Philosophy for Christians, anyone?

An epiphany - walking in to undesirable circumstances with open arms instead of trying to avoid them altogether

2008-12-17T15:41:00.002-06:00

One crucial life lesson I have been learning since our move to the Denver area has been a painful one. Sandy and I were "studying," and during this time we discussed matters of faith. In the course of our conversation, I was made aware of the next step I must take forward to mature as a Christian. The realization was both painful and freeing (like a light bulb suddenly illuminating).

I have been running from trying and difficult circumstances of certain sorts like the plague. "Running" isn't a very accurate description. Loathing and dreading perhaps. Here's an example. Nothing has made my sinful, imperfect being more apparent than my embarrassingly crappy attempts at good parenting. I'm not at all good at distinguishing that fine line between letting my 2-year-old toddler express her autonomy and drawing boundaries for her. Sometimes my patience runs thin way too fast. Earlier today, I felt incredibly guilty for letting my frustrations get the better of me. I didn't strike my child out of anger or anything like that. Didn't strike her at all. But, I feel like raising my voice to her and getting impatient with her taking seemingly aeons to put away her toys was just as bad. I hate how I dealt with that situation and some other previous ones.

Rather than expecting myself to never make any parenting mistakes from now on, the Holy Spirit let me know that I should walk towards such patience-testing, emotionally difficult circumstances with open arms, learning to lean on the Lord while walking through them. I cannot continually live in fear of having to deal with difficult situations, whether in relation to parenting or anything else. Instead, from the inside out, as a part of my growth and maturing as a Christian, I need to learn to lean on God as the Counselor and wise adviser. This is true in every aspect of my life and with every interpersonal relationship I have.

How do I know that the Holy Spirit is saying this to me, first through my friend Sandy and then again this morning? I didn't hear some sort of little voice whispering in my ear. I am not keen enough to reach this sort of realization on my own; I've lived long enough to realize that human reasoning and insight has its limits. This could not have come from Sandy or me without any assistance. It was the Lord, moving through the Holy Spirit.

Be still and know that I am God

2008-12-01T11:24:00.007-06:00

This chapter of my life, the one that started around the time we moved to the Denver area, has been rough and turbulent. I gave birth to my second child and we moved half way across the country in two months time. We up and left a church full of good people, some beloved friends, and a life beyond just babies. In our new abode, four months later, I haven't met any kindred spirits yet (there are amazing people here, but none where we cannot stay away from each other), and I feel lonely a lot. Don't get me wrong, my close friends are still around, just not close by. My psychological and mental well-being have been on a roller coaster ride, taking steep climbs and nose-dives, heading down windy paths. On top of all that, my body still has not (and may not ever) fully recovered from my last delivery. My teeth are not the strongest (that isn't even counting the root canal and crown I had done at the end of my pregnancy), and I have a hernia that wants to stay. I'm used to a pretty busy life with a schedule filled with activities. Before coming to Colorado, I was on the worship team at church, teaching an adult Sunday school class, and facilitating a small group. I even resumed all this a week after delivering our second child. What am I doing now? None of that. I try to put my husband first (after God of course, but before the children), look after our home, and take care of our children. I'm doing nothing in service of our church, I'm not in any bible studies, I'm not a part of any small group. Nothing extracurricular. Well, I am in school, part-time.

I'm saying all this not just to unload and to complain. Really. There are people in this life that have much more to complain about. I have a great life: an awesome God to serve, a wonderful husband, two endearing and darling children, a roof over my head, food on the table, freedom that people in many parts of the world will never experience, the opportunity to continue studying, the list goes on . . .

What I am saying is that in the midst of this turbulence and interesting adventure, I have noticed and recognized, at times, that the Lord is calling my attention towards Him. Sunday morning, before church, I even spoke with my husband about the time I had with the Lord that morning, where He told me that this is a time for me to grow in my relationship with Him.

That same day, the day before yesterday, we went to church and heard our Pastor (Kevin Navarro) speak on Psalm 46. We've been working our way through the Book of Acts, and starting this past Sunday, we took a brief hiatus in observance of this Advent season. I truly believe the Lord was using Pastor Kevin to speak to me. "Be still and know that I am God," He's telling me. Be still from all the flurry in my head - worry about finances, anxieties about whether I am being a good spouse or a good mother, concerns about whether I'm doing enough with my life (especially on matters of significance), everything. This is a time for silence. It is a time for quiet, to listen to the Lord.

Verses 1 through 3 of Psalm 46 recognizes that we live in a fallen world - full of disappointment, hurt, pain, suffering. God isn't trying to slap icing and sugar on something that is bitter and ugly. Nor is he putting a band aid on a wound. He admits and points out that we live in a messed up world. But, God also wants us to know that in the midst of this chaos, He is our refuge and our strength. God is our strong tower. God is our foundation. God is our rock.

Think on that friends. We serve a Lord that loves us so much that he gave his only Son to die for our sins. But, God did not make that sacrifice and help us no more. He still is our Abba, who loves us, carries us, wants us to lean on Him.

This day and any day you feel like a failure and life sucks, remember that you are His precious child and that He made you the way you are, special and very important. What you see as flaws are not flaws to Him.

Also remember that the spotlight is not on you; it's about the Lord. It's all about Him.

William Lane Craig's motivating and moving story about how he came to have two PhDs

2008-11-22T22:38:00.002-06:00

One of my really good friends, Christine, alerted me to this story. It offered me so much hope, in the face of a rather trying time:

Got it off of Reasonable Faith with William Lane Craig:

Question 83

Subject: Double Doctorates

Question:

Dear Dr. Craig,

I am curious as to how you obtained your double Phds. How did you attain the second one? I am curious because such an achievement is among my own goals. Thank you Sir, God Bless.

Yours Respectfully,

Christopher

Dr. Craig responds:

Then you’re certainly more ambitious than I was, Christopher! We never planned to do such a thing; we were just sort of led into it. Jan and I have found that the Lord never shines His light very far down our path but gives us just enough light to take the next step.

Occasionally I like to take a more personal Question of the Week like yours, so let me share a bit of the story of how God has led us.

My senior year at Wheaton College I was introduced to the subject of Apologetics through reading of E. J. Carnell’s An Introduction to Christian Apologetics. Carnell’s book electrified me. He was addressing all the interesting questions that I wondered about and wanted answers to. I admired Carnell greatly because he had earned doctorates in philosophy and theology from Boston University and Harvard University respectively. I thought how wonderful it would be to have expertise like that in both areas, but I never dreamt that this would be something I might aspire to.

I did, however, aspire to a seminary education following my college graduation, so in 1973 I moved with my young wife to Deerfield, Illinois, to commence studies in Philosophy of Religion under Norman Geisler at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. We spent two great years at Trinity, studying under men such as Paul Feinberg, David Wolfe, John Warwick Montgomery, David Wells, John Woodbridge, J. I. Packer, Clark Pinnock, and Murray Harris. I earned twin Master’s degrees in Philosophy of Religion and in Church History and the History of Christian Thought. It turned out to be a crucial stepping stone in the path God had laid out for us.

As graduation from Trinity neared, Jan and I were sitting one evening at the supper table in our little campus apartment, talking about what to do after graduation. Neither of us had any clear leading or inclination of what we should do next.

So Jan said to me, “Well, if money were no object, what would you really like to do next?”

I replied, “If money were no object, what I’d really like to do is go to England and do a doctorate under John Hick.”

“Who’s he?” she asked.

“Oh, he’s this famous British philosopher who’s written extensively on arguments for the existence of God,” I explained. “If I could study with him, I could develop a cosmological argument for God’s existence.”

But it hardly seemed a realistic idea.

The next evening at supper Jan handed me a slip of paper with John Hick’s address on it. “I went to the library today and found out that he’s at the University of Birmingham in England,” she said. “Why don’t you write him a letter and ask him if you can do a doctoral thesis under him on the cosmological argument?”

What a woman! So I did, and to our amazement and delight Professor Hick wrote back saying he’d be very pleased to supervise my doctoral work on that subject. So it was an open door!

The only problem was, the University of Birmingham required an official bank statement certifying that we had all of the money for all of the years it would take me to complete the doctoral degree. (They didn’t want foreign students dropping out midway through their doctoral programs because they had run out of cash.)

Well, we didn’t have that kind of money! In fact, we were as poor as church mice. Our efficiency apartment was so small that lying on our mattress on the floor I could reach out and touch the refrigerator. We used to cut paper plates in half just to keep down expenses! (That led to an embarrassing moment once when we had Dr. Woodbridge over for dessert, and Jan, not even thinking about it, served him his pie on a half of a paper plate! Gracious to a fault, he never said a thing.)

But we really sensed that God was calling us to go to England to do this degree. There were no scholarships for foreign students from the financially strapped British universities. We had to come up with the money ourselves. And so every morning and evening we began to pray that somehow the Lord would supply the money.

To make a long story short, we made an appointment with a non-Christian businessman whose family Jan was acquainted with, and we laid out for him what we believed God was calling us to do. And this non-Christian businessman gave us—not loaned us—he gave us all of the money we needed to do the doctoral degree under John Hick at the University of Birmingham! It was one of the most astonishing provisions of the Lord I have ever seen. So Jan and I felt as though God had miraculously plucked us up and transported us to England to do this degree.

I did write on the cosmological argument under Professor Hick’s direction and was awarded the Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Birmingham. Three books flowed out of my doctoral dissertation, including The Kalam Cosmological Argument (1979). Today the kalam argument has become one of the most discussed arguments of natural theology.

As Jan and I neared the completion of my doctoral studies in Birmingham, our future path was again unclear to us. I had sent out a number of applications for teaching positions in philosophy at American universities but had received no bites. We didn’t know what to do.

I remember it like yesterday. We were sitting at the supper table in our little house outside Birmingham, and Jan suddenly said to me, “Well, if money were no object, what would you really like to do next?”

I laughed because I remembered how the Lord had used her question to guide us in the past. I had no trouble answering the question. “If money were no object, what I’d really like to do is go to Germany and study under Wolfhart Pannenberg.”

“Who’s he?”

“Oh, he’s this famous German theologian who’s defended the resurrection of Christ historically,” I explained. “If I could study with him, I could develop a historical apologetic for the resurrection of Jesus.”

Our conversation drifted to other subjects, but Jan later told me that my remark had just lit a fire under her. The next day while I was at the university, she slipped away to the library and began to research grants-in-aid for study at German universities. Most of the leads proved to be defunct or otherwise inapplicable to our situation. But there were two grants she found that were possibilities. You can imagine how surprised I was when she sprung them on me!

One was from a government agency called the Deutsche Akademische Austauschdienst (DAAD), which offered scholarships to study at German universities. Unfortunately, the grant amounts were small and not intended to cover all one’s expenses. The other was from a foundation called the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung. This foundation was evidently an effort at Kulturpolitik (cultural politics), aimed at refurbishing Germany’s image in the post-War era. It provided very generous fellowships to bring foreign scientists and other scholars to do research for a year or two at German laboratories and universities.

Reading the literature from the Humboldt Stiftung just made my mouth water. They would pay for four months of a German refresher course at the Goethe Institute for the scholar and his spouse prior to beginning research, they would help find housing, they would pay for visits to another university if your research required it, they would pay for conferences, they would send pocket money from time to time—it was unbelievable! They even permitted recipients to submit the results of their research as a doctoral dissertation toward a degree from the university at which they were working.

The literature sent by the Humboldt Stiftung made it evident that the vast majority of their fellows were natural scientists—physicists, chemists, biologists, and so on. But it did say that applicants in any field were welcome. So we decided to apply in the field of theology and propose as my research topic an examination of the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus! And we decided to go for the doctoral degree in theology at the same time.

We then began to pray morning and night that God would give us this fellowship. Sometimes I could believe God for such a thing; but then I would think of this panel of 80 German scientists in Bonn evaluating the applications and coming to this proposal on the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, and my heart would just sink!

It would take about nine months for the Humboldt Stiftung to evaluate the applications, and in the meantime our lease was expiring, so we needed to move out of our house in Birmingham. So I said to Jan, “Honey, you’ve sacrificed a lot for me during my studies. Let’s do something that you’d like to do. What would you really like to do?”

She said, “I’ve always wanted to learn French. I had to drop my French class in college because I got sick, and I’ve always felt bad I didn’t get to learn French.”

“O.K.,” I said, “Let’s go to France and enroll in a French language school!”

So we began to look into the possibilities. The obvious one was the Alliance Française, which is the official language school in France. But the far more interesting option was the Centre Missionnaire in Albertville, a Christian language school nestled in the French Alps for training foreign missionaries to French-speaking countries. They emphasized learning to really speak French with as little foreign accent as possible, as well as to read and write it, along with all the biblical and theological vocabulary only a Christian school would provide.

So we wrote to the Centre Missionnaire, asking if we could study there. To our dismay, they wrote back informing us that applicants have to be missionaries officially with a mission board and, moreover, the course would cost several thousand dollars. Well, we didn’t have that kind of money. We had spent just about all of the money given to us by the businessman to do our doctoral studies in Birmingham.

So I wrote back to the Centre Missionnaire explaining our financial situation. I also explained that while we weren’t officially missionaries, we did want to serve the Lord, and I included a letter of commendation from one of the elders at the Brethren church we were attending in Birmingham. Then I basically forgot about it.

Time passed, and none of my other efforts to find a job had materialized. We had shipped all of our belongings back to my parents’ home in Illinois. In one week we had to move out of our house in Birmingham, and we had nowhere to go.

I remember walking out to the mail box that day to collect the mail. I found there a letter from the Centre Missionnaire. I opened it half-heartedly and began to read. And then—my eyes suddenly grew wide as I read the words: “It doesn’t really matter to us whether you are missionaries as long as you want to serve the Lord. And as for the money, you just pay what you can, and we’ll trust God for the rest.” Unbelievable!

Once again we felt as though God had just miraculously plucked us up and transported us to another country to do His will. We later learned that the Centre had actually turned down paying missionaries and accepted us instead. We went to France with a deep sense of divine commissioning and so threw ourselves into our language studies. It was unbelievably rigorous, but by the end of our eight months there I was preaching in French at our small church, and Jan led our French neighbors to Christ.

Our French language training was going to be over in August, and as of July we still hadn’t heard anything from the Humboldt Stiftung. Then one day we received a letter from the Humboldt Stiftung. The only problem was, it was in German, and with my rusty high school German I wasn’t sure what it said!

So we grabbed the letter and rushed into the village to a small bookstore, where we found a French-German dictionary. As we stood there slowly translating the letter into French, hoping against hope, we could scarcely contain our excitement. “We are pleased to inform you that you have been granted a fellowship from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation to study the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus under the direction of Professor Dr. Wolfhart Pannenberg at the University of Munich.” So for the next two years the German government paid me to study the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus! Incredible! Absolutely incredible!

Jan and I arrived in Germany on a cold January day to begin four months of language studies at the Goethe Institute in Göttingen, a small university town near the East German border. We had chosen Göttingen because “high German” is spoken by the ordinary people in that region, as opposed to a local dialect. It’s amazing how much you can learn in four months when you’re immersed in the language. We hired a university student named Heidi to help us with our pronunciation. With my post-doctoral studies in Munich looming, we were super-motivated to learn German. After a couple of months we determined only to speak German with each other until 8:00 p.m., when we’d revert to English. (It’s funny, but even when you know the meaning of the words, “Ich liebe dich” just doesn’t convey the same feeling as “I love you” to a native English speaker!)

By the end of our four months I had finished the advanced class with the highest grade of “1,” and Jan, whose knowledge of German when we started didn’t extend beyond “eins, zwei, drei,” was able to converse freely with the shopkeepers and people in our town. One evening during dinner at the Goethe Institute she astonished me. There’s a German proverb, “Ohne Fleiss, kein Preis!” (Without effort, no reward!). So during the meal Jan asked the Turkish fellow next to her (in German) to pass the meat. But he showed her the empty serving dish and offered her the bowl of rice instead. To which she instantly retorted, “Danke, nein! Ohne Fleisch, kein Reis!” (No thanks! Without meat, no rice!) I about split! Here she was already punning in German!

I have to admit that it seemed a little nutty to spend nine months learning French just before going off to do post-doctoral studies in Germany. But the Lord’s providence is amazing. The first day I showed up at the theology department at the University of Munich to confer with Professor Dr. Pannenberg, he took me into the departmental library and pulled three books off the shelf and said, “Why don’t you get started with these?” To my amazement, two of the three were in French! I thought to myself, “Praise you, Lord!” I could never have said to Pannenberg that I didn’t read French. That would have been equivalent to saying that I wasn’t qualified to do the research! God knew what He was doing.

Doing my doctorate in theology under Pannenberg was the most difficult thing I’ve ever done in my life. I even had to pass a Latin qualifying exam to get the degree, which necessitated my taking Latin in German! But by the end of our time in Munich I’d learned so much about the resurrection of Jesus that I was worlds away from where I’d been when we first came. As a Christian, I of course believed in Jesus’ resurrection, and I was familiar with popular apologetics for it; but I was quite surprised to discover as a result of my research how solid a historical case can be made for the resurrection. Again, three books came out of that research, one of which served as the dissertation for my second doctorate, this time in theology from the University of Munich.

Since that time I’ve had the opportunity to debate some of the world’s leading sceptical New Testament scholars like John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, Gerd Lüdemann, and Bart Ehrman, as well as best-selling popularizers like John Shelby Spong, on the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection. In all objectivity, I have to say I’ve been shocked at how impotent these eminent scholars are when it comes to refuting the evidence for Jesus’ resurrection.

Very often, and I mean, very often, it turns out to be philosophical considerations, not historical considerations, that lie at the root of their scepticism. But, of course, these men aren’t trained in philosophy and so make amateurish blunders, which a trained philosopher can easily spot. I’m so thankful that the Lord in His providence led us first to do doctoral work on philosophy before turning to a study of Jesus’ resurrection, for it is really philosophy and not history which under girds the scepticism of radical critics.

So we’re very grateful for the way the Lord has marvelously led us, as we stepped out in faith, and equipped us beyond what we could ever have imagined to do His work.

Give 'thanks'

2008-06-28T00:44:00.002-05:00

I love praise and worship songs. The chorus of a song starts, "Give 'thanks' with a grateful heart. Give 'thanks' to the Holy One. Give 'thanks' because He's given Jesus Christ, his only Son. And now, let the weak say, 'I am strong," let the poor say, 'I am rich,' because of what the Lord has done for us. . ."

I'm going through a little bit of a valley, and I say this, not to complain. Our family is about to make a really important move, one that is good for our family in the long run and one that comes as a blessing from the Lord. Moves and changes, though, are not without their difficulties. My feelings of sadness and anxiety may be due to a combination of moving blues and post-partum depression.

When I feel badly like this, I try to take the focus off of me by interceding for others and praying for friends and family. But, a few insightful friends have suggested a couple of other very important things to do: singing praises to the Lord and thanking the Lord.

