  This is a friendly bunch and tends to see contradictory ideas about God as a fun little game of no real consequence to our lives.  Important, yes, but not dealing with truth.  The question of God to the religious pluralist is one that is unknowable; so they see all religious talk as ways of groping towards an unknown, ineffable "real."³

A classic illustration of this is the parable of the blind men and an elephant.  The story traces back to an ancient Indian folk tale where several blind men are examining and elephant when the King asks them what they think an elephant is.  One who is holding on to its tail, confidently exclaims "An elephant is like a rope!" Another blind man pushing on the body of the elephant  proclaims with equal confidence "An elephant is like a wall!" Still another holding its trunk snottily weighs in "No, an elephant is like a wet hose!"  The moral of the story is supposed to illustrate the reality of religious pluralism.  Not the fact that different religious ideas teach different things about deities, but rather they are all just talking about the same thing in different ways.⁴ 

The religious pluralist in the west is typically a universalist in that he believes that all people, everywhere will ultimately end up in heaven.  Let's call them optimistic.   All will end up in a blessed state of heaven even if they don't believe in such places at all.  Religious pluralists love to make statements on the behalf of all religious people.  They say things like "All religions teach the same things on the big issues, they just differ on the details."  Of course no Muslim, Hindu, Christian or Buddhist who understands his philosophy would agree to this.  After all, the phenomena is quite the opposite.  We all agree on things like "be nice and good" but we disagree on God, heaven, hell, salvation, our problem as humans and what nice and good really mean.   Religious pluralists are nice people-I think they just want to give the world a coke and a smile.  I like that.  They are just profoundly mistaken and then they seek to impose their beliefs about everyone's faith on everyone else....which maybe isn't so nice and respectful after all.

There is another form of pluralism that is very similar that emerges from our secular minded friends.  While they see a plurality in religious ideas, they think they are somehow immune from such silly talk.  They see no truth in religion and feel it all a big chasing down a metaphysical rabbit hole as it were.  The bold and obnoxious ones revel in telling the big wide religious world that they all are, well... "stupid." Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and their tribe come to mind⁵.   They are universalists too, only of course they think we are all heading for a long dirt nap rather than heaven, paradise or nirvana. We will be ultimately gone from existence once our fragile bodies fade away.  Let's call them pessimistic.  Here is the catch. They are very religious, very dogmatic people when it comes to their own ideas.  They hold to fundamental truths and claim that everyone is blind and that they see the truth about "religions."  They worship their own minds and technological abilities and are not really a fun bunch.  After all, this sort of folk have this life changing message to bring to the world "There probably isn't a god...get over it..."  Cool.  They probably are wrong.

Let us revisit the story of the elephant and the blind men one more time.  There is a fatal problem with the whole story in my mind.  How do we even know we are talking about "an elephant"? Obviously, someone in this story can see very well and not everyone is blind. Behind the reality of the groping men grasping trunk and tail is a King who can see.  There is someone who knows what an elephant is and could tell all the blind men they are not touching rope, hose and wall.   What if the King, the one being spoken about, could tell us  and show us who he really is? What if blind eyes can be opened and elephants could be seen? In simpler terms, what if God chose to actually speak to us?  Furthermore, the problem of pluralism is that we are not all talking about elephants-some religions believe God is one and others think there are millions of Gods.  We need God to define himself for us and this is in fact what Jesus came to do...to reveal to us our creator. 

Jesus' Teaching-Inclusive and Particular

The person of Jesus and his followers had something more interesting to say; something that was both inclusive of all human beings and calls us particularly to the creator God.  The Christian message is clear that God made all things and placed people in time and history so that they might reconnect in relationship with God (See Genesis 1-3; Acts 17). Furthermore, God has kindly given all of us evidence that he exists and has certain attributes.  Psalm 19 of the Hebrew bible (what we call the Old Testament) teaches us that God is speaking to us through creation and that this witness is available to all peoples. Romans 1 teaches us that what can be known about God is clear to us from what has been created.  We can see from looking at the stars, the vast oceans, high mountains, and the intricacies of RNA and DNA that there is indeed a powerful intelligence behind the universe.   Acts 14 of the New Testament also teaches us that God kindly provides for creation and Jesus taught the same in declaring that he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust (Matthew 5:45).  So God gives to all people a universal display of his existence and common grace.   The Christian message is inclusive in this way.