Below is a list of things for which I am thankful. The list is in no particular order and is by no means exhaustive. It's late and I'm just starting the list. . .

My husband who loves me and puts up with all my crap, for better and for worse.
Having been able to have a successful VBAC this past May; having a skillful, understanding, caring obstetrician guide me through pregnancy and delivering Victoria; being surrounded by a team of very capable staff when I was in labor and delivery; being prayed for by lots of friends, having nursed continually encourage me while in labor (when I felt like I didn't have what it takes to deliver a baby into the world).
Manda, Christine, Abirami, Diana, Tenny, Chrissy, Cami, Katia, Debbie, Maxine, Elisa, Jeannie, Mommy & Daddy, Momma & Poppa, Becky, Jenny & Aaron, Brittany, Martha. . .
La Leche League.
My breastfeeding support friends.
Our church family.
Troy and I were able to conceive relatively easily each time we have tried.
We have a roof over our head, food on our table, clothing on our backs.
God has ALWAYS provided for us in time of need.

Alright, there's much more to be said and shared, but I am about to pass out, and I'm incapable of any lucid thinking. Good night to all.

Addendum to previous post, on Yale student; it was false

2008-04-18T23:05:00.004-05:00

Yale University officials investigated Aliza Shvarts' claims and found them to be false. When confronted, she admitted that she was never pregnant and did not really induce abortions.

See the following Associated Press article for more details:

Yale: Student's artwork purporting to show abortion a hoax

It is also worth noting that she let Yale know that if they went public with what she had admitted to University officials, she would stick to her original story (of performing numerous artificial inseminations on herself, followed by taking abortifacient herbs) and claim that the University was only trying to protect its own reputation.

What is wrong with the Yale senior who's using abortion for a medium for art?

2008-04-18T13:36:00.003-05:00

Some of the vital information is the following:

Aliza Shvarts '08 artificially inseminated herself frequently, using sperm donated from volunteers.
Then, she took abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages.
Her so-called art exhibit involves two things: showing a video recordings of these forced abortions and blood from different abortions.

To see the article on this, click on the link provided below:

For senior, abortion a medium for art, political discourse

I can't bring myself to read the details of that article again. Disgusting. Infuriating. Tragic. . .

"Expelled" due for release in theaters this coming Friday, April 18th

2008-04-13T23:33:00.002-05:00

Trailer for Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Correspondence #27: How can another man's death pardon me?

2008-02-11T10:45:00.001-06:00

February 10, 2008 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 27: How can another man’s death pardon me?

Edward’s inquiry:

“The idea that the ‘rules’ are there to drive us to accept salvation as a gift – that’s one hell of a revolutionary concept! . . . It sounds like someone saying, ‘Well, since I can’t live up to these high standards, I’ll simply say that the purpose of the standards is to reveal the fact that I can’t live up to them.’ But on another level your interpretation of Jesus’ teachings is very compelling to me” (172).

“How can one man’s death 2,000 years ago pardon me? How can a God of perfect justice punish Jesus for my sins, and then let me off the hook knowing full well that I’m still guilty as hell (literally)? And why would He go through all the trouble? Surely there must have been an easier way” (172-173).

Greg’s response:

Regarding the ideals of Jesus’ teachings, the emphasis is that salvation hinges not on our own goodness (we are sinful), but rather, on God’s grace –

“Rather than inspire giant feats of self-effort which result in denying the sinful reality of our inner life, Jesus was trying to bring about the end of all self-effort by getting us to examine the sinful reality of our inner lives. And it works, if one hears Him rightly” (174).

“So in a word, the Cross of Christ and grace of God mean it’s safe before God to be real, honest, and therefore healthy. How relatively ‘good’ or bad’ a person is completely beside the point. Grace is, as you said so eloquently, Dad, ‘one hell of a revolutionary concept’” (175).

On how Christ’s death is a pardon for us, Jesus isn’t just any man who took a hit for us. Furthermore, Scripture reveals exactly why Jesus took a hit for us, why he died for us –

“The church has never arrived at any definite theology of how we are made right with God through the work of the cross (what’s called ‘the atonement’)” (175).

2 noteworthy points:

1. “Dad, it’s important to realize that Jesus was not just ‘a man’ whose death 2,000 years ago gets you off the hook. . . . Rather, Jesus is Himself God as well as man. . . . There are only two parties – the all-holy God and sinful humanity – and the Jesus who died for us is both. This is not injustice, Dad; this is incomprehensible love” (175).

2. “Secondly, without trying to explain exactly how the atonement occurred, or whether it had to happen the way it did, I think we are given enough insight in Scripture to make sense of the fact that it occurred the way it did. We can say why Jesus died for us without going so far as to say that He had to die for us” (176).

How we as sinful beings can be compatible with a perfect God –

We must have an atonement for our sins –

“And this, Dad, is exactly what the Bible says happened in the life and death of Jesus Christ. In Jesus, God’s love absorbed His own justice. Out of love for humanity, God Himself satisfied His own moral standard by absorbing within Himself the sin of humanity and the punishment which that sin deserved. As a man, God ‘became sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God’ (2 Cor. 5:19)” (177).

We have to be changed into beings compatible with God –

“The Bible says that when a person accepts what God has done for him in Christ, God gives him His own perfect righteousness, the only kind of righteousness which is compatible with God. In the Book of Romans, Paul says, ‘To the man who does not work (try to earn God’s love by his behavior) but who simply trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness’ (4:5)” (177).

“This does not, obviously, mean that people are perfect from the moment they give their lives to the Lord. A believer is given a ‘new self,’ a self identified with the righteousness of God. But he yet lives under a habitual addiction to the thoughts, emotions, and behaviors of ‘the old self,’ the self which is identified with everything other than God. Believers are thus given a new nature which is what they truly are, but they yet live, in varying degrees, in contradiction to this new nature. Only in heaven will the gift of God’s eternal righteousness shine forth from us perfectly. Only then will the ‘old self’ be shown to be the lie that it is. Our time on earth after our conversion is simply a slow progression toward this end” (177-178).

Correspondence #26: Isn't the Christian life impossible to live?

2008-02-08T15:45:00.001-06:00

January 27, 2008 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 26: Isn’t the Christian life impossible to live?

Edward’s inquiry:

“So here’s my problem: how can God really expect anyone to live up to His ideals? I mean, I consider myself to be a pretty good person. I’ve certainly gone out of my way to help the underdog more than most. But I also know that my life isn’t the ‘saintly’ life the Bible idealizes. Nor could it ever be. But this biblical ideal seems to me to be totally impractical and unrealistic” (167).

“The Bible seems to have all sorts of other hang-ups on sex. Why did God slay a person for masturbating? Isn’t that a wee bit extreme? And why does God give us all these sexual drives and make sex so enjoyable, only to then clamp down on us so hard with all His rules? And what of Jesus’ statement that people who get remarried are committing adultery – which is why I had to get my previous marriage annulled so Jeanne could stay in the Catholic Church. It all seems quite impractical and unrealistic” (167).

“But it’s not only the rigidity of the Bible’s sexual ethics which bothers me. I remember hearing a priest preach on Jesus’ command to ‘love your enemies,’ and I thought to myself that this command would be the ruin of any nation that actually tried to live it! So too Jesus said somewhere that if someone steals your coat you should offer him your shirt as well, or if someone hits you on one side of the face you should offer him the other side to hit as well! Come on! I bet there’s not a Christian in the state of Florida who would actually do that!” (167).

Greg’s response:

We cannot live a sin free, holy life on our own. Hence our need for a Savior –

“Now about your last letter: Dad, you are perfectly correct! No one can live the Christian life! No one has, does, or ever will (this side of heaven) perfectly live the Christian life! Do you think for a moment that I’m any better at doing the ‘holiness routine’ than you? You know me better than that! It’s as impossible for me as it is for you

But this is just the point, Dad. It is the central motive for all of Jesus’ ethical teachings. We are unable to perform our way to God on our own: thus, we need a Savior! Throughout Jesus’ ministry He was confronting people who (like the Christians you’ve confronted) believed that they were righteous before God on the basis of how good they were. They didn’t think they needed a Savior” (168).

“But this righteousness, Dad, we cannot acquire through our own effort. This is the realization Jesus is driving us to with His teaching. Being rightly related to God isn’t about ‘doing’ anything. It’s not a performance. If it were, as some try to make it, we’d all be goners. Rather, God’s righteousness can only be received as a gift. God wants to give it to you, for free, no strings attached! He wants to establish a relationship with you, Dad, a relationship which is characterized by unconditional love” (169).

“Read such teachings of Scripture, and recognize how badly you, like everyone else, need a Savior. And then simply accept Him. He died on the cross for your sins. Dad, so that sin no longer needs to be the issue between you and God. The only issue is, do you accept this sacrifice?” (170).

3 comments raised in response to Edward’s concerns:

“First, there’s no record in the Bible of God ever slaying anyone for masturbating” (170).

Genesis 38:6-10 –

Not about masturbation, but rather, about not fulfilling obligation as a brother-in-law and not obeying God.

Deuteronomy 25:5-10.

“Secondly, concerning the political applicability of Jesus’ ethics, you’re right that a nation would come to disaster if it tried to survive with a ‘turn the other cheek’ mentality. . . . [T]he main purpose of Jesus’ ethics wasn’t to set up a new, more restrictive, social program in this fallen world . . . What He was doing was revealing how sinful our situation is. He lifts up God’s ideal to drive us to the cross” (170).

“I’m guessing, Dad, that you are concerned that accepting Christ is going to entail ‘giving up’ certain things in your life. And you’re not sure you can, or want, to do this. I’m guessing that you have something like the common notion that being a Christian means doing a lot of things you’d rather not do and not doing a lot of things you’d rather do.

Let me just say, Dad, that nothing could be further from the truth. You, like me, are a sinner precisely because you don’t do what you need to do, and you do do what you need not do, and you like it that way. Did you follow that? And that’s why you need a Savior. If you could clean up your act on your own, or even wanted to clean up your act on your own, you wouldn’t need anything more than a gentle ‘divine encouragement’ now and then. But instead, you need a Savior who suffered and died a hellish death and who is willing and able to do the whole thing for you!” (171).

“So, Dad, becoming a Christian just means confessing that you need Him – precisely because you are helpless to make yourself right with God or change your life. Being a Christian isn’t about doing what you don’t want to do; it’s about allowing Christ to change what you want to do” (171).

Correspondence #25: How would an all-loving God torture people in an eternal hell?

2008-02-08T15:41:00.002-06:00

January 20, 2008 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 25: How could an all-loving God torture people in an eternal hell?

Edward’s inquiry:

“Now tell me, what the hell (excuse the pun) would be the purpose of torturing someone eternally? What’s the point? Obviously there’s no ‘lesson’ to be learned. This isn’t corrective punishment. The person in hell has no hope of ever improving his character or situation. So this is sheer vengeance, pure retribution, unadulterated anger, with no motive other than the pure divine delight of inflicting horrifying pain on a person” (160).

“Don’t get me wrong, Greg. There are plenty of people whom I wouldn’t mind seeing in hell – for a time. But even I’d get tired of hearing Hitler scream after a couple of hundred years. Wouldn’t the ‘fun’ wear off? After that, I’d probably figure he’s paid his debt to his victims, and then I’d just kill him” (160-161).

Greg’s response:

“Hell is a real theological problem, I must admit it! To be perfectly honest, Dad, I’ve never been able to make much sense of it myself. But I have enough grounds for believing in Jesus and in the Bible to accept what they say on this matter, even though it doesn’t make perfect sense to me. If I decided to reverse this procedure and to thus reject these two authorities because of their teaching on hell didn’t seem reasonable to me, I’d have to then explain away all the evidences these two authorities have on their behalf” (162).

4 general comments:

1. The descriptions of hell aren’t to be taken literally; when they are, contradictions occur (162) –

· Hell as a place of total darkness & a place of fire.

· Hell as a pit and as a lake burning with brimstone.

2. People earn their places in hell; God doesn’t put them there –

“It is simply inaccurate to construe God as taking any delight in people’s pain. He tells us explicitly, ‘I take no delight in the destruction of the wicked’ (Ezek. 18:23)” (163).

“Now God, to be sure, allows these people to go to hell. But He does it by giving such people their own way” (163).

3. The will of sinners, not the will of God, keeps people in hell –

“[I]f hell is, in fact, eternally locked (and I believe it is0, then it is so ‘from the inside’ (C.S. Lewis again). Again, it is not the will of God which keeps sinners in hell, but the will of sinners” (163).

“The biblical doctrine that there is coming a state of being where people will be permanently solidified in their respective characters, is, I would think, just what an analysis of human nature would lead us to anticipate” (164).

“So it’s simply not the case that God tortures people eternally out of some sadistic delight in inflicting pain. What pain the damned experience they inflict on themselves” (164).

4. About whether God puts those in hell out of their misery is controversial –

“[Y]ou wondered why God would not, after a time, finally put the rebellious out of their misery. Why doesn’t He just perform a divine act of euthanasia and exterminate the damned? You should know that a number of very reputable evangelical theologians maintain that this is exactly what the Bible teaches! They maintain on the basis of analysis of the scriptural text, that the Bible itself teaches that God will ultimately annihilate all who are not ‘in Christ’” (164).

“While I find this view most compelling on a strictly rational level, I have some exegetical reservations with it” (165).

“The most important thing about hell, Dad, is not in understanding it or explaining it: it’s to avoid it! Whatever theory one holds about it, it is a nightmarish reality humans were never supposed to have a part in. And yet, our race is so presently fallen, so utterly screwed up, that the only way to avoid being ‘disposed of’ in this place is to grasp onto the Savior” (165).

“Think of it this way: if Jesus willingly died for us to avoid it, hell must be one terrifying experience!” (165).

Correspondence #24: Do all non-Christians go to hell?

2008-02-08T15:39:00.001-06:00

January 13, 2008 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 24: Do all non-Christians go to hell?

Edward’s inquiry:

“The root of my problem, I think, is that regardless of how much more reasonable the Bible is (to us!) to believe as God’s Word than any other book, people are still going to believe in other books so long as it’s part of their upbringing and culture to do so” (155).

“Now, on your account, does this not mean that these people cannot be saved? Isn’t this what all ‘born-again’ people believe? And doesn’t this mean that these unfortunate people – who constitute the vast majority of the world – are in fact going to be sent to hell by your all-loving God? But how can this be since they had nothing to do with when they were born, where they were born, what culture they were born into, and even who they were born as!” (155).

“How can one go to hell by the accident of where he happened to be born? How can there be one right way to God when there are so few who have the chance of finding that one way? How can heathen children go to hell just because they weren’t born into a Christian home?” (155-156).

Greg’s response:

In short – “I can say with certainty that all without Christ are damned, but not all without explicit faith in Christ are damned” (159).

Breaking down Greg’s response, he admits that there’s much disagreement among Evangelicals on the issue and further says that his approach is to move from the known to the unknown. His response is based on five principles:

1. “First, if I have very good grounds for believing the Bible to be God’s Word – the person of Jesus, the fulfilled prophecy, personal experience, etc. – then I must, at the start, be willing to confess that this revelation may have teachings which are going to transcend my own rationality” (156-157).

“The bottom line, Dad, is that reality is infinitely more complex than we can ever imagine. There are perhaps billions of variables which affect God’s interaction with us about which we have no conception . . .” (157).

2. “Second, I am certain that God is the most decisively revealed in Jesus Christ. Nothing is more central to the New Testament than this. ‘If you see Me, you see the Father’ (John 14:9-10)” (157).

“However God may appear at times, He cannot be other than He is in Jesus Christ” (157).

3. “A third principle of which I am certain as I work toward an understanding of the issue you raised is that there is no salvation outside of Jesus Christ” (157).

“‘There is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved’ (Acts 4:12). Sinners are only made compatible with God through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. They cannot do it on their own” (158).

4. “ . . . there are some people who did not know Jesus Christ personally or consciously, but who were nevertheless saved” (158).

“[T]he sacrifice of Christ embraces more than those who consciously embrace it. If people in the Old Testament, Jews and Gentiles, could be made right with God, then it can only be because God applied to them the blood of a Savior they were, for various reasons outside of their control, prevented from knowing” (158).

“This, I suspect, is what we must also say about small children who die, about retarded people, and about others who are prevented from knowing Christ through no fault of their own” (158).

5. “[P]eople who have not heard and believed the Gospel are in grave danger. While there may be enough in the Bible to give us a small degree of hope for the unevangelized, there is nothing to give us any assurance about them. Indeed, everything we are told impresses on us an urgency about evangelizing them. All people need to hear!” (158).

Correspondence #23: What about the 'holy books' of other religions?

2008-02-08T15:36:00.001-06:00

January 6, 2008 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 23: What about the ‘holy books’ of other religions?

Edward’s inquiry:

“I wonder, however, if you didn’t minimize the blame which the Bible must take for the different views Christians have of it. Are questions about baptism and the like the only things Christians don’t agree on? Didn’t that group you used to belong to when you first became a Christian hold that the Trinity was wrong? Don’t the Jehovah’s Witnesses who come around here every so often say that Jesus wasn’t God?” (149).

“All religions have their own ‘Bibles,’ don’t they? How do you know that yours is the only true one? They, no doubt, have their reasons for holding to the one they believe in, just like you do yours. So how can you say yours is the one and only truly true one? It strikes me as a fairly narrow-minded position” (149-150).

Greg’s responses:

1. Regarding various sects that distinguish themselves from traditional Christianity by denying central tenets of faith –

“But these are generally regarded as ‘cults,’ and their very uniqueness is an indictment on them. Anytime anyone ‘discovers’ some new ‘truth’ in the Bible that no one else in church history has ever seen – and these sects are founded on just this assumption – one should immediately become suspicious” (150).

2. Regarding the “holy books” of other religions –

1) “First, only a few major religions have ‘holy books’ that claim to be ‘God’s Word.’ The literature of most religions, Hinduism and Buddhism for example, is regarded by the religion’s adherents as being sacred and full of wisdom, but in no sense infallible” (151).

2) In working from the known to the unknown, Greg points out the following:

“Thus, I know why I believe in Christ, why I believe in the Bible, and what the Bible has done for my life. I have to start with this. When I judge ‘the competition’ in this light, I arrive at the conclusion that, since they contradict the Bible on certain fundamental points, they cannot also be the Word of God” (151).

3) “Thirdly, it shouldn’t surprise you, Dad, to find that there are other works which claim to be God’s Word. For one thing, it simply reveals how hungry people are to hear God’s Word. When a starving person doesn’t have any real food to eat, he fantasizes a dinner of his own creation” (152).

3. On the comment that Christianity is the one and only truly true religion is a narrow-minded position –

“Narrow-mindedness does not attach to what you believe, but how you believe it. If I refuse to consider any perspective, any religious book, and any philosophy which disagreed with my own, that would be narrow-minded. But just because I hold to a belief that disagrees with other perspectives, other religious books, and other philosophies doesn’t itself make me narrow” (152).

Correspondence #20: Isn't the Bible full of myths and God's vengeance?

2008-02-08T15:34:00.001-06:00

December 16, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 20: Isn’t the Bible full of myths and God’s vengeance?

Edward’s questions:

“Do you take it all [the Bible] to be literally true? Do you take every word of it to be infallible? Square with me, Greg. Do you really believe in the talking snake stuff? Do you take all of the nonsense seriously?” (131).

“You have talked so much about the love of God, etc. But the God I recall in the Old Testament is anything but this!” (131).

“And, finally, there is this problem. I don’t know much about this, but I’ve heard that none of the authors of the Old Testament books are the ones the books say they are. I’ve heard that a bunch of different people wrote the ‘five books of Moses,’ that Solomon couldn’t possibly have written all his proverbs, etc.” (131-132).

Greg’s responses:

Regarding 1. –

“Dad, I do take the entire Bible seriously. How can I do otherwise if Jesus Christ is my Lord? He took it seriously, so must I. I’m thus prepared to accept stories as true which I otherwise wouldn’t accept. But there are several considerations which alleviate the difficulty of this somewhat” (133).

1) “First, realize that humanity was in a very different situation back then than we are today. Hence, God’s mode of operation was quite different back then than it is today” (133).

“We don’t today normally see the sort of strange and miraculous activities the Bible speaks of, but if the evidence suggests that it was in fact like this, if we have reasons for accepting it, why not? The Resurrection of Christ, archeology, prophecies, etc. are, I contend, just those reasons” (133).

2) “Secondly, realize that the narratives of the Bible are selective. They are in the Bible precisely because they are unusual” (133).

“But [the spectacular deeds of Yahweh are] collected all together in one library called the Bible, which is why it collectively reads like these things happened all the time” (133).

3) ‘Third, as I hinted in the previous letter, I see no reason why God would have to limit Himself to the genre of literal history in revealing Himself to us. There is no reason why certain sections of Scripture could not contain some symbolic elements. If utilizing the literary genres of myth or allegory would better express the point God is trying to make, then what would prevent Him from using them? Nothing” (133).

“So, Dad, taking the Bible seriously does not necessarily mean taking it all literally” (134).

“Authors in biblical times were not as infatuated with ‘literal facts’ as modern authors tend to be. They frequently wove together history and allegory or history and myth to make a point. Ezekiel 19 is one case in point. The author tells literal history, but he does it by using symbolism. The end result is a story which has a literal point and must, as history, be taken seriously, but which can’t be understood literally at every point. The idea that the Bible must be 100 percent literal if it is 100 percent inspired is a very recent, and quite misguided notion” (134).

Regarding 2. – on God in the Old Testament –

“But it helps me to try to put things in perspective” (135).

1) “First, as I said earlier, it’s always best to work from the known to the unknown. Jesus Christ is the person in whom God is fully revealed. This, for me, must be my central definition of God. Whatever else God is like, He can’t be different than the God I encounter here” (135).

2) “Secondly, we again have to remember that when we read the Old Testament, we’re dealing with an entirely different world than our own. . . . “[The ancient mind] was an intensely violent, power-driven world where ‘might was right’ (maybe not so different from our own after all?). Life was cheap” (135).

“The Canaanites, for example, used to ritually sacrifice newborn babies by burning them alive. There’s evidence that they would perform some ‘religious’ ritual of tying together the legs of a woman in labor, and leaving her there until she died! These cultures would sometimes impale their conquered adult subjects and celebrate their victories by smashing the heads of their subjects’ infants against the rocks!

So, perhaps one of the reasons God had to use violence in the Old Testament was because violence was the only way of accomplishing what He wanted to accomplish” (135).

3) “Another consideration is this: perhaps the death of certain people was, in certain circumstances, the lesser of two evils” (135).

Regarding 3. – the authorship of the Old Testament –

“For my part, I think the evidence indicates that Moses was the primary author of the first five books of the Bible, but it also seems clear that he utilized sources which predate him (like the Gospel authors did), and also that material was added to this work at a later date” (136).

Correspondence #19: Why do you think the Bible is inspired?

2008-02-08T15:32:00.001-06:00

December 9, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 19: Why do you think the Bible is inspired?

Edward’s question: There are some really strange stories in the Bible. Doesn’t that make the Bible, as a whole, difficult to accept?

“I’m afraid I just can’t ‘suspend’ judgment on all the stories in the Bible. For me, Christianity stands or falls as a whole. It’s a package deal. You can’t ask me only to consider your strong arguments and bypass your embarrassing material. For me, to believe that Jesus is the Savior of the world goes hand in hand with believing in a book that has got some very strange stories in it” (126).

· That a serpent spoke.

· That a man was swallowed by a whale.

· That an ax-head floated.

· That a giant sea was parted.

· That a man grew stronger the longer his hair became.

Greg’s response: Just as we progress from the known to the unknown, from the clear to unclear, in every field; so, too, we must apply this to the current situation.

Various reasons for accepting the Bible as God’s Word –

1) the Lordship of Christ (128), which Greg discusses in previous letters. In this correspondence, he discusses others.

2) “First, the Bible contains a good deal of fulfilled prophetic material which is explainable only on the supposition that this book is God’s Word” (128).

The Old Testament foretells various things that are fulfilled in the New Testament – some examples:

· Jesus’ place of birth as Bethlehem.

· Jesus’ linage from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David.

· Jesus’ forerunner, John the Baptist.

· Jesus’ suffering and death.

· Jesus’ crucifixion and his crucifixion among common criminals.

· Jesus’ divinity.

· Ezekiel prophesying that Nebuchadnezzar II, a Babylonian king, would overthrow the city of Tyre; nations would wage war with Tyre; Tyre would be totally destroyed and made flat as a rock; Tyre would be pushed into the sea.

3) “[The Bible] has, as I mentioned some time ago, time and again proven itself to be archeologically accurate” (129).

4) “There is also a unity to the Bible, Dad, that defies naturalistic explanations” – God’s loving pursuit of humanity, humanity’s resistance to Him, redemption (130).

5) “And finally, there is the experience of the inspiration of Scripture, an experience testified to by Christians throughout the centuries. For one who has experienced the transforming power of the message of this ‘library,’ the ‘troublesome parts’ of Scripture are minor” (130).

Correspondence #18: Why does God make believing in Him so difficult?

2007-12-02T14:19:00.002-06:00

December 2, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 18: Why does God make believing in Him so difficult?

Edward’s question:

“Why does God put us in a position where we have to try to believe in Him? Why does He toy with mankind, teasing us with evidence that’s good enough to make us uncomfortable, but never coming directly out and making Himself clear?” (119).

“It seems to me that an all-powerful God could do a much better job of convincing people of His existence than any evangelist ever does, and even better than all your arguments do. . . .[J]ust write it across the sky, nice and big: ‘Here’s your proof, Ed. Believe in Me or go to hell! Sincerely, the Almighty” (120).

“I suppose it’s for the better, but the more convincing you sound, the more ticked off I seem to get. And I’ve found myself recently thinking about this material too much, which means I walk around here in a state of frustration” (120).

Greg’s response:

1) To his dad’s state of frustration –

“I’m sorry you’re feeling frustration over all this, but then again I’m not. From my perspective, it’s a positive thing. Changing something as fundamental as one’s worldview is never easy – especially when you’ve held it for as long as you have” (121).

“In a fallen world like this, worldviews are going to collide for thinking people.

So don’t let my apparent certainty in our dialogue fool you. I’m a convinced Christian for sure: in the light of the evidence, and under the impact of the Spirit’s working in my heart, I could not be otherwise. But faith has never come easily for me either” (122).

2) To his dad’s questions of why faith is so difficult and why God isn’t more obvious –

“Think for a moment, Dad, what would happen if God did what you asked Him to do in your last letter – if God individually wrote a message in the clouds for every person alive. What if He wrote ‘Jesus is My Son. Believe in Him or perish’? Would all people now put their love and trust in Jesus Christ? I suspect not” (122).

Reasons why people wouldn’t necessarily put their love and trust in Jesus Christ, even if God made proof of His existence more obvious (by writing the proof in the sky, for instance):

1) “First, the impression stupendous events have on us is rarely permanent. The impression fades with time” (123).

“If a person does base his faith on miracles, he needs a steady diet. But then the miracles stop being miraculous” (123).

2) “Second, there’s almost nothing which can’t be explained in more than one way. The cloud which says, ‘Believe in My Son’ could be a strange cloud formation, a hoax, a demon, a hallucination” (123).

“The explanations don’t have to be good, just possible . . . and sometimes not even that!” (124).

3) “Third, divine things are not as clear in this world as they might otherwise be because our world is, as I’ve argued before, caught in the crossfire of a spiritual cosmic war” (124).

“And some of the time when things are not ‘clear’ to people, it’s not because the issue itself isn’t clear; it’s because their mind, deceived by the will of demonic forces or their own evil-bent free will, is cloudy. God can holler all He wants, but if people are covering up their ears, they cry out ‘why doesn’t God talk?’” (124).

4) “Finally, even when God’s ‘direct approach’ seems to work, it doesn’t. God desires a loving, trusting relationship with us. We were created to this end. But does parting the Red Sea do that? Does speaking from the clouds do that?” (124).

“They can temporarily modify behavior – including the fear-filled words ‘I love you.’ But they do not produce love” (124).

“Love must be chosen. It must be free, and it must be from the heart, without external motivations” (124).

“The long and short of it, Dad, is that faith is more than a historical hypothesis. It is also a decision: a moral decision. The question is not only, ‘Do you rationally see why you should believe?’ but also ‘Do you want to believe?’ . . . God desires faith because He seeks love from responsible people, not forced behavior from robots” (125).

“As important as those issues are, salvation isn’t about believing in a talking serpent who deceived a woman, a giant fish who swallowed a man, or a sea that parted. It’s about recognizing your need for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (125).

Correspondence #17: How can you believe that a man was God?

2007-12-02T14:16:00.001-06:00

November 25, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 17: How can you believe that a man was God?

Edward’s claim: Even if Jesus did rise from the dead, that doesn’t prove He’s God.

“Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I conceded that Jesus did resuscitate or something. The grave was empty. That would be a strange event, for sure, but I’m wondering whether it alone proves that this man is everything the Christians want to make Him. I mean, I’ve heard of other people coming back to life. Does this prove that they’re God?” (110).

Greg’s response: To Edward’s allegation that Christ’s divinity was a piece of superstition that began with Paul, Greg says the following –

1) Various considerations that further substantiate the conclusion that Jesus Christ is God incarnate are:

· Jesus isn’t portrayed as divine only in Paul’s letters but everywhere in the Gospels –

“It’s true that Jesus Himself never comes out and explicitly says He is God in the Gospels, but He is everywhere portrayed in terms that come to the same thing. He says things like ‘If you see Me, you see the Father,’ ‘Honor Me even as you honor the Father,’ and ‘I and the Father are one’” (112).

· “Jesus makes Himself the object of faith, consistently saying such things as ‘believe in Me.’ He everywhere equates believing in Him with believing in God, rejecting Him with rejecting God” (112).

· “On top of this, Dad, we find the disciples calling Jesus ‘Lord’ (Kurios) which is the Greek equivalent to Yahweh, the name of God in the Old Testament” (113).

2) First-century orthodox Jews believed that there was only one God and that He is infinitely above human beings. They believe that Jesus was God incarnate –

“Now, what makes all of this most remarkable, Dad, is that we are dealing with first-century Jews here. Jews were (and are) not like the other ancient pagan cultures who believe in many gods, some who could come down to earth and take human form at will. No, at the center of the orthodox Jewish faith is the belief that there is only one God and that He is infinitely above human beings. . . .

All of this raises a perplexing historical question: whatever could have convinced these Jews that Jesus was in fact God incarnate? . . .

According to the Gospels, it wasn’t the ‘resuscitation’ of a corpse which convinced them that Jesus was God incarnate; it was the Resurrection of a man who had already embodied the kingdom of God – its love, teaching, and power – during His life” (114).

To Edward’s claim that the incarnation is a contradiction, Greg responds by saying –

3) The incarnation is paradoxical but not a contradiction.

“The analogy that is frequently used by theologians is that physicists say something similar about the nature of light. It can be proven that light has both wave and particle-like features. But this is paradoxical, for we have no way of conceiving how something could have both of these features simultaneously. But since the evidence for both features is incontrovertible, physicists yet assert that it is, in fact, true.

Something similar may be said of the Trinity, which you also raised in your previous letter. This is not a belief that ‘part of’ God was a man while ‘part of’ God was in heaven. God is Spirit, and thus can’t be ‘divided up.’ Rather, this belief is (among other things) the belief that God fully exists as transcendent Father, while God fully exists as Incarnate Son, while God also fully exists as indwelling Spirit (in the hearts of believers). God exists, and eternally has always existed, in three different ways. That’s what the doctrine of the Trinity comes to.

Is this a contradiction? No, but it is paradoxical. We can’t conceive how it is true, but there are good grounds for believing that it is true” (115).

Correspondence #16: How can you believe that a man rose from the dead?

2007-11-19T19:45:00.000-06:00

November 18, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 16: How can you believe that a man rose from the dead?

Greg considers each of his dad’s questions and answers them at length, so we’ll take a look at those questions and responses together.

1) Edward’s 1^st objection to the Resurrection: The Resurrection is just an article of faith that a person believes or does not believe.

Greg: Believing in the Resurrection takes a conjunction of evidence ascertained by historical criteria and the Spirit of God working in a person’s heart –

“The event took place in history, and thus it must be ascertained by historical criteria, just like any other historical event. It takes more than evidence to believe in the Resurrection of Christ – I believe it also takes the Spirit of God working in a person’s heart – but this doesn’t mean that this belief can or should be held apart from historical evidence” (102).

2) Edward’s 2^nd objection: Though the Gospels may be trustworthy in general, they aren’t necessarily trustworthy in every respect.

Greg: That’s not a reasonable demand. We don’t even ask that sort of rigor of other ancient documents.

“How could one ever prove such a thing about any ancient historical document? I’ve been maintaining that we must treat the Gospels just like we treat other ancient documents, but what you’re asking for goes way beyond this” (102).

3) Edward’s 3^rd objection: Legendary features have crept into the Gospels.

Greg: People seem to assume that there are legendary aspects of the Gospels because of the supernatural events.

“From all I’ve been able to find (and I study this material a good deal), the only real basis anyone has for making this claim is that there are supernatural aspects to Jesus’ life in the Gospels and supernatural events” (103).

Greg considers four arguments against the theory that the Gospels contain legendary material –

a) The Gospels were written not long after the events recorded in them, and that’s not enough time for legendary accretion to happen –

“First, the Gospels are written within several decades of the events they record, and that is not enough time for significant accretion to occur” (103).

b) People who were trying to undermine the message of the Gospel would have pointed out any legendary accretion –

“Second, the Gospels are written in a hostile environment which would necessarily hold in check the development of legendary accretion” (103).

c) “Thirdly, if legendary accretion did occur, we would expect to find it in the later strata of the Gospel material, but not in the earlier” (103).

d) “Finally, if the Gospels contained legendary material amidst their otherwise trustworthy material, we should expect this material would not pass our earlier discussed ‘historical criteria’ as well as their other ‘non-legendary’ material” (104).

Next, Greg looks at the historicity of the Resurrection, pointing out, he says, that it “is, in my estimation, stronger than for any other event of Jesus’s life – and stronger than the evidence for the historicity of many other historical events we take for granted” (104):

“The Resurrection event is testified to by five independent sources (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul – who refer to numerous other sources as well, such as Peter and James in 1 Cor. 15). This plurality enhances the credibility of each” (104).

“The location of Jesus’ tomb was well known by all, so if Jesus had not risen from the dead, if His body were yet in the tomb, this could have been easily checked out” (104-105).

“Related to #2, no one disputes that the Christian church began in Jerusalem just a few weeks after Jesus’ crucifixion. It exploded in growth. And the content of the message that caused this explosion was that Jesus was the Messiah, the Lord of all, as was evidenced by His miracles and resurrection from the dead (see Acts 2:16ff)” (105).

“As I stated earlier, the Resurrection narratives lack the characteristics common to late legendary narratives, and embody many of the characteristics common to early eyewitness-based reports” (105) –

a. irrelevant story line –

“To give one illustration, Mark mentions the name of the well-known member of the Sanhedrin (a Jewish councilman) who donated a tomb for Jesus – Joseph of Arimathea” (105).

b. counterproductive material –

“Legends lack this. The role women in the story, for example, could, in the first century context, do nothing but damage the testimony of the authors” (105).

c. Total lack of theological reflection in the narratives –

“Later legendary material leaves nothing unexplained, but the Gospel narratives contain many puzzling features which the authors simply report, but leave puzzling. For example, Jesus tells Mary Magdaline in John 20: ‘Do not hold on to Me, for I have not yet returned to the Father.’ Why not? The author doesn’t say” (105-106).

“The conversion of Paul is unexplainable except on the basis he himself gives: he confronted the risen Lord (see Acts 9 and 1 Cor. 15). Here was a man dead set against Christianity, even overseeing the stoning of one of its preachers, and then in a moment he’s converted. Similarly, James, the brother of Jesus, was also a nonbeliever in Jesus until the Lord appeared to him (1 Cor. 15:7)” (106).

“Paul gives us an early list of the Resurrection appearances. It’s found in 1 Corinthians 15, written about 15 to 20 years after the Resurrection” (106) – Christ’s appearance to the apostles, to James, to mre than 500 at the time, most of whom were still living (1 Cor. 15:6).
“There is no way of accounting for the transformation of the disciples except on the basis of the Resurrection, the very basis they themselves give. If you compare the disciples before the death of Jesus with the disciples after the Resurrection appearances, you will see a world of difference” (106).

“Finally, there is no motive for the disciples to fabricate this story. They had nothing to gain and everything to lose” (106).

Finally, Greg briefly examines Greg’s alternative explanations for the Resurrection:

1) Someone could have stolen Jesus’ body –

Greg’s response: They couldn’t have gotten past the Roman guards (107).

2) Perhaps the disciples just hallucinated about seeing Jesus –

Greg’s response: “[T]he appearances have none of the qualities of hallucinations. They occur over a relatively long period of time. They occurred to groups of people at the same time (who interact with, even eat with, the ‘hallucination’)” (107).

3) Maybe Jesus made up the whole thing –

Greg’s response: Jesus couldn’t stage his own death, with the executioners present, and a resurrection (107).

In the end, Greg points out the following:

“The resurrected life of Jesus is the first instance of something which is going to in time be universal. He is the first illustration of what humans are going to be, of what they are divinely intended to be. He is, in fact, the first true human being” (108).

Greg uses the following illustration:

“Jesus is the first zygote to go full term and become a newborn baby. But if you never saw a fully formed baby, you’d have trouble believing that this microscopic, fertilized zygote could ever become one” (108).