Yet at the same time people have rejected God, desire to live without him both in their attitudes and actions on the earth (Read Romans 1-3).  We want to do things our way and deny that we were created by God for God.  We worship ourselves rather than the maker of all things.  Scripture calls this sin-and it is universal.  So God in his kindness reveals to us in Jesus Christ that he is "God of gods and Lord of Kings."  All who come to him in repentance (turning from sin/self to God) and faith (trusting him fully) he will not turn away.   The gospel is particular in this way.  We must come to God as God, not make him up in our minds and then come to the alter of an imaginary deity.

God shows something to us all by placing us in creation to see that there is a God to whom we give an account.  Inclusive.  Yet humanity in sin will resist his kindness so he enters the world in order to save some who will believe. The Bible does not teach that every person from every nation will be rescued from sin, death and hell.  Nor does God favor any group of people in that all from only some nations will be saved. The Scriptures are clear that there will be some from every people, tribe and language in the Kingdom of heaven (Revelation 7:9-12).  In a unique way, Jesus' message was as open as can be imagined yet only some respond.  His open call is clear:

• All who are weary and heavy burdened...come to Jesus (Matthew 11:25-30)
• All who are thirsty...drink (Revelation 22:17)
• All who are in darkness...he is light (Matthew 4:12-17; 2 Corinthians 4:1-6)
• All who are hungry...come eat and be satisfied (John 6:35-40)

Yet his message is also a call, a summons, to those who have "ears to hear."  All that have been given to Jesus he calls.  Those who "hear him" do come to him.  This is the mystery of grace; God saves, we respond.  He calls to all, yet all do not respond.   As followers of Jesus it is not our goal to prove everyone is wrong or dispute with deities. Yet we are called to present the truth-that there is one God and one mediator between God and people-the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5,6).  This Jesus is no normal man nor simple prophet; he is God of gods and Lord of Kings and his Kingdom will last forever.

God of gods and Lord of Kings?

The most controversial figure in the New Testament is Jesus.  Yes, sweet, nice Jesus. The fact of the matter is that he made such radical claims about himself that he has always been a fork in the road for many.  Some would peddle him off as being a nice moral teacher, but this begs the question as to why he was unjustly murdered as a criminal.  He did seem to hack people off a bit no?  Jesus was utterly compelling to some while utterly repelling to others.   Part of the reason for this is that he claimed to be God incarnate (become human).  This is not what you hear people saying about themselves at Starbucks...

Followers of Jesus have been clear for centuries about the identity of Jesus.   He was not "a god of gods" he is the God of gods and Lord of Kings.  If you look at what some of his earliest followers said about him it becomes quite clear.  This is  necessarily a small sampling and I recommend further reading in this area for those who are interested.⁶

• He claimed to forgive sin, only what God could do (Mark 2:1-12)
• He claimed to be the divine "Son of Man" (Daniel 7:13, 14; Mark 13:24-27)
• He claimed to exist before Abraham was born as the "I AM" - the unique name of God in the Old Testament (John 8:48-59)
• He claimed that he was "one" with the Father (John 10)
• He claimed that if you saw him, you saw the Father (John 14)
• He was called "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" superseding the grandeur and authority of all earthly kings and rulers (Philippians 2:9-11; 1 Timothy 6:11-16; Revelation 9:11-16)

Scripture teaches us  that God became a human being  to reveal to us his nature and his ways.  Furthermore, God then died the death that we deserved on the cross-a death for sin.  He then gives to us forgiveness, grace and peace based upon his own merit.  This person, Jesus of Nazareth, is the one who is called King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  He is the God of gods revealed to us in living flesh so that we might follow and worship him.  

We proclaim him and him alone in our world, 

Notes

¹ Huston Smith, The World's Religions : Our Great Wisdom Traditions (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991) 378.

² Hence we may infer, that the human mind is, so to speak, a perpetual forge of idols. Jean Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Translation of: Institutio Christianae Religionis.; Reprint, With New Introd. Originally Published: Edinburgh : Calvin Translation Society, 1845-1846. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), I, xi, 8.

³ John Hick A Pluralist View in Dennis Okholm and Timothy R. Phillips, More Than One Way? : Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1995) 47-51.

⁴ The Blind Men and the Elephant is a very old Indian folk tale.  John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) wrote a poem based on the story which you can read at http://www.wordinfo.info/Blind-Men-and-Elephant-crop.html

⁵ See Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion and Sam Harris Letter to a Christian Nation as exhibits A and B.

⁶ See Robert M. Bowman and J. Ed Komoszewski Putting Jesus in His Place-The Case for the Deity of Christ (Grand Rapids: Kregal, 2007) and Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears Vintage Jesus (Wheaton: Crossway, 2007) 11-31.