“What is tragic though, and I need to close by telling you this, Dad, is that Scripture makes it clear that many of these zygotes will be aborted. . . the only umbilical cord we have with God is Jesus Christ” (108).

Correspondence #15: Who wrote the Gospels, and when?

2007-11-19T19:41:00.000-06:00

November 11, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 15: Who wrote the Gospels, and when?

Edward’s inquiry: The dates the books were written and the authors of the book aren’t certain.

“[H]ow can you be sure when these books were written, and how can you even be sure who wrote them? In fact, given the fact that they’ve been passed down to us hand by hand for so long, how can you even be sure you have the original Gospels? Maybe they’ve been ‘doctored up’ along the way” (92).

Greg’s response: Though nothing of vital importance to Christianity hinges on the early dating or exact apostolic authorship of the Gospels, both can be shown.

The former is based upon the dating of the Book of Acts, which was written some time in the early 60s of the 1^st century. Greg mentions 6 reasons he puts the dating of Acts in the early 60s:

No mention of the fall of Jerusalem –

“Luke (the accepted author of Acts) makes no mention of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This would be most remarkable if Acts was written after this date, especially because Luke is, throughout Acts, centrally interested in events which occur in Jerusalem. In fact, Dad, Luke makes no mention of the war that broke out between the Jews and the Romans in A.D. 66 which led to the fall of Jerusalem, though throughout his work he is concerned with Roman-Jewish relations” (94).

“What really drives home this point is the fact that Jesus, in Luke’s Gospel, prophesies that Jerusalem would fall (Luke 21)” (95).

No mention of Nero’s persecution of Christians –

“Acts makes no mention of Nero’s persecution of Christians in the mid-60s. In fact, his view of the Roman government is positively irenic. This requires us to place the document at a time when the Roman government was not hostile to Christians, a time prior to Nero” (95).

No mention of Paul’s martyrdom or Peter’s martyrdom –

“Luke in Acts, makes no mention of the martyrdom of Paul (A.D. 64) and Peter (A.D. 65), though he is very concerned to note the martyrdoms of ‘lesser’ Christian leaders (e.g., Stephen, James). This is especially remarkable because half the Book of Acts is about Paul, and a large part is about Peter!” (96).

No mention of issues important after the fall of Jerusalem; only issues of concern before the fall discussed –

“Much of the subject matter of Acts concerns issues which are important before the fall of Jerusalem, but not after. This reflects the needs and interests of the audience, an audience which clearly has not yet experienced the fall of Jerusalem” (96).

Luke’s record of events in the Roman Empire have been confirmed and substantiated by archeology –

“Luke’s record of people and events in the Roman Empire has time and time again been substantiated by archeology. He reflects a detailed knowledge of the early first century, a knowledge which grows increasingly unlikely the later we place the date of this document” (96).

Luke uses terms and expressions which were used early on, not later on, in Christianity –

“Luke uses expressions in Acts which were used widely early on in Christianity, but not later – not after A.D. 70. Jesus, for example, is called ‘the Son of Man,’ but this title of Jesus died out very early in Christian circles (replaced by ‘Son of God’)” (96).

Regarding the latter, the Gospels’ authorship, Greg makes 3 points:

That Luke and Acts was written by Luke isn’t really disputed –

“First, the authorship of the Gospels of Luke and Acts is not much disputed. It is, as the documents themselves say, and as early sources confirm, Luke” (97).

Authorship of the other three Gospels is confirmed in the early part of the 2^nd century –

“Secondly, the authorship of the other three Gospels is confirmed early in the second century by people who were in a position to know. These people would want to know because they were, at this time, being persecuted, and even martyred, for their faith. And no one wants to die for a lie” (97).

What is claimed in the Gospels matches what happened during this time –

“Third, this early tradition fits with almost everything else we know about these Gospels: they everywhere reflect the perspectives of people close to the events they record” (97).

Correspondence #14: Aren't the Gospels full of contradictions?

2007-11-03T22:27:00.000-05:00

November 4, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 14: Aren’t the Gospels full of contradictions?

Edward’s inquiry: First, faith shouldn’t be based on how well a certain document meets historical criteria. Second, the Gospels don’t seem to have much historical value. Given that the Bible is composed of different sources, it is not to be trusted. Moreover, the Gospels seem to be full of contradictions. Finally, even if there is some truth in the Bible, there are some tales told about Jesus.

“First, I don’t see how anyone can base their faith on how well a certain document meets historical criteria because all of it is guess work” (87).

“Now, I’m no Bible scholar, but I’ve read that a lot of Bible scholars who aren’t fundamentalist don’t think the Gospels have much historical value. I read in Time that there’s a committee of New Testament scholars who get together every year and vote on whether the sayings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels are really His! We don’t even know what He actually taught, but you’re trying to tell me to trust these writings to tell me He’s the Almighty here on earth!” (87-88).

“Along these same lines, I’ve read somewhere or other that a lot of scholars believe that the Gospels, and most of the rest of the Bible, are pieced together from previous sources. Doesn’t this go against any theory of the whole Bible being ‘divinely inspired’?” (88).

“It’s also said that the Gospels are full of contradictions, that the order of the events in each is arranged all differently, that the teachings of Jesus are found in different contexts, and the like” (88).

“If [the Gospels] were pieced together from previous sources like the liberal scholars say, maybe some of these earlier sources are accurate here and there, but mixed in with this are all sorts of tall tales and legends about the man they’re writing about” (88).

Greg’s response: First, faith depends on the overall credibility of the documents, not in the credibility of every single detail.

“My faith doesn’t hang on the demonstrable credibility of these documents in every detail, but it does hang on their overall credibility . . . Faith is a loving, trusting relationship with Christ, an attachment which goes way beyond a theoretical assessment of ancient documents. But it isn’t divorced from this historical assessment. It’s much like our relationships with others. Your relationship with Jeanne, for example, goes way beyond the factual information you know about her, but you’d have a hard time being related to her in the first place without this information” (89).

“It is true that most scholars believe that the Gospels utilized sources, oral and written, when they composed their accounts. . . .But I don’t see anything radical or ‘liberal’ about this. Luke, after all, tells us himself that he is utilizing the sources available to him (Luke 1:1-4). Neither do I see how this diminishes the authors’ credibility in the least. In fact, in my view it enhances their credibility in that it ties them in with preexistent material which brings us even closer to the original events they are talking about” (89-90).

“It is also true that the order of events in all the Gospels varies a great deal, but I again don’t see this as diminishing their credibility. Dad, the Gospels are not trying, on every point, to just give us biographical information on the life of Jesus. They were not written to satisfy historical curiosity. They were written to save people by bringing them into a relationship with the Savior” (90).

“The Gospels vary a good deal on what exactly Jesus said, and when exactly He said it. But this just shows that the writers were not 20^th-century people concerned with the exact wording of things” (90).

“Almost all of the alleged ‘contradictions’ in the Gospels are the result of people misusing the Gospels, viz., treating them like 20^th-century works which work under a ‘snapshot-tape recording’ criteria of truth. But if they are read in accordance with their first-century context and the purpose for which they are written, the ‘contradictions’ disappear. Not because they are explained away, but because they instantly become totally irrelevant” (91).

“There’s a lot [the Gospels] don’t tell us, which perhaps, our historical curiosity would like to know. But they nevertheless tell us all that we need to know and thus force us to answer an all-important question: who was Jesus Christ? And with this question comes a decision: was He a lunatic, was He a liar, or was He the Lord His followers proclaimed Him to be?” (91).

Correspondence #13: Why trust the Gospel accounts?

2007-10-27T22:50:00.000-05:00

October 28, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 13: Why trust the Gospel accounts?

Edward’s inquiry: First, he hasn’t totally let go of the issue in the previous correspondence; he thinks that we don’t amount to much for God. Second, he doesn’t recognize the Bible as an authority on Jesus.

“[I]s it really any deficiency in God if humans are just too insignificant to worry about? No one would think I’m less of a person for stepping on an ant, would they? Ants simply don’t warrant that kind of consideration, though they are undoubtedly important in their own eyes. So also, in the total scheme of things it seems humans are less to God than ants are to us. It’s not that He’s defective: it’s just that we don’t amount to much” (77).

“Christians, especially ‘born-again’ types, are always quoting the Bible to back up their beliefs. They justify their beliefs as absolute truths because ‘the Bible tells me so.’ All I can say is, by whose authority is the Bible granted this lofty position?” (77).

“So you say that ‘history’ proves that God loves us, and ten you quote the Bible! And I don’t blame you because that’s the only place you could ever find anything about Jesus. But it just doesn’t cut any mustard with me because I don’t accept the Bible in the first place” (77).

Greg’s response: Regarding Edward’s comment that we don’t amount to much for God, Greg says that the ant analogy is faulty. As for the Bible’s authority on Jesus, he explains how the Bible is legitimate authority on Jesus by showing how the Bible (especially the Gospels) passes the same criteria historians apply to other ancient documents researched.

Regarding the ant analogy –

“It may lie outside the capacity of humans to care about bugs, but that’s simply one more indication that we are imperfect” (78).

“The imperfection of our love is clearly revealed in the inability, or just lack of willingness, of most people to care much about (say) the suffering of people we never see. It is further revealed in some people’s inability to care about the welfare of ‘higher animals’ – dogs, cats, monkeys. And it is even revealed in many people’s inability to care about the plight of ‘lower animals’ (e.g., those who for their own gain kill off species of animals by destroying forests, polluting water, etc.)” (78).

Addressing the authority of the Bible on Jesus –

· Internal Criterion #1: Check to see whether the author is in a position to know what he or she is writing about, such as an eyewitness account –

Luke used eyewitness resources. John, Mark, & Matthew are written from eye witness accounts.

· #2: “Firsthand sources are typically full of material, especially details, which aren’t central to the story, whereas fabricated accounts tend to be generalized” (80).

The Gospels have plenty of seemingly insignificant details.

John 20:1-8 (what is contained in parenthesis are Greg’s comments) –

Early on the first day of the week (when? Does it matter?), while it was still dark (who cares?), Mary Magdalene (an incriminating detail, see the next criteria) went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved (John’s modest way of referring to himself – another mark of genuineness) and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” (note her lack of faith here). So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. They were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first (John’s modesty again, but who cares about this irrelevant detail?). He bent over (the tomb entrance was low – a detail which is historically accurate for tombs of wealthy people of the time – the kind we know Jesus was buried in) and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in (why not? irrelevant detail). Then Simon Peter, who was behind him (modest repetition again), arrived and went into the tomb (Peter’s boldness stands out in all the Gospel accounts). He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus’s head (irrelevant and unexpected detail – what was Jesus wearing?). The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen (could anything be more irrelevant, and more unusual, than this, Dad? Jesus folded one part of His wrapping before He left!). Finally the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went inside (who cares about what exact order they went in?) (82-83).

· #3: If there’s something in the material that makes the author look bad or the

heroes of the story look bad in any way, the author probably had truthfulness as a goal.

Lots of self-damaging detail in the Gospels –

o A woman was the first to discover the empty tomb.

o The disciples are oftentimes portrayed in a bad light.

o Comments made by Jesus, such as “My God, my God, why have You forsaken Me?”

· #4: The document must exhibit coherence to truth –

There’s consistency in who Jesus is, what He did, and what happened in His life.

· #5: The more exaggerated the stories and the more exaggerated the characters, the more likely the stories aren’t real –

“C.S. Lewis was a professor at Oxford and an expert on ancient mythology. He once said, ‘as a literary historian, I am perfectly convinced that whatever else the Gospels are they are not legends. I have read a great deal of legend, and I am quite clear that they are not the same sort of things.’ The Gospels do include supernatural acts, but the accounts which we find in the Gospels don’t have any of the features of ancient mythology. They are very sober” (84).

· External Criterion #1: “ . . . if the author had nothing to gain, or even something to lose, by writing the account, then document’s trustworthiness is increased” (81).

Jesus’s disciples had nothing to gain from the stories they told about Him. In fact, they suffered tremendous persecution from it.

· #2: If a document’s account can, in some way, be confirmed by other sources, this helps the document's credibility.

A number of sources in the 2^nd century can confirm the authorships of the Gospels.

“We can also ascertain some things about Jesus and the early disciples, things which fit well with the Gospels, from other secular ancient sources such as Tacitus (ca. 55-100), Suetonius (early second century), Josephus (ca. 37-97), Thallus (mid first century), Pliny (early second century), as well as ancient Jewish writings written against the Christians (the Talmud)” (84-85).

· #3: If archeological finds support the material in the document, then the document is more trustworthy –

”I know of no conclusive archeological finding which refutes conclusively any biblical account, but I do know of many conclusive archeological findings which substantiate the biblical account – often after the biblical account has been accused of error on the basis of a previously misinterpreted finding” (85).

· #4: “If there existed persons who could have exposed the document’s account as a fabrication, and had a motive for doing so, but nevertheless did not – so far as history tells – this increases the trustworthiness of the document” (82) –

There were plenty of people, such as the leaders of Judaism, that wanted to see Christianity fail.

Evolutionary naturalists and their, at best, imaginative theories

2007-10-26T20:57:00.000-05:00

I read in today's Drudge Report the following: Oliver Curry, an evolutionary scientist from the London School of Economics, predicts that in 1,000 years, human beings will split into two species: an attractive, intelligent elite and ugly, dim-witted goblin-like beings. As the article points out, this prediction sounds suspiciously like the Eloi and the Morlock in H. G. Wells' The Time Machine.

"Human race will 'split into two species'"

Correspondence #12: Why would God care about us little humans?

2007-10-20T22:23:00.000-05:00

October 21, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 12: Why would God care about us little humans?

Edward’s inquiry: To reiterate what he said in the last correspondence, Edward claims that he doesn’t seem to see any positive responses resulting from prayer. New to this correspondence, he mentions that we’re too small and insignificant for God to see us as important.

“Well, as I told you over the phone, your stuff on prayer made some sense to me. But like I said, I would think it would help whatever the purpose the Almighty has for prayer if He’d at least occasionally show us that He hears us at all, that prayer has some positive effect on things. I can appreciate His not wanting to be a ‘cosmic vending machine,’ but I think He’s erring in the opposite direction! Tell Him my gripe next time you talk to Him” (69).

“In any event, I have trouble with the whole idea of talking to God so long as I am nagged with the idea that we aren’t central, or even important, to anything He’s doing. I grant that the almighty force behind the creation has personal characteristics, but I’m still not convinced that this has any bearing on us. His ‘agenda,’ as you say, seems to be with something else in the universe. It seems to me that we are an accidental feature to the whole thing” (69).

Greg’s response: Small doesn’t mean unimportant. In fact, that such a great being as God loves us makes His love even more magnificent.

1) small is not equal unimportant:

“But why should we assume this? Do we regard elephants as more important than human babies because they’re bigger? Is Jupiter more important than Earth because it’s 100 times larger? What’s size got to do with anything?” (70).

“Just as we would admire a rich king who, for the sake of love, would be willing to forsake all for a peasant girl he fell in love with, so it seems that God’s love for us is all the more magnified precisely because we are so small” (70-71).

2) God cannot be personal but not be personally interested in us; in other words, if God is personal, he has to be personally interested in us:

“You agree that our personal characteristics can only be explained if our Creator is personal, but then you suppose that our personal existence might just be an ‘accidental feature’ to the Creator’s overall agenda for the creation. But the whole force of positing a personal Creator to explain our personal characteristics in the first place is derived from the fact that our personal characteristics (our moral convictions, our reason, our love, etc.) could not come about by accident! Do you see the problem here?” (71)

3) Our imperfect characteristics presuppose the existence of a perfect personal being:

“For example, don’t our imperfect moral convictions presuppose the existence of a perfect moral standard? How else would we know ours is imperfect? . . . I would argue that the Creator, by definition, is the definition of what it is to be perfect. For nothing, by definition, could be above him” (71).

4) The implication of God being a perfect being is that He is infinitely more outraged at injustices of this world than we are, He hurts out of love and moral conviction infinitely more than we do, He knows us perfectly, He loves us perfectly, He cares about our suffering and moral perfections perfectly:

“The gist of all this, Dad, is that if we imperfect beings are morally outraged at the injustices which exist in this world, must not the Creator be infinitely more outraged? If we hurt, out of love and moral conviction, for those whom we know suffer in our world, must not the Creator hurt infinitely more? (71).

“The implications of this for our understanding of ourselves, is, I think, enormous. It means, Dad, that God know you – perfectly (better than you know yourself). It means that God loves you – perfectly (more than you love yourself). And it means that God cares about your suffering and moral convictions – perfectly (more than you care about them yourself)” (72).

5) “The answers to the questions raised above – e.g., where do we find out more about God? – are found in the history in the person of Jesus Christ, and found in a way that confirms everything we already know about God through reason” (72).

Correspondence #11: Why would an all-powerful God need prayer?

2007-10-20T22:21:00.000-05:00

October 14, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 11: Why would an all-powerful God need prayer?

Edward’s inquiry: What’s the point of prayer? Prayer seems to be useless and does not work.

“If God is all-good and all-powerful, and concerned about us, doesn’t He already want the best for us? And so wouldn’t He already be doing as much as He can ever do for us? So what are you asking for in prayer? For Him to care more? He supposedly already cares as much as He could. Are you asking Him to do more? He’s supposedly already doing everything He can. Are you informing Him of some problem so He’ll do something about it? He supposedly already knows everything. So you can’t inform Him about anything, you can’t coax Him to do anything, and you can’t empower Him to do anything” (63-64).

Greg’s response: The main purpose of prayer isn’t to ask for things, but rather, to build a relationship with our Creator. Petitionary prayer is only one small aspect of the relationship.

1) The main purpose of prayer is to build a relationship with our Creator –

“[The main purpose of prayer is] to build a faith-filled loving relationship with our Creator and Redeemer. What kind of relationship would I have with Shelley if the only time we ever talked was to make requests of each other? Not much of one, I suspect” (64-65).

“The main function of prayer is simply to be with Someone you love: to talk, to listen, or to simply ‘commune’ with your Creator” (65).

2) Petitionary prayer is only one aspect of the relationship –

“It’s not that God needs our petitions to be informed or empowered to do anything” (65).

“Petitionary prayer is simply the spiritual aspect of the ‘power to influence’ that God gives us. . . . And He gives us this spiritual ‘say-so’ for the same reason He gives us ‘say-so’ on a physical level: to facilitate our freedom, our personhood, and thus a real, loving relationship with Him” (65).

3) It’s super difficult to prove the effectiveness of prayer, and besides, it’s more important to know that God’s on your side -

“I know of several published experiments done in hospitals to ‘test’ the effectiveness of prayer (concluding that there is a positive correlation between prayer and healing), and while I find these tests intriguing, I doubt anyone who didn’t already believe in prayer would find them very convincing. There are simply too many variables” (66).

“If petitionary prayer could be conclusively ‘verified,’ it would turn God into a sort of cosmic vending machine. Make your requests, pull the lever, and abracadabra, you have your wish granted. But this defeats the whole purpose of prayer which is to facilitate a faith-filled relationship with the Creator. So it takes faith to pray, and faith to see the answer to prayer” (66).

“There are undoubtedly billions of variables that go into God’s moment by moment interaction with the world. There is His overall plan for humankind and for the cosmos. There is the necessary degree of freedom of each individual, human and angelic, with which to contend. There is His plan for each individual. There is the sheer number of opposing forces and allied forces available to consider. There is the strategy of the battle with which He is involved. There is the degree to which He has ordained our prayer to have consequences in the world to consider” (67).

"Chimps choose more rationally than humans"?!!

2007-10-09T21:59:00.000-05:00

German researchers, in Leipzig, from the Max Plank Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology, conducted a study that concluded that chimpanzees make more self-interested choices than human beings do. I haven't gone to find the article detailing the research, but someone is equating rationality with self-interest. Bother anyone?

"Chimps choose more rationally than humans"

Sperm donor to father own grandchild?!

2007-10-07T21:26:00.000-05:00

Here's the gist of the situation. In the UK, a couple hasn't been able to conceive, even through in vitro fertilization of the husband's sperm. The couple desperately desires a baby that is really genetically close to both parents. The husband doesn't have any male siblings. So, the 72 year old father of the husband has agreed to donate sperm to his daughter-in-law. If successful, the child will biologically be the father's half-brother or half-sister. What do you guys think?

Sperm donor, 72, to father his own grandchild.

Correspondence #10: Why didn't God spare your mother?

2007-10-07T14:17:00.000-05:00

October 7, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 10: Why didn’t God spare your mother?

Edward's inquiry: God doesn’t seem to care about us personally. If He does, he would have spared Arlyle’s life.

“ . . . I don’t see what difference it makes what characteristics God has: He still doesn’t seem very interested in us!” (58).

“If God is personally interested in us, as you say, we presumably can talk to Him. But does He listen? I don’t think so” (58).

“So if God is personally interested in us, why is prayer so totally unsuccessful?” (59).

“While Arlyle was dying, we all prayed till we were blue in the face. . . . If God had been personally concerned about us, Greg, He’d have spared your mother and spared all of us a tremendous amount of pain” (59).

Greg’s response: Though some prayers and some questions have gone (and will go) unanswered, God suffers with us and wants to heal us.

“My question still remains, but Christ has won my trust in Him by showing me His beauty – the beauty of a love, a grace, a tenderness, a gentle strength which no mere human being could ever match. He won my love and trust through the healing compassion of His eyes and the warm understanding of His embrace. He provided an understanding in the heart which the mind could never grasp” (61).

“What I also experienced, Dad, and what is shown throughout the New Testament, is that Jesus suffers with us in our suffering. That’s how He heals us of our suffering. One of His names in the New Testament is ‘Immanuel,’ which means ‘God is with us’” (61).

“Only the Gospel dares to proclaim that God enters smack-dab into the middle of the hell we create. Only the Gospel dares to proclaim that God was born a baby in a bloody, crap-filled stable, that He lived a life befriending the prostitutes and lepers no one else would befriend, and that He suffered, firsthand the hellish depth of all that is nightmarish in human existence. Only the Gospel portrait of God makes sense of the contradictory fact that the world is at once so beautiful and so ugly” (62).

Addendum to government handling of child pornography case

2007-10-07T13:58:00.000-05:00

After the various comments and conversations with various friends, I did a bit of research. I must apologize ahead of time. I usually do the research before I post. But the news came from a reliable source, and . . .

Anyways, the person Manda refers to is Raymond Landry, who was prosecuted in 2005. He tried to bring "a 13 year old girl" to McAllen for sex.

The person to whom I was referring in the previous post is Brian Butler, who was arrested in March of this year (2007). There is the implication that the FBI did use actual images to catch Butler. In a March 8, 2007 article, "UTPA professor caught in child pornography sting heads to court today," in The Monitor, is the following quotation:

"Assistant history professor Brian Butler, 48, received several contraband images over the Internet from undercover FBI agents, local bureau spokesman J.L. Cisneros said."

There isn't a lot of information available as to the exact details of the approach the FBI used in catching Butler. Anyways, my question of whether the FBI's approach was morally right or not.

UTPA Professor convicted of receiving child pornography
UTPA Professor caught in child pornography sting heads to court today

Is the fed's approach to finding people into child porn ethical?

2007-10-05T22:12:00.000-05:00

Let me lay a few things down, before I begin describing my concerns about this issue. I am very much AGAINST child pornography. Pornography, in general, is something I believe is wrong. But, that is side-tracking from the issue at hand. I am also in favor of putting away people who are into child pornography, and I very much want to protect potential victims from such people.

That being said, I heard today that the feds., earlier this year, arrested a number of people, several from here in the Valley and one from the UTPA faculty, who were looking up child pornography on the internet. How? Well, the person that was a UTPA faculty member wasn't doing the stuff at school. He was doing it in the privacy of his home. Then how was he caught? Well, the feds. set up a child pornography web-site that was able to track the number of hits it was getting and the sources of the hits.

Wait, uh, the federal GOVERNMENT set up a CHILD PORNOGRAPHY web-site?!! The web-site had to be pretty convincing to lure the same persons back more than once. That means there must have been pictures of young people on there!

I think I've already given away my leanings on this issue. But, what do you guys think? Is it okay for the government to do use this approach to arrest and put away people doing child pornography? One reason people may cite in favor of doing this is utilitarian. Someone might say that we're sacrificing some innocent young people's names (and perhaps well-being) for the sake of the greater good (protecting all the innocent children who live in different neighborhoods, attend various schools, etc.). Anyone think this is problematic? How so?

Correspondence #9: Couldn't it all be by chance?

2007-09-29T22:05:00.000-05:00

Here is the handout for tomorrow's Sunday school class:

September 30, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 9: Couldn’t it all be by chance?

Edward’s response to the “Anthropological Argument”:

1) “It almost sounds like you’re saying that there must be a God or life is a bitch. But hey, life is a bitch!” (53).

2) One alternative explanation to how human beings came about is, we came about by accident or by chance. But, admittedly, Edward believes that there is some greater force behind the universe –

“You then say that humans aren’t explainable unless there’s a personal being who created us, but couldn’t we just have come about by accident? . . . I’m not even sure what I think about the theory itself, but it’s an alternative explanation.

But again, I’m not denying some kind of force greater than ourselves lying behind the universe. I’ve always thought there is too much design in the cosmos to be all by accident” (53).

Greg’s rejoinder:

Greg speaks to 2) in Edward’s response, by making two major points:

1) If the cause or force of human beings is not personal, then the effect (human beings) is greater than the cause, which is not possible –

“Now since an effect can’t be greater than its cause, doesn’t the fact that humans (the effect) are personal mean that the cause (the force) must also be personal?” (54).

2) The process of how human beings came about cannot be by pure chance –

“Our thinking about reality presupposes that there is a correspondence between our mind and reality” (54).

a) Mathematical formulas – “But chance, Dad, simply can’t produce mathematical formulas. And chance can’t produce organisms like our minds that can know that can know and work out mathematical formulas. Look at it this way: if our minds are simply ‘chemicals in motion,’ then any truth we think we may discover amounts to nothing more than a brute chemical reaction, and thus can have no more truth than, say, a burp” (55).

b) Morality – “If morality is simply the result of chance, . . . then our moral

claims have no objective reference point” (55).

c) Self-awareness – “We are self-aware, conscious, and this is why we are

free. But can chance chemical reactions, however complex they may be, ever be free?” (56).

Correspondence #8: Why believe in God in the first place?

2007-09-29T22:02:00.000-05:00

I seem to be getting more and more slack about getting these things out. My apologies.

September 23, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 8: Why believe in God in the first place?

Edward’s inquiry:

“[I]t seems to me that the burden of proof is on anyone who claims to believe in an all-loving God to show that such a God exists. If you have to do all these theological gymnastics to preserve your faith, maybe it’s because your faith is wrong! If God exists, why isn’t He more obvious?” (49).

Greg’s response:

The anthropological argument –

“[W]e human beings are personal beings. This means, I believe, that we are constituted by a mind which is self-aware and is rational, a heart which is free and can love and which is, therefore, morally responsible, and a soul (or call it what you will) which longs for meaning and significance. Consciousness, rationality, love, morality, and meaning: these, I maintain, constitute the essence of what it is to be a person in the full sense of the term” (51).

· The attributes that are significant to Greg’s argument:

o Consciousness.

o Rationality.

o Love.

o Morality.

o Meaning.

· According to Greg, “either we exist in an environment (viz. the cosmos) which is compatible with these attributes, or we do not” (51).

· He claims that if our environment is ultimately itself personal, it can answer to our personhood.

· But, if our environment is not ultimately personal, it cannot answer to our personhood –

o rationality – “we humans instinctively assume...that reasoning gets us

closer to the truth...but the end nature is irrational” (51).

o love – Love is important to our lives, but nature is indifferent to love (52).

o moral convictions – “We humans instinctively assume that our moral

convictions are true to reality, do we not? There are, of course, people who say that moral convictions are ‘just a matter of taste,’ but cut them off at an intersection and their convictions change” (52).

o meaning & purpose – We desire meaning and purpose. “But if our cosmos

is ultimately indifferent and purposeless, all we are, all we do, all we believe in, all we strive for is ‘dust in the wind’” (52).

Correspondence #6: Why did God create Satan?

2007-09-14T10:28:00.000-05:00

This past Sunday, September 9, we discussed the 6th correspondence.

Something that came up during the Sunday school class was that some people believe that Satan was once a most precious and wonderful angel in heaven, who committed evil while in heaven, and as a result was thrown out of heaven. Some passages people may turn to in support for that interpretation include: Ezekiel, Isaiah, and Revelation.

Here are some questions I have:

Are those passages really talking about Satan and his committing evil in heaven?
If that is the interpretation one is taking, what are some possible problems with reading the passages that way?
In general, what are some problems with claiming that Satan can and did commit evil in heaven?

These are such important matters to discuss and get straight, that I plan on revisiting the topic at some point. I need to do some research.

Anyways, here is the handout:

September 9, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 6: Why did God create Satan?

Edward’s inquiries:

How can a person believe in angels and demons?

“First, I’m wondering how a graduate of Princeton and Yale like yourself can really believe in angels and demons and the like” (38).

Why would God create Satan?

“[W]hy would God create Satan in the first place? . . . Bad people make bad choices – that’s what makes them bad. And good people make good choices – that’s what makes them good. So if Satan was so good, how come he made such a bad choice, and now, supposedly, done so much evil?” (38).

Can people choose to do evil once they’re in heaven?

“But Satan was supposedly in heaven, wasn’t he? Yet he fell. So do you think people may even choose evil once they get to heaven?” (39).

Greg’s responses:

1) Believing in a nonphysical, personal being isn’t all that strange. Think of quantum physics.

“Quantum physics deals almost entirely with a realm of the universe – the sub-atomic realm – which is almost entirely invisible. Not only can’t we see it, but we can’t even conceptualize what a photon, neutron, quark, etc. might look like. We can only formulate their behavior with mathematical equations” (40).

2) “[L]ove requires freedom. It must be chosen. And the greater the possibility of love, the greater the possibility of evil. . . .

“ . . . We tend to become the decisions we make. The more we choose something, the more we become that something. We are all in the process of solidifying our identities by the decisions we make. With each decision we make, we pick up momentum in the direction of that decision” (41).

e.g. old, ugly, bitter, mean-spirited person.

Correspondence #4: Does God know the future?

2007-08-27T21:52:00.000-05:00

We discussed the fourth correspondence in Letters from a Skeptic this past Sunday. Here is the heart of information we discussed:

August 19, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 4: Does God know the future?

Edward’s inquiry:

“Since God supposedly is all-knowing, why didn’t He just look ahead and see who was and wasn’t going to use freedom rightly, and then just create the good people? We’d still have freedom, but in a world without suffering” (29).

Greg’s answer:

“But to assume He knows ahead of time how every person is going to freely act assumes that each person’s free activity is already there to know – even before he freely does it! But it’s not. If we have been given freedom, we create the reality of our decisions by making them. And until we make them, they don’t exist” (30).

Greg’s answer is not a traditional or orthodox Christian response to the problem – Greg knows and even admits that this is the case:

“Now I should tell you that this isn’t the traditional Christian position” (30).

It’s an open-theist response, basically a ‘God knows what we do as it happens’ response.

There are orthodox responses to the problem that don’t compromise God’s omniscience, and they claim that it is possible for God to foreknow the free actions of people. 3 possible answers are:

1) God’s atemporal eternality – God exists outside of time and He knows everything from eternity.

2) Simple foreknowledge – a person is free even if only one option is available:

“Imagine that tachyons (particles that travel backward in time) have been adapted for household use and that my friend the tycoon has installed one of the new tachyonic doorbells at his mansion. Arriving for a dinner party, I press the button outside the front door, this causes the buzzer inside the house to sound five minutes earlier, giving the butler a headstart in getting to the door. Now let’s go back to my arrival at the door. Is it possible for me to refrain from ringing the bell, given that it has already sounded?”[1]

3) Middle knowledge – God knows what every free person would choose to do in any situation or circumstance (including circumstances that aren’t realized or won’t be realized).

[1] David Hunt, “The Simple-Foreknowledge View,” in Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views, ed. by James K Beilby and Paul R. Eddy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 85-86.

Correspondence #3: Is the risk of freedom worth all the suffering?

2007-08-22T22:23:00.000-05:00

This past Sunday, August 19th, we mainly continued discussion of the 2nd correspondence. But, here's the stuff I put together.

August 19, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

In response to some of fantastic discussion from last week:

1) Perhaps evil is God’s judgment reigning down on certain people.

No doubt, God judges us for our actions and God lets us experience the full consequences of our actions. But, we should be cautious not to label all evil as God’s judgments.

Job.

John 9:1 – 5:

“As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’

‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned,’ said Jesus, ‘but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

· Assuming that all physical maladies and punishments were due to sin was a mistake the rabbis made.

· Giving sight to the blind is additional evidence that Jesus was/is the Messiah.

2) The evil we see is the result of free will, the consequences of actions people made.

· What about the thousands (a conservative estimate) of people who die from famine?

· What about persons who die from diseases, such as Smallpox or the Black Plague?

· What about evils, such as the some times seemingly pointless suffering of animals, such as a fawn dying a slow death as a result of a forest fire started by lightning striking a tree?

· What about natural disasters, such as tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, etc.?

Correspondence 3: Is the risk of freedom worth all the suffering?

Edward’s inquiry:

“Is it all worth it? To create a world in which mad men like Hitler or Stalin can use their freedom to take away freedom – and the lives – of millions of others, is quite frankly, very poor management” (25).

Greg’s answer: 4 points –

The risk of freedom must be exactly proportionate to its potential for good –

“Yes, there are Hitlers and Stalins in the world. But there are also Ralph Walenbergs, the Mother Teresas, the Martin Luther King, Jrs. And I don’t see how you could have the latter without at least risking the possibility of the former. If we have the potential to oppress or slay millions, it’s because we also have the potential to liberate and love millions” (26).

We have freedom for the sake of love, not freedom for freedom’s sake –

“Love is really the only reason worth creating! It’s not freedom for the sake of freedom that God values – it’s love. Freedom is simply the only possible means to this end” (27).

Creation wasn’t risky just for us, but God risked a great deal, too –

“In the Book of Hosea, God portrays Himself as one who is married to, and deeply in love with, a wife who will not be faithful. She harms herself, her husband, and her children by prostituting herself. So, with a great deal of pain, God continually attempts to call His people, His bride, back to a faithful relationship with Him” (27).

The love that allowed us to be free and for evil and suffering to exist is worth it from an eternal perspective –

“Our earthly, temporal lives are but a brief prelude to a life that is going to go on forever. For a great many this lie is indeed filled with nothing more than pain and suffering, but from an eternal perspective, this is only a small part of the story. Jesus died on the cross so humans could exist eternally in the peace and joy of God – heaven – and the promise of Scripture is that this state of being will be such that our present sufferings can’t be compared to it (Rom. 8:18)” (28).

Romans 8:18 –

“I consider our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us.”

Correspondence #2: Why is the world so full of suffering?

2007-08-12T14:35:00.000-05:00

Continued discussion on Letters from a Skeptic. We discussed the 2nd correspondence today:

August 12, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 2: Why is the world so full of suffering?

Edward’s inquiry – twofold:

“It’s not just the evil in the church that’s the problem, it’s the evil whole world. If God created this world and cares about it, why is there so damn much suffering it? . . . When the freedom to decide to do harm results in pain and suffering to innocent people, God is simply not the ‘loving’ God you make Him out to be!

I thought about this when I read about this lunatic down here in Florida who was released from jail after some seven or eight years for raping a teenage girl and then chopping off both her arms, leaving her for dead. It was his free choice to commit the crime, but what choice did the innocent girl have?” (21).

“Another situation along these lines is the drought in Africa causing millions of people to starve because of the lack of rain. There are no choices involved here. Nature just got fouled up in the water supply, so millions of people, all of them innocent, most of them children, die a horrible death. Where was the ‘loving and protecting’ God during this, or did He just forget them?” (22).

Greg’s answer:

“It seems to me, Dad, that if God is going to give free wills to His creatures, He has to allow for the possibility of them misusing that freedom, even if this means hurting others. To be significantly free is to be morally responsible, and to be morally responsible means being morally responsible to each other” (23).

Does Greg successfully answer his dad’s question?

2 kinds of evil:

Moral evil: results of actions done by people.

Natural evil: bad events, in which no human being played a role.

What about the following atrocities?

o Check out a snippet of what happened in Sierra Leone's civil war:

“Many of those we speak to watched the rebels rape and kill their parents. Others were forced to do just that to family members.

Captured girls are sometimes raped too. Still children themselves, they now look after their own babies in a small enclosure to the edge of the camp.

The government's election slogan had been "Vote with your hands." The rebels, not exactly great believers in democracy, developed their own electioneering strategy and started a programme of amputation. Thousands had their hands and legs cut off.

One boy, 12-year-old Osman, has a scar deep into his forehead. The rebels often use a machete to cut into the skull. They then fill the wound with drugs and tape it over.

High for days, the children are sent to the front and fight, little knowing, understanding or caring what they are doing.”[1]

o The Holocaust:

· POWs, disabled and mentally handicapped, gay men, Freemasons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, & some 6 million Jews were killed.

· Terrible medical experiments were done –

“The most notorious of these physicians was Dr. Josef Mengele, who worked in Auschwitz. His experiments included placing subjects in pressure chambers, testing drugs on them, freezing them, attempting to change eye color by injecting chemicals into children's eyes, and various amputations and other brutal surgeries.^[20] The full extent of his work will never be known because the truckload of records he sent to Dr. Otmar von Verschuer at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute were destroyed by von Verschuer.^[21] Subjects who survived Mengele's experiments were almost always killed and dissected after the experiments.

Romani children in Auschwitz, victims of medical experiments.

He seemed particularly keen on working with Romani children. He would bring them sweets and toys, and would personally take them to the gas chamber. They would call him "Onkel Mengele."^[22] Vera Alexander was a Jewish inmate at Auschwitz who looked after 50 sets of Romani twins:

I remember one set of twins in particular: Guido and Ina, aged about four. One day, Mengele took them away. When they returned, they were in a terrible state: they had been sewn together, back to back, like Siamese twins. Their wounds were infected and oozing pus. They screamed day and night. Then their parents—I remember the mother's name was Stella—managed to get some morphine and they killed the children in order to end their suffering.”[2]

o Famine:

The photograph was taken by Kevin Carter in Southern Sudan, on March 1, 1993. He won a Pulitzer Prize for this photograph. Carter committed suicide a month after winning the prize.

o What about a case closer to home?

In 2001, Andrea Yates killed her five children – ages 6 mos., 2, 3, 5, and 7 years old – by drowning them in a bathtub.

o Tsunamis:

The tsunami of December 26, 2004, affected parts of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, and Thailand & caused the deaths of some 186,000 people.[3]

o What about diseases, such as Smallpox or the Black Plague?

Examining Greg’s answer:

Is some sort of free will response.
Free Will Response: God does not make a world with free individuals but no evil; in other words, a free individual has the capacity to do good and evil.

o genuine moral responsibility is valuable and requires “significant freedom.”

Look at what Greg says:

“Look at it this way: if I give Denay five dollars, can I completely control the way she spends it? If I stepped in every time she was going to spend this money unwisely (according to my judgment), is it really her money at all? Did I really give her anything? If the only things she can buy with her money are things which I decide are worthwhile, is it really her money at all? Is it not rather still my money which I am indirectly spending through her?” (23).

o significant bad choices have consequences.

PROBLEM: Greg’s answer (and free will responses, in general) does not account for natural disasters and probably doesn’t account for diseases.

Are there any alternative answers for a Christian who wants to account not only for moral evils but also natural evils?

One possibility is the soul-making response.
Soul-Making Response: God made a world so that we have a capacity to choose how to respond and become a good or bad person.

This response can account for natural evil in ways the free will response cannot.
PROBLEM: However, a problem that’s especially difficult with the soul-making response is, what soul was advanced by the suffering of little bambi in the forest? Isn’t there gratuitous evil?

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/world/africa/1136430.stm

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake

Correspondence #1: Why has Christianity done so much harm?

2007-08-05T21:58:00.000-05:00

The following is material I covered in the adult Sunday school class I'm teaching at church. We just started discussing Letters from a Skeptic. Today's material was Correspondence #1. Would love to hear your substantive feedback.

August 5, 2007 Lily Chang

Gregory A. Boyd & Edward K. Boyd’s Letters from a Skeptic: a Skeptic Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity.

Correspondence 1: Why has Christianity done so much harm?

Edward’s question:

“How could an all-powerful and all-loving God allow the church to do so much harm to humanity for so long? Isn’t this supposed to be His true church, His representation on earth?” (17-18).

Evil is often used as a basis in arguing for atheism. The question Edward posits can be formulated into an argument for atheism:

If there were a God, he would not allow his institutions on earth to perpetrate evil in his name.
Christian institutions frequently perpetrate evil in the name of God.
Therefore, there is no God.[1]

What are problems, if any, with such an argument?

1) Greg’s answer: one problem with the aforementioned argument –

Premise 1. is false. It’s possible for God to allow institutions on earth to perpetrate evil in his name:

“My first and primary response is that I don’t think God can be held responsible for what the Catholic Church – or any church, or any religion whatsoever – has done or shall do. From my perspective, the God whom the Bible talks about, and whom Jesus Christ incarnates, is a God of love, and this entails that He is a God of freedom, for you cannot have love without freedom” (19).

1 Peter 2:16 – (NIV)

“Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God.”

Galatians 5:13-14 –

“You my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

2) Importance of Christian growth –

We must grow spiritually:

Philippians 3:15 –

“All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.”

Hebrews 5:11– 6:3 –

“We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, still being an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained them to distinguish good from evil.”

2 Corinthians 3:18 –

“And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.”

3) C. S. Lewis’s answer: a second problem with the argument –

Question 12.

Are there any unmistakable outwards signs in a person surrendered to God? Would he be cantankerous? Would he smoke?

Lewis:

I think of advertisements for ‘White Smiles’ Tooth Paste, saying that it is the best on the market. If they are true, it would follow that:

(1) Anyone who starts using it will have better teeth;

(2) Anyone using it has better teeth than he would have if he weren’t using it.

But you can’t test it in the case of one who has naturally bad teeth and uses it, and compare him with a healthy Negro who has never used tooth paste at all.

Take the case of a sour old maid, who is a Christian, but cantankerous. On the other hand, take some pleasant and popular fellow, but who has never been to Church. Who knows how much more cantankerous the old maid might be if she were not a Christian, and how much more likeable the nice fellow might be if he were a Christian? You can’t judge Christianity simply by comparing the product in those two people; you would never know what kind of raw material Christ was working on in both cases.[2]

o Beware in judging 2), or the spiritual growth of others by looking purely at their actions.

o At times, action is not a good judge of Christian faith.

4) Difference between Greg Boyd and C. S. Lewis’s answers:

Boyd: redirects attention to Christ.

C. S. Lewis: does not want to discount the church or tradition.

[1] John O’Leary-Hawthorn, “Arguments for Atheism,” in Reason for the Hope Within, ed. by Michael Murray, foreword by Alvin Plantinga (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999), 131.

[2] C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2001), Chapter 4 Answers to Questions on Christianity – 59.

Biblical Allusions and Humor

2007-04-19T00:01:00.000-05:00

This doesn't so much have to do with philosophy but a former professor of mine and friend forwarded this to me. I found it to be quite keen.

Q. What kind of man was Boaz before he married Ruth?
A. Ruthless.

Q. What do they call pastors in Germany?
A.. German Shepherds.

Q. Who was the greatest financier in the Bible?
A. Noah He was floating his stock while everyone else was in
liquidation.

Q. Who was the greatest female financier in the Bible?
A. Pharaoh's daughter. She went down to the bank of the Nile and drew
out a
> little prophet.
>
>
> Q. What kind of motor vehicles are in the Bible?
> A. Jehovah drove Adam and Eve out of the Garden in a Fury. David's
Triumph
> was heard throughout the land. Also, probably a Honda, because the
apostles were
> all in one Accord.
>
>
> Q.. Who was the greatest comedian in the Bible?
> A. Samson. He brought the house down.
>
>
> Q. Wha t excuse did Adam give to his children as to why he no longer
lived in
Eden?
A. Your mother ate us out of house and home.

Q. Which servant of God was the most flagrant lawbreaker in the Bible?
A. Moses. He broke all 10 commandments at once.

Q. Which area of Palestine was especially wealthy?
A. The area around Jordan. The banks were always overflowing.

Q. Who is the greatest baby-sitter mentioned in the Bible?
A. David. He rocked Goliath to a very deep sleep.

Q. Which Bible character had no parents?
A. Joshua, son of Nun.

Q. Why didn't they play cards on the Ark?
A. Because Noah was standing on the deck. ( Groan ...)

PS... Did you know it's a sin for a woman to make coffee?
Yup, it's in the Bible. It says . .. "He-brews"

Holocaust Remembrance Day

2007-04-15T23:45:00.000-05:00

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day. I don't know what I could possibly say to do justice to such an important day. We must remember those that were treated badly, tortured, and killed by Hitler and his regime.

I am flabbergasted, what Hitler did is as morally legitimate as what Mother Teresa did?!

2007-04-11T09:09:00.000-05:00

Taught a class this morning for Introduction to Philosophy. As of this past Monday, we are discussing ethics until the end of the semester, beginning with Relativism, specifically Cultural Relativism. Today, my students admit to believing that what Hitler did is as morally legitimate as what Mother Teresa did. Oh my goodness, someone wake me up from a bad dream! They weren't kidding. What's worse was that not only one student was claiming this, my entire class as a whole was endorsing this.

Reasoning for believing such a claim? Hitler got most of Germany to accept the genocidal acts; so it was right. Who wants to do what Mother Teresa did, to the extent she did it? She went way overboard to help the poor. Winning the Nobel Peace Prize for helping the poor . . . well, the award is just opinions.

To push the envelope further, I said something like this. If somehow I suddenly decide that Asians are the smartest and work the hardest AND I want to annihilate all the other races in the United States, is that okay? My students said that if I can gain widespread support for it, then the acts are morally permissible.

WHAT?!

I was so flabbergasted, I was finished lecturing. Didn't know what else to say. Ladies and gentlemen, these are the future leaders of America.

Happy Easter everyone

2007-04-08T20:10:00.000-05:00

Jesus has risen from the dead.
Jesus is Lord.
Let us rejoice!

Happy Good Friday

2007-04-06T22:09:00.000-05:00

My best friend, Christine gave me some grief for wishing her a happy Good Friday. She said something to the effect of, "Lily, I don't think you are supposed to say 'Happy Good Friday.' I am know, especially by my college friends, for making up my own phraseology. I am well aware that we say Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Christmas (or Happy Christmas in England), but why can't we say Happy Good Friday. The day after tomorrow, we are commemorated the risen Christ, Christ rising from the dead. Isn't this a happy occasion? Jesus is Lord!

I hope you have all had a pleasant Good Friday.

I plan to write about our Good Friday on A Day in the Life of Lily. I suffice to say that I thoroughly enjoyed being able to spend time with Troy as well as Manda & Johnny. Troy and I have been so busy, any lengthy time together has not be frequent recently. We had a fantastic Good Friday together.

Palm Sunday

2007-04-01T23:22:00.000-05:00

Blessings to you all on the Palm Sunday, the last Sunday in Lent and the Sunday before Easter. This time commemorates Jesus's entry to Jerusalem, riding upon an ass or donkey, before the Passion. Jesus entered Jerusalem for the Jewish festival of Passover.

Holy Week begins today and ends on Easter Monday.

A parable

2007-03-16T00:13:00.000-05:00

A friend and a professor of mine from my Furman days forwarded this to me. Interesting read.

4 WIVES

Once upon a time there was a rich King who had four wives.

He loved the 4th wife the most and adored her with rich robes and treated her to the finest of
delicacies. He gave her nothing but the best.

He also loved the 3rd wife very much and was always showing her off to neighboring kingdoms.
However, he feared that one day she would leave him for another.

He also loved his 2nd wife. She was his confidant and was always kind, considerate and patient
with him. Whenever the King faced a problem, he could confide in her, and she would help him
get through the difficult times.

The King's 1st wife was a very loyal partner and had made great contributions in maintaining
his wealth and kingdom. However, he did not love the first wife. Although she loved him deeply,
he hardly took notice of her!

One day, the King fell ill and he knew his time was short. He th ought of his luxurious life and
wondered, I now have four wives with me, but when I die, I'll be all alone."

Thus, he asked the 4th wife , "I loved you the most endowed you with the finest clothing and showered
great care over you. Now that I'm dying, will you follow me and keep me company?"

"No way!", replied the 4th wife, and she walked away without another word.

Her answer cut like a sharp knife right into his heart.

The sad King then asked the 3rd wife, "I loved you all my life. Now that I'm dying, will you
follow me and keep me company?"

"No!", replied the 3rd wife. "Life is too good! When you die, I'm going to remarry!"
His heart sank and turned cold.

He then asked the 2nd wife, "I have always turned to you for help and you've always been
there for me.

When I die, will you follow me and keep me company?"

"I'm sorry, I can't help you out this time!", replied the 2nd wife. "At the very most, I can only
walk with you to your grave." Her answer struck him like a bolt of lightning, and the King
was devastated.

Then a voice called out: "I'll go with you. I'll follow you no matter where you go."

The King looked up, and there was his first wife. She was very skinny as she suffered
from malnutrition and neglect. Greatly grieved, the King said, "I should have taken much
better care of you when I had the chance!"

In truth, we all have the 4 wives in our lives:

Our 4th wife is our body. No matter how much time and effort we lavish in making it look
good, it will leave us when we die.

Our 3rd wife is our possessions, status and wealth.
When we die, it will all go to others.

Our 2nd wife is our family and friends. No matter how much they have been there for us,
the furthest they can stay by us is up to the grave.

And our 1st wife is our Sou l. Often neglected in pursuit of wealth, power and pleasu res
of the world. However, our Soul is the only thing that will follow us where ever we go.

Cultivate, strengthen and cherish it now, for it is the only part of us that will follow us to
the throne of God and continue with us throughout Eternity.

Thought for the day:

Remember, when the world pushes you to your knees, you're in the perfect position to pray.

Being happy doesn't mean everything's perfect. It means you've decided to see beyond
the imperfections

I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has
reached in life but by obstatcles one has overcome while trying to succeed.

Ash Wednesday

2007-02-21T17:24:00.000-06:00

Remember that Easter is earlier this year; it's the second Sunday in April. Today is Ash Wednesday, the first day of the Lent season. Forty days from today is Good Friday. The traditional name for Ash Wednesday is Day of Ashes. People have a cross marked on their forehead to represent persons' ownership, that they belong to Jesus Christ. The cross is drawn on the forehead using ashes burned from the previous Palm Sunday, showing penance. Christians sometimes fast during the Lent season, beginning on Palm Sunday and ending on Good Friday.

Ash Wednesday.
Ash Wednesday by newadvent.org/.

ahh . . . those little ambiguities

2007-02-19T16:42:00.000-06:00

One of my friends and former professor of mine forward this to me. This doesn't so much appeal to Christians specifically. But, it is a humorous illustration of ambiguities.

A man was sitting on the edge of the bed, observing his wife
turning back and forth, looking at herself in the mirror.

Since her birthday was not far off, he asked what she'd like
to have for her Birthday.I'd like to be six again, she
replied, still looking in the Mirror.

On the morning of her birthday, he arose early, made her a
nice big bowl of Lucky Charms, and then took her to Six
Flags theme park. What a day ! He put her on every ride in
the park; the Death Slide, the Wall of Fear, the Screaming
Monster Roller Coaster... everything there was. Five hours
later they staggered out of the theme park. Her head was
reeling and her stomach felt upside down.

He then took her to a McDonald's where he ordered her a
Happy Meal with extra fries and a chocolate shake.


Then it was off to a movie, popcorn, a soda pop, and her
Favorite candy, M&M's.! What a fabulous adventure! Finally
she wobbled home with her husband and collapsed into bed
exhausted.

He leaned over his wife with a big smile and lovingly
asked, Well Dear, what was it like being six again ??

Her eyes slowly opened and her expression suddenly
changed.

I meant my dress size, you dummy!

The moral of the story: Even when a man is listening, he
is going to get it wrong.

Pray for a smooth transition, please!

2007-01-15T23:55:00.000-06:00

Right, for those who don't mind putting in some prayers for us, pray that we have a smooth transition as we return to work. Here are some things to pray for:

1. I'm trying to nurse Isabella before I go to teach in the morning. Pray that I get up at the sound of my alarm to nurse her and that I can get Isabella to go back to sleep soon after the feeding. I'm hoping that though I'm up and gone that Troy can still get some zzzzzz's. I used today as a trial run. I didn't get up when the alarm when off, some time between 6 and 6:30 AM. But, I started nursing before 7 AM. She finished nursing, I put her down to sleep, and she fell asleep around 8 AM. Though Isabella and I don't have to be anywhere tomorrow, I'm going to do the same thing tomorrow morning.

2. Pray that Isabella won't give Daddy such a hard time when I'm teaching. Since I came home from D.C., she sometimes gives Daddy a really hard time. The moment he passes Isabella to me, oftentimes she quiets down instantly. I know the Mommy preference is a phase, but pray that she'll go easy on Daddy anyways.

3. Pray that I find time in the day to prepare my lectures, ahead of time. My worst nightmare is not having anything prepared.

Can't really think clearly now. Got to start getting ready for bed. Nighty-night.

For Unto Us a Child is Born

2006-12-25T00:17:00.000-06:00

I sang Handel's Messiah with the University Chorus, while I was at Furman University. Love the music and the lyrics. Wonderful, wonderful stuff. You ought to listen to the music, if you haven't already. Even if you have, take it in and enjoy.

At the moment I have the chorus to For Unto Us Child is Born in my head. Here are the words to the chorus:

For Unto Us a Child is Born

For unto us a Child is born,
unto us a Son is given,
and the government shall be upon His shoulder,
and His Name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor,
The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father,
The Prince of Peace.

George Frederick Handel was born February 23, 1685, in Halle, Germany, and died in London, England, on April 14, 1759. The words to the chorus are based on Isaiah 9.6.

Merry Christmas to you all!

2006-12-25T00:07:00.000-06:00

From our family to you, Merry Christmas! Though this is a tough season for many, for a variety of reasons, may the work of the Lord - through Christ Jesus - bring hope to you this holiday season. Peace and good will to you.

What Child Is This?

2006-12-23T00:17:00.000-06:00

I love the melody to What Child Is This? It's the same melody as Greensleeves.

What Child Is This?

What Child is this who, laid to rest
On Mary’s lap is sleeping?
Whom angels greet with anthems sweet,
While shepherds watch are keeping?
This, this is Christ the King,
Whom shepherds guard and angels sing;
Haste, haste, to bring Him laud,
The Babe, the Son of Mary.

Why lies He in such mean estate,
Where ox and ass are feeding?
Good Christians, fear, for sinners here
The silent Word is pleading.
Nails, spear shall pierce Him through,
The cross be borne for me, for you.
Hail, hail the Word made flesh,
The Babe, the Son of Mary.

So bring Him incense, gold and myrrh,
Come peasant, king to own Him;
The King of kings salvation brings,
Let loving hearts enthrone Him.
Raise, raise a song on high,
The virgin sings her lullaby.
Joy, joy for Christ is born,
The Babe, the Son of Mary.

Keeping the spirit of Christmas - Happy Christmas!

2006-12-23T00:02:00.000-06:00

Around this time last year, actually a bit after Christmas last year, Troy and I were in NYC, for an American Philosophical Association Eastern Division conference, looking for jobs. We were sitting at a cafe, enjoying coffee and noticing how holiday songs were playing. In particular, the songs were devoid of any substantive content, especially of any religious significance.

In keeping with such a spirit, many people choose to say "Happy holidays" and avoid any religious greetings, like "Merry Christmas" (or "Happy Christmas" for folks abroad).

What gets me so excited about Christmas time is thinking about the true meaning of Christmas, about what Christ has done for us and his return. Without that, Christmas would be merely another holiday. Hey, gifts are exchanged on birthdays, Valentine's Day, anniversaries, etc. The gift exchange is fun. Don't get me wrong. But, the message of Christ is ever important.

I'm too tired and groggy to write anymore. Good night.

The Pope also is concerned about defending the true spirit of Christmas:

Pope: Defend Christmas Against Secular Trends

Give thanks

2006-12-15T14:53:00.000-06:00

Our little baby calms down when she hears me talk to her and when I sing to her. This is especially effective when I'm trying to put her to sleep at night.

From now until Christmas, I'll be posting lyrics to songs that I like a lot. Right now, I'm feeling the need to give thanks to the Lord . . . for everything.

Here are the lyrics to Give Thanks:

GIVE THANKS
WITH A GRATEFUL HEART
GIVE THANKS
TO THE HOLY ONE
GIVE THANKS
FOR HE'S GIVEN
JESUS CHRIST, HIS SON
(X2)

AND NOW LET THE WEAK SAY
I AM STRONG
LET THE POOR SAY
I AM RICH
BECAUSE OF WHAT
THE LORD HAS DONE
FOR US
(X2)
GIVE THANKS...

God rest ye merry, gentlemen

2006-12-15T14:50:00.000-06:00

God rest ye merry, gentlemen
Let nothing you dismay
Remember, Christ, our Saviour
Was born on Christmas day
To save us all from Satan's power
When we were gone astray
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy

In Bethlehem, in Israel,
This blessed Babe was born
And laid within a manger
Upon this blessed morn
The which His Mother Mary
Did nothing take in scorn
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy

From God our Heavenly Father
A blessed Angel came;
And unto certain Shepherds
Brought tidings of the same:
How that in Bethlehem was born
The Son of God by Name.
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy

"Fear not then," said the Angel,
"Let nothing you affright,
This day is born a Saviour
Of a pure Virgin bright,
To free all those who trust in Him
From Satan's power and might."
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy

The shepherds at those tidings
Rejoiced much in mind,
And left their flocks a-feeding
In tempest, storm and wind:
And went to Bethlehem straightway
The Son of God to find.
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy

And when they came to Bethlehem
Where our dear Saviour lay,
They found Him in a manger,
Where oxen feed on hay;
His Mother Mary kneeling down,
Unto the Lord did pray.
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy

Now to the Lord sing praises,
All you within this place,
And with true love and brotherhood
Each other now embrace;
This holy tide of Christmas
All other doth deface.
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy.

Our little one wishes you a Happy early Christmas

2006-12-13T20:09:00.000-06:00

2006-12-11

The life of a Christian

2006-12-13T11:09:00.000-06:00

Just a brief blurb. Sometimes people think that Christians have an easy time. That is not at all true. Others, besides persecuted Christians, live a challenging life. To follow the Lord is a difficult but rewarding journey. The decision to pick up one's cross daily and walk the path of the Lord is challenging. I believe each one of us is tempted to do things our own way, and to do things in a way that glorifies the Lord is much more difficult. But, we each were made in God's image, and, as Christians, our role is to restore that image, as best as we can, and to glorify God.

Let me add a bit more. I strongly believe that turbulent points in people's lives fulfill one of two goals, bring people closer to God or distance people from God. A person, I believe, never stays in the same place, relationship-wise to the Lord during tough times.

My heart's desire is to grow in my relationship with Him, whatever the challenge. Hold me to it!

Adeste Fideles

2006-12-03T17:26:00.000-06:00

This is a Christmas song I like to sing from time to time. I first learned some of the words to this song by watching part of the movie, Beaches, with Bette Midler and Barbara Hershey, over and over again. After finding the lyrics, though I've seen the movie more times than I care to admit, I watched the part where Hershey's character, Hillary, sang this song so many times only to learn the first verse! Anyways, here are the words to the song, Adeste Fideles. For those of you who aren't familiar with the song, the words are sung to the same tune as O Come All Ye Faithful.

Adeste Fideles

Adeste, fideles, laeti triumphantes;
Venite, venite in Bethlehem.
Natum videte Regem angelorum.

Refrain

Venite adoremus, venite adoremus,
Venite adoremus, Dominum.

Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine,
Parturit virgo mater,
Deum verum, genitum, non factum.

Refrain

En grege relicto, humiles ad cunas
Vocati pastores approperant:
Et nos ovanti gradu festinemus.

Refrain

Stella duce, Magi Christum adorantes,
Aurum, thus, et myrrham dant munera.
Jesu infanti corda praebeamus.

Refrain

Aeterni Parrentis splendorem aeternum
Velatum sub carne videbimus,
Deum infantem, pannis involutem.

Refrain

Pro nobis egenum et foeno cubantem
Piis foveamus amplexibus;
Sic nos amantem quis non redamaret?
Refrain

The first Sunday of Advent

2006-12-03T15:08:00.000-06:00

Advent, which comes from the Latin term Adventus meaning coming, is a season we commemorate the coming of the Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a special time during which we celebrate the coming of the King, that is, his birth.

Purple, one of the significant colors used in sanctuaries during this time, represents penitence and fasting. But it is also a color signifying loyalty, to welcome the coming of our King.

This Advent season has a new meaning for us this year. Having a little bundle of our own has changed our lives in more ways than we could ever imagine. Our little one entered the world with only one mode of communication, crying, for so many needs. She cries when she is hungry, when she is tired, when her diaper is wet, when she wants to be held, when she is left alone, when she does not feel well, and a multitude of other reasons. And, she is left at our mercy to figure out what her needs are and how to meet her needs. Jesus entered the world this way, and to what end? To pay and to be the ultimate sacrifice for our sins.

What is a cult?

2006-11-28T22:12:00.000-06:00

This coming Sunday, in our Sunday school, we're reading a chapter on cults. I've asked fellow attendees of the Sunday school, as part of their homework, to come up with at least one good definition of cult. What definition(s) do you have?

I love my sister

2006-11-27T14:19:00.000-06:00

I thank the Lord so much for blessing me with events that would continue to bring my sister and me ever closer. Since I went to college, my sister and I have been pretty close. But, with our pregnancies and babies, we grown even closer. My sister and I somehow got pregnant around the same time. Though we never saw each other with swollen bellies, we spent no small amount of time comparing and sharing our experiences with each other. Strange how we ended up having similar issues and problems within a close amount of time. We also had our babies within six days of each other. We had plenty to talk about before the babies came, but now, we have even more to talk about. We can lean on each other stories and trade horror, I mean, sweet stories. I love you, Tenny! You're the best.

The Apostle's Creed is not gobbleygoop

2006-11-26T22:33:00.000-06:00

Last Sunday, Troy and I asked our Sunday School class to attempt memorizing the Apostle's Creed. We provided various neumonic devices and games for remembering the Creed. Part of the trick to remembering the Creed was to understand the breakdown of the Creed: it moves from talking about God, to talking about Jesus, to talking about the Holy Spirit.

We're transitioning to a book, provided by a book series the Nazarenes use, called "Misguiding Lights." The book didn't arrive last Sunday but arrived a few days later. We didn't give them a reading assignment for today. At the beginning of class, I decided to see who could remember the Creed and then I asked them what chapters they are interested in covering.

I've included the words to the Apostle's Creed elsewhere, in another posting on this blog. But let's see if I remember the words . . .

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth. And, in Jesus Christ his only son, our Lord; was conceived by the Holy Spirit; born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried. On the third day, he ascended into heaven and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. (here's where I start to have trouble remembering the Creed) I believe in Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church (holy church universal, if you don't like the use of the lower case, "catholic"), the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the dead, and the life everlasting. Amen.

How did I do?

The "x" in Xmas and what it means

2006-11-26T22:28:00.000-06:00

Christmas is one of my favorite holidays, if not my absolute favorite. From now until Christmas, I will be putting up a lot of posts on Christmas. Ready? For those who don't want to read about the Christian aspects of the holiday or find such discussions offensive, read no more.

Perhaps some of you may already know this, but the "x" in Xmas is not sacrilege. Rather, "x" represents the Greek letter, x (chi), which was used as an abbreviation for Χριστός or Christ. So, the when you substitute "Christ" in for "x," in "X-mas," you get "Christmas."

9 year old boy in Texas saves family by pulling a car over and calling 911

2006-11-14T11:14:00.000-06:00

This doesn't qualify as philosophy, but I think what happened was . . . well, take a look!

Here in the State of Texas, a mother of three passed out while driving on an Interstate. One of the kids who was sitting in the back, a nine year old boy saw what happened, pulled the car over, and called 911. I think that was simply amazing!

Boy drives car, saves mom

How ironic - "The end of False Religion is Near" & Jehovah's Witnesses

2006-11-11T10:30:00.001-06:00

Yesterday afternoon, a woman and her daughter (who looks to be about ten years old) came to our door and dropped off a Watchtower tract, entitled "The end of false religion is near!" How ironic that the Jehovah's Witnesses would be attempting to spread a worldwide message that "The end of false religion is near!"

According to the tract, some characteristics of false religion includes:

meddling in war and politics.
spreads false doctrine.
tolerates immoral sex.

Then, the tract proceeds to describe how false religion will end, by some horrifying means.

Finally, the tract ends by stating what a true religion does:

practices love.
trust's God's word.
strengthens families and upholds high moral standards.

Perhaps I've been a philosopher for quite some time and find such a presentation to be anything but convincing in terms of how to identify what a false religion is, what a true religion is, and how Jehovah's witnesses is somehow a true religion.

I may be gullible, but I'm not that gullible!

The woman who dropped the tract didn't even attempt to dialogue with me, and I have no idea why. Did she agree merely to volunteer by dropping off tracts at each door? Did she figure that I may not be competent enough in English to discuss such matters? Sometimes people look at the fact that I'm Asian and assume that I am somehow not a native English speaker. What?! Anyways, too bad, no dialogue with this person. Would have loved asking a bunch of philosophical questions about such a tract - for example, how are those characteristics of true religion necessary or sufficient?

Someone to add to your Christmas card list

2006-11-08T12:05:00.000-06:00

I got this as a forward from a friend. Interesting and amusing.

Want to have some fun this CHRISTMAS ? Send the ACLU a CHRISTMAS CARD!
As they are working so very hard to get rid of the CHRISTMAS part of this holiday, we should all send them a nice, CHRISTIAN, card to brighten up their nasty, dark, sad, little world.
Make sure it says "Merry Christmas" on it.
Here's the Address, just don't be rude or crude. (It's Not the Christian Way.)
ACLU
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Two tons of Christmas cards will freeze their operations because they won't know if any are regular mail containing contributions. So spend 39 cents and tell the ACLU to leave Christmas alone. Also tell them that there is no such thing as a Holiday Tree. . . . It's a Christmas Tree even in the fields!!
And pass this on to your email lists. We really want to communicate with the ACLU ! They really DESERVE us!!

Why, oh why?

2006-11-03T17:13:00.000-06:00

This past Tuesday, Troy headed to Missouri, not for fun and frolicking, but to settle a landlord/tenant dispute that has lasted well over a year. The court date was Wednesday. Though the hearing was at 2:30 pm, things didn't get kicking until close to the end of the working day. Long story short, the judge only heard the landlord's side of the story before making a verdict. I can't disclose any details, since we're not done and we're filing a motion to be heard, but seriously, how can a judge (with any conscience), make such a decision? He didn't hear anything on our side, simply because the clock read five o'clock and he wanted to go home. Oh, and by the way, the amount of money the landlord is seeking from us, for lawyer fees and court fees, is against Missouri law!

Anyways, pray for us as this case continues and hopefully draws to a close. Specifically, pray that the judge actually reviews our side and respects the Missouri law when critically examining and revising his decision.

Praise the Lord for many blessings He has bestowed upon us!

2006-09-14T22:12:00.000-05:00

me today (Thurs., September 14, 2006), at 40 weeks of pregnancy
yup, it's baby's due date today!

Though I only had less than three hours of sleep last night, which is normally enough havoc to turn my world upside down, I have felt quite peaceful, calm, and joyous today. This is all due to the realization that we're surrounded by loving and caring people. The following are just some of the many blessings that have already been poured on us, and the baby's not even here, yet:

we have been given so many baby gifts. seemingly people have come out of the wood works giving us stuff!
junko brought over some pressed salmon sushi when i hated my cooking and had trouble finding stuff to eat.
manda took me out to lunch last week, when i was feeling somewhat bummed.
friends have been calling us to see what's happening with the little one and whether she has come or not. i really appreciate the effort others have been putting forth to look out for us.
te cared enough and noticed how much i care about niao mi (our 17 year old cat) to make sure he got an appointment with the vet., to check to see what problems he's having. he's been throwing yellow liquid once a day for several weeks now, and he has been blind for four to five days.
someone also dropped off some aveeno soothing bath treatment at our door earlier today, knowing full well of my pregnancy issues as of late - super itchy skin and hemorrhoids. i have a sneaking suspicion of who did this kind gesture.
manda took me out to ice cream today, on baby's due date. i love hanging out with her!

i haven't even listed all the kind deeds and thoughts people have poured in our direction. praise the Lord for His goodness and outpouring of His blessings on undeserving people, such as us!

We need not despair

2006-09-12T20:45:00.000-05:00

Those who are close to me know that a number of issues concern me. I don't know whether the dramatic increases in level of hormones from pregnancy have heightened my sensitivity to various issues - such as finances, future occupations, and keeping up with friends, but the concerns are there. One big concern I have, it's almost an obsession, has to do with finances. I'm not as good at banking and saving money as my parents or my sister, but we have made our strides forward. I'm sure we still have a long way to go . . . With a baby on the way any day now, my sensitivities in the area of finances is more acute.

I ran across an article in Christianity Today online that I found insightful:

Despair Not

For me, I needed the reminder that the focus is on Jesus. We must fix our eyes on Jesus. We're running the race here on earth, with Jesus as our finishing point to the race. By the way, if you haven't read Screwtape Letters, it's a fantastic read!

Prayers and much needed divine intervention

2006-09-12T02:41:00.000-05:00

It's 2:36 in the morning. I've not only been wide awake, but I've haunted by super itchy hands, wrists, and chest. My hands are bright red from vigorous rubbing. My chest is a bit raw from scratching. On top of all that, my hemorrhoids (the one that developed nearly two days ago) are making me insane. I'm wondering whether they really are hemorrhoids, why they are so hard, why the swelling hasn't gone down, and why it still hurts a lot. I'm extremely discouraged (not to mention the fact that I keep doing things to maim or injure my body in attempt to relieve itchiness).

Pray for me! I don't know if such a request is too sillyto ask for or whether I am supposed to somehow just suck up how I feel. But, honestly, I feel terrible. Had to take a moment to clean up Niao Mi (my cat)'s throw up. He threw up a bunch of yellow in two and a half spots. Poor, poor cat. He really needs to see the vet.

Remembering September 11, 2001

2006-09-11T15:18:00.000-05:00

Can't believe 5 years have already passed since the tragedy of 9/11 occurred. Though much time has passed, I am sure the pain, resulting from the loss of love ones, is still very real and vivid. Taking some time to remember and mourn those whose lives were taken, I think, is very important.

People mock America in general, even Americans, for a variety of reasons. Honestly, I am honored to live in a country where I am free to do so many things that are taken for granted and that are not allowed in other countries. As citizens of this country, in general, we don't have to worry about our privacy being violated - such as having our mail open by the government, having our phone conversations taped, or having our everyday lives videotaped by the government. We do live in a land of freedom. . . Don't believe me? Try living in another country, I don't mean just visiting for a quick stint, I mean LIVING in another country.

Since this is a blog directed towards fellow Christians, let me say that I am really grateful that we can practice our faith without worrying about persecution or execution! Praise the Lord.

Argument Clinic: What are the definitions of "argument" being offered?

2006-08-29T15:43:00.000-05:00

Argument Clinic - Monty Python

I am showing this clip to my Introduction to Logic classes as well as my Ethics class. See if you can identify the different definitions of "argument" offered. Which definition is correct?

Won't be going to court this trip

2006-07-11T22:30:00.000-05:00

Heard from our lawyer. The judge presiding over our case will not be able to hear the case on Thursday. The next time available is towards the end of August. I think that will be a bit too close to the baby's due date to work. . . More waiting. No closure on the case, yet.

A Dispute that is Getting Settled in Court the Day We Leave

2006-07-10T23:33:00.000-05:00

Given that a particular case that my hubby and I have to deal with, I cannot specify the specific details of what has ultimately driven us to go to court. Those who are close to us know what is going on in this situation. This particular case has been unresolved for nearly a year now, shortly after we left Columbia, resulting in us seeking a lawyer and ultimately ending with us going to court. When we get to the heart of the issue, both of us think that we are, in principle, correct and the other part is wrong. we have attempted to settle out of court with this person, who has refused such a gesture.

Well, right before lunch today, our lawyer contacted us and informed us that the other part is available only on the day we are to leave Columbia - Thurs., July 13th. I told our lawyer that we're more than willing to go to court that day, so long as we can still make our flight. Here's the deal: many of you know that I've been extremely frustrated and angry at times for being wrongfully dealt such a bad hand in this issue. But, I am getting to the point where I am finally leaning more on the Lord and trusting that He will resolve the issue in a way that He sees fit. I have no idea what this will mean practically; whether losing the entire amount of money the person is asking for (plus fees to our lawyer) or winning. I just know I have to somehow be at peace with whatever the outcome is or at least ready and willing to move on with our lives.

For those of you who are so inclined, pray that the Lord's will be done, if and when we go to court this coming Thursday. Pray for the Lord's presence and pray that the Lord's light shine through us. Also, please pray for wisdom on behalf of our lawyer and that he not only represent us but fight for us.

Vacation Bible School

2006-06-07T22:07:00.000-05:00

This evening was the first day of VBS, a.k.a. Vacation Bible School, at our church. Vacation Bible School holds a dear place in my heart. It was the way by which I came to learn about Christ Jesus and the time in which I got saved. Though I was only nine or ten, VBS left a huge impression on me, so much so that I accept Christ as Lord and Savior. At Vacation Bible School at Cedar Springs Presbyterian Church, in Knoxville, TN, I remember at least one of the activities we did. We painted flower pots. During the day we painted pots, I was wearing a brand new dress. And I wore the dress home, looking different than when I arrived at the church, with paint stripes here and there. Certainly, I recall hearing about Jesus. Then, we I accepted Christ as Lord and Savior, my head was annointed with oil and I got a little book, with each page a different color, representing some aspect of the Christian faith. This little book had no words in it. Though my memories of that time are in bits and pieces, I knew God was trying to tell me something at VBS, even at such a young age.

My hope is that Vacation Bible School offers the same sort of experience for the little ones attending now!

For more pictures go to A Day in the Life of Lily

Why in the world would a person lower himself into a lions' den and say "God would save him if he exists"?

2006-06-06T01:00:00.000-05:00

I don't have any idea why any person would lower himself or herself into a lions' den and say, "God will save me if he exists." This reportedly happened in a Kiev zoo. A man lowered himself, by rope, into the lions' den. A lioness knocked the man down, severed his carotid artery, and the man died.

Lioness in zoo kills man who invoked God

Lacking Patience Like Saul Did

2006-06-05T16:04:00.000-05:00

I read 1 Samuel 13 today for devotional time. My heart feels conviction on one particular issue. Though I cannot go into detail here, many of you know that I've been concerned about our future, occupationally and financially. Certainly I read 1 Samuel 13 as carefully as I could, paying attention to context, reading footnotes, and such. But, I couldn't help but feel that the Lord was sending me a message, too.

In the scripture, earlier, Samuel had given Saul instructions to wait seven days and to wait for Samuel to give burnt offerings to the Lord before Saul was to go to war. Well, Saul got kind of nervous, understandably so. His soldiers were hiding in caves. The seventh day had come. When Samuel arrived, he rebuked Saul after hearing what Saul had done. Saul was supposed to wait, wait on God's timing, not his own. Plus, Saul was supposed to trust the Lord to provide as promised.

Well, in our case, I have no reason to think that the Lord will not provide for us and take care of us. I'm getting nervous, kind of like Saul was. We're getting close to "battle" insofar as by August, we'll be officially unemployed. I've put out around 100 applications to various teaching positions in philosophy at universities, and Troy has put out some 50 or so. No solid news so far. This application process started this past October. So, we've been waiting for some time now. Perhaps, part of my problem is that I still don't have a PhD in hand. At any rate, the battle is fast approaching, especially with our first little one, who is due to arrive in September! I do not think I've received any particular signs - such as a message from Samuel - to wait for the Lord. But, I think waiting for the Lord's timing and trusting in the Lord is what I was hearing when I did my devotions today.

A Good Friend to Us, Tullian Tchividjian

2006-05-30T15:33:00.000-05:00

Tullian Tchividjian

Prior to August 2002, I had contacted Cedar Springs Presbyterian Church, in Knoxville, TN, about getting married there. This may sound a bit too sentimental to some of you. But, I wanted to get married in the church where I got save, many years ago; I was nine or ten years ago, when I got saved at their Vacation Bible School. Though this church normally will marry only current church members, they made an exception for me, given that I was saved there and I desperately wanted to get married where I was saved!

I asked whether the senior pastor, John Wood, would be willing to marry us, given that he had been at that church as long as I can remember. To make a long story short, he wasn't able to commit to marrying us but recommended one of the young adult pastors marry us instead. His name was Tullian Tchividjian. I had no idea who he was; just knew he had a unique name.

Soon after I got in touch with Tullian, we spend a precious little time talking about marriage and pre-marital counseling. Instead, we jumped into discussion of theology and philosophy! That was pretty cool. Somewhere down the road, after we had already committed to Tullian being the officiant to the ceremony and we had been chit-chatting about theology, we found out who he was. Much to our surprise, he's one of the grandsons of the infamous Billy Graham.

Tullian married Troy and me on Saturday, August 3, 2002, at Cedar Springs, in Knoxville, TN.

Well, given that Troy and I no longer lived in Knoxville, TN, we didn't see him super frequently. But, we made a point to see him every time we were back in Knoxville. We'd go out for lunch or something, the three of us. Tullian's a great guy. Unfortunately, after he moved to Florida, to start his own church - New City Presbyterian Church - we lost contact with him. We're trying to get back in touch with him, because we miss him (and his family, too) a lot!

Here's a biography of Tullian:
Tullian Tchividjian

A Confession Regarding My Devotional Life

2006-05-30T11:40:00.000-05:00

My heart has felt a strong conviction regarding devotional life. Without going into loads of detail, let me say that as a woman of God, I have been totally pathetic in putting the Lord first, especially in devoting time and attention to knowing him more intimately through devotions. This is not an under-the-table way of making comments about what is happening or what is not happening with other people's lives. This is strictly a confession about my life and convictions I've been feeling.

Yesterday, following a conversation with my good friend Manda, in conjunction with the conviction I've been feeling about spending devotional time with the Lord, my return to devotional time has begun its return. Last night when Manda & Johnny came over, Manda lent me her copy of Beth Moore's A Heart Like His. Before I have touched any dissertation work, I have completed my devotional time for the day. For those of you who have heard my dissertation saga and are familiar with the impending deadlines I face in the next seven or eight days, this says a whole lot.

I'm really glad that Manda and I are accountability partners on a number of different matters, including devotional time. Moreover, the somewhat suprising result from being obedient to the Lord was almost immediate calmness! Keep in mind the distinction between having calmness as a goal (and figuring what activities will lead to calmness) and having calmness as a consequence or result. I decided to start my day with devotional time, not to calm myself, but to honor the Lord. And, what happened as a result of honoring the Lord and being obedient to Him? He granted me a sense of peace. Thanks be to God. And this calmness and feeling of peace came after I awoke feeling frustrated with dissertation work and frustrated about our seemingly dismal job situation.

Memorial Day

2006-05-29T10:57:00.000-05:00

In the U.S., today is Memorial Day. From what I experience and from what I've seen, I feel that we take so much for granted as Americans. Without soldiers to defend our country, at least to a very large extent, we would not have what we do today. I don't know how to express everything we do have as Americans. The best way to find out is to travel to other countries that are much more restricted and have much more controlling governments (like a totalitarian regime, like China). I'd like to take a moment to thank the soldiers who have died for our country, the soldiers who have fought for our country, and the soldiers who are fighting for our country.

What do you think about Freeganism?

2006-05-28T23:42:00.000-05:00

The term Freeganism is taken from two words, "free" and "vegan." From what I understand, what motivates people to become freegans is that human beings produce loads of waste, and they believe that we ought to do something about it. Freeganism has been growing in U.S., and it is gaining some ground in the U.K. Not all freegans are vegans. Many freegans scavenge for food by going through trash bins and dumpsters. They rummage through others' garbage to eat or utilize what others waste.

See a recent article on Freegans below, by clicking on the following link:
"Freegans" forage for food

What do you think? In what way are we morally obligated to keep from producing so much waste? How?

The Lord's Prayer

2006-05-28T16:26:00.000-05:00

For details on why I'm including the words to the Lord's Prayer, see the previous posting.

What comes first in the prayer? What comes next in the prayer? What comes last? What doesn't show up at all in the prayer?

The Lord's Prayer

Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed by thy name.
Thy kingdom come,
thy will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
Forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
Amen.

The Apostle's Creed

2006-05-28T16:11:00.000-05:00

Let me put out a disclaimer before I say anything more. What I am about to say is not a comment about the church we're currently attending; we really love the people there and we enjoy worshipping and serving there.

I was born and raised in a non-Christian home. But, I got saved at Cedar Springs Presbyterian Church's Vacation Bible School (VBS) one summer, when I was nine or ten years old. If you want the details to that story, I'll tell you, but for now, let me get on with why this is significant. I continued attending that church through high school. Every now and again, we would recite the Apostle's Creed and the Lord's Prayer (I'll include the words to the Lord's Prayer in the next posting).

I wish churches would spend time citing the Apostle's Creed as a congregation. A main reason why I think this is important is that the Apostle's Creed includes a lot of rich doctrinal information. How many Christians that attend church very regularly know all the parts of our faith, that are cited in the Apostle's Creed? When I still lived in Knoxville and attended Cedar Springs, I knew the Apostle's Creed by heart. Here are the words:

The Apostle's Creed

I believe in God, the Father Almighty.
Creator of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into hell.
The third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
when He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Amen.

*The term "catholic" does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church. It refers to the universal body of the Lord Jesus Christ: the church.

What does "disciple" mean?

2006-05-28T15:57:00.000-05:00

What does the verb, "disciple" mean? I hear the term used quite frequently, especially in campus Christian organizations (such as InterVarsity Fellowship or Campus Crusade for Christ). What exactly do people mean when they say their discipling other people?

Difficulty in Trusting the Lord on an Issue

2006-05-22T21:40:00.000-05:00

I am well aware that the Christian walk was never promised to be a cake walk. A challenging adventure taking us through valleys and mountains is a better description. And, I know that the pious, good Christian response to what I am about to share is simply that I must trust in the Lord. Honestly, I know that the road we're on is more a test of faith than of anything else, like financial security.

We must be able to trust fellow Christians with honesty, including struggles, right? Well, here's my current struggle. Neither hubby nor I have guaranteed employment for the next academic year. In fact, at this point in time, we don't even have a high likelihood of employment. At one place, where we were hoping to be employed next year, I just found out that the prospects look grim, not for us specifically, but on other grounds. I had a phone interview with five faculty members at another school a week ago. But, I have no idea what they've decided . Prospects look grim all around. I know that the Lord has never failed us before and I have no reason to believe the Lord will let us down now. But, somehow that offers little consolation, especially since a little one is on the way! Just wanted to be able to share a burden on my heart. I do believe that the Lord is looking out for us . . .

Some Websites Regarding Carrying Fetuses to Term and Abortion

2006-05-12T11:47:00.000-05:00

Here are some decent websites. The latter two came on recommendation from a friend -

Justice For All
Feminists for Life of America
abort73.com

There are many, many organizations that assist mothers-to-be in carrying their child(ren) to term and provide mothers-to-be with important resources. If any of you reading this are already pregnant and you want help but can't get it, let me know, and I'll find help for you.

Abortion

2006-05-11T23:20:00.000-05:00

I usually work very hard to not get on my soap box on this blog. And, I try not to make my own position known, so that a more open dialogue can take place. But, I was reading some news online, and several things bothered the heck out of me.
Below is a link to the article, should you be interested in taking a look:

Health experts say cause for concern over "abortion pill"

Some things that bother me, in general, about the abortion debate are:

the use of the phrase "anti-abortion," instead of what was used in the past - "pro-life."
the focus on the "pro-abortion" side being on a woman's choice when that isn't all that the issue concerns.
rarely, do the "pro-abortion" advocates discuss the consequences of having an abortion - increased rate of suicide, difficulties of a woman to have a normal pregnancy after an abortion, risks to the mother-to-be's health. . .
choosing to abort a fetus is not like choosing what clothes a person wants to wear, who she wants to date, or what activity she wants to pursue.
from the "pro-abortion" side, assuming that the agent is the most important person under consideration.

Okay, it's getting late. Don't know whether what I'm saying is making any sense. I'll sign off for tonight.

May Day for the Latinos

2006-05-01T12:37:00.000-05:00

A student informed me last night that her family told her not to go to school all day today. She said something to the effect that Latinos have been encouraged not to go to school or attend work today, to protest the U.S. Immigration policy. Some of my students said today that the purpose of such a protest is to show how much the U.S. economy is affected by Latinos. The same students explained that there are persons who have been living in the U.S. so long (though illegally), that they now have family members here. Some Latinos have been living in the U.S. illegally for more than 10 years. One issue some students raised is that by being forced to return to Mexico, they will be leaving behind everything (meaningful to them - family, work) and returning to nothing. What do you think about the whole situation?

The first article is from The Monitor, a local newspaper:
Immigration concern runs high at forum

The second article is from The New York Times:
Nationwide Immigrant Rallies Are Under Way

Focusing on Teaching Math and Reading, Leaving Behind Many Subjects

2006-03-26T15:27:00.000-06:00

Thanks in large part to the requirements President Bush placed on reading and math through the "No Child Left Behind Act," we're leaving behind the study of many subjects. Sounds like a super fantastic idea. Who needs art, music, history, or social studies, when we can produce automatens who can perhaps read and do math? Who needs well-rounded persons?

I confess I am not an expert insofar as education in high school and under is concerned. But, from what I have heard among teachers in high school and below, the "No Child Left Behind Act" has been more of a hindrance than an advancement. Teachers, instead of teaching the curriculum, are forced to focus on preparing students on taking standardized tests. If any time is left over after preparing students to take standardized tests, then teachers can return to covering curriculum material. I find leaving subjects - such as the arts and history - behind absolutely appalling. That is a travesty on our educational system these days.

Schools Cut Back Subjects to Push Reading and Math

Afghan Christian, Abdul Rahman, Should be Released Soon

2006-03-26T15:18:00.000-06:00

According to An AP (Associated Press) article, a decision will be reached soon about releasing Abdul Rahman, who converted to Christianity some 16 years ago. Rahman converted when he worked as a medical aid worker for an international Christian organization, helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan. The court ruled that this case has insufficient evidence to continue holding Rahman. The court has returned the case back to the prosecutors for further information.

Afghan Christian Should Be Released Soon"

What Will Happen to the Afghan Christian Convert?

2006-03-24T21:58:00.000-06:00

In Afghanistan, Abdul Rahman, age 40, coverted to Christianity. Last week, he was arrested for converting. According to Islamic law, death is punishment for apostasy. Thus, Rahman could face the possibility of punishment by death for converting to Christianity.

A TV frame grab, aired on March 22, 2006,
shows Abdul Rahman holding a translated version
of the Bible in a Kabul court. (Reuters TV/Reuters)

This isn't so much a philosophical question, strictly speaking, but what you do think?

Persecution of Christians certainly is not anything new, but . . . I not sure exactly what I'm trying to say. Such an occurrence puts life into better perspective. From my perspective, I often feel like life is full of trials and I'm been stretched thin on many if not all sides. But, when I read about such cases, I reevaluate and realize that my life really isn't all that bad.

Outcry rises over Afghan Christian convert

What Justice Served in the Case of Debra Lafave?

2006-03-24T20:52:00.000-06:00

Just as the previous post, I am interested in finding out from you what you believe constitutes the just form of punishment, if any, for what Debra Lafave did.

What is the just form of punishment in the case of Debra LaFave?

Here are some points about her case:

Debra LaFave, 25 years old, is charged with having sex with a 14 year old boy.
At the time she was a Hillsborough schoolteacher, in Tampa, Florida, teaching reading.
She is charged with having sex with the 14 year old student while visiting in the summer of 2004.
LaFave pleaded guilty to 2 felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery with her 14 year old student.
She said she committed these acts during a week long episode of bipolar disorder.
At one point, the boy said that he had sex with LaFave three times in four days in June 2004, one of those times in a car while his fifteen year old cousin drove them here and there. Also, according to the boy, she performed oral sex on him numerous times, once in her home.
In November, she plead guilty in Hillsborough County court to 2 felony counts of lewd and lascivious behavior. In that case, she was sentenced to three years under house arrest and seven years of probation. And, she was required to register as a sex offender. The judge in Hillsborough County rejected LaFave's plea agreement and she is scheduled to go to trial on April 10.
Other similar charges were filed in Marion County, where one of the incidents occurred. Similar charges were filed and a similar plea agreement was reached. However, the Marion County Superior Court, in particular - Judge Hale Stancil, threw out the case because the boy refused to testify.

Was justice served in the case of Debra LaFave?

Not off the hook: Debra LaFave will now go on trial
Lafave got a free pass
Prosecutors drop sex case against teacher
Mother of LaFave's Victim Furious At Judge

What is Just in the Case of Andrew Salva?

2006-03-24T15:09:00.000-06:00

A good friend of the family and a member of this blog, axeman, brought some interesting issues to my attention. I am going to discuss them in a series of postings.

Some of you know me well enough to know that, in the context of this particular blog, I don't like to wear my specific position on any given issue that I post on my sleeve. The reason for this is that I want to see what position(s) you hold and, more importantly, what reasons you have for such positions.

This morning, my ethics students began presentations. Up until today, I've been lecturing. Today's group came dangerously close to committing the fallacy of complex question. To use the words of Tim Hurley, who wrote "A Concise Introduction to Logic," "The fallacy of complex question is committed when two (or more) questions are asked in the guise of a single question and a single answer is then given to both of them" (9th edition, p. 148). For instance, the question "When will you stop cheating on the exams?" presupposes that you've been cheating on exams. If you answer "now," then you're claiming that you've been cheating until present. If you answer "later," then that means you've been cheating and intend on continuing to do so until some time in the future. One of the students doing a presentation this morning asked something like "Which one of you wouldn't want a person to be true to himself or herself?" This followed a presentation on the permissibility of homosexuality. All that was to say that I don't want to sandwich anyone into any position they don't adopt. I want to see what you guys think.

Regarding the case I'm about to discuss, here's the question I want to put out there:

What is the just form of punishment for Andrew Selva?

Before answering, understand that I'm asking a moral question, not a legal question.

Andrew Selva -

accused of sexually assaulting two boys in a small town outside of Columbus, Ohio.
accused of sexually assaulting the two boys, ages 5 and 12, in a number of ways.
confessed that he raped the boys in a number of ways.
Judge John Conner, of the Franklin County Common Pleas, labeled him as sexual predator, the most dangerous of sexual offender labels.
Initially, the charge was 20 counts of rape.
Conner thought an appropriate sentence was 8 years in prison.
Nevertheless, with a prior clean record and no convincing proof that Selva is a pedophile brought a different verdict.
A plea deal was arranged, in which Selva pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual batter, which is a third-degree felony and doesn't carry with it jail time.
A judge can use discretion and impose a jail sentence of up to 5 years per count.
The sentence? 1 year house arrest. Selva must report his residency every 90 days, must continue mandatory counseling and treatment, and must live more than 1,000 feet from any school. He cannot meet with any person under 15 years of age unsupervised.

Judge Explains Reasoning For Sentence
GOP will not seek judge's removal
Admitted Child Molester Not Sentenced to Jail
Legal doesn't always mean it's right
The most dangerous states for American kids

Fruit of the JFA Exhibit

2006-02-23T10:55:00.000-06:00

Recently, I received an e-mail update from the JFA Exhibit at Arizona State University, on February 20, 2006. Alyssa (not her real name) had a conversation with Exhibit volunteer, Kim, upon approaching a table to vote on whether we're considered fully human at conception. Through the course of the conversation, Kim found out that Alyssa was 16 weeks pregnant, and she had already scheduled an abortion appointment later that week. Over dinner, Kim shared with Alyssa different resources available that would help her carry her pregnancy to term. And, she could decide to provide a family a child through adoption or to raise the child herself. The next day, Alyssa called Kim to tell her Alyssa had cancelled the appointment to have an abortion.

Below, I've included a description of what a fetus already has at 13-16 weeks and what sort of changes a fetus undergoes at that time. The description is from:
Pregnancy.about.com/

Weeks 13-16

The brain is fully developed and the fetus can suck, swallow, and make irregular breathing sounds. Fetus can feel pain (New England Journal of Medicine). Fetal skin is almost transparent. Muscles tissue is lengthening and bones are becoming harder. Liver and organs produce appropriate fluids. Eyebrows and eyelashes appear and the fetus makes active movements including kicks and even somersaults.

The two images I am including also are from pregnancy.about.com. Below is an image of a fetus at 16 weeks gestation:

And, here is what a fetus looks like at 18 weeks gestation:

Pregnancy.about.com 16, 18 weeks gestational period

The purpose of Justice for All using graphic images of different stages of pregnancy at their exhibits, I believe, isn't merely to shock people, but to educate people. People oftentimes do not understand exactly what is occurring in a woman's uterus at various stages of pregnancy. Justice for All's exhibition images can be seen on their homepage:
Justice for All

Also, a woman, by having an abortion, brings detriment to herself. Some of the consequences from having an abortion, from what I understand, are risking future (healthy) pregnancies and increasing suicidal tendencies.

An Evaluation of Treatment of Prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

2006-02-17T08:53:00.000-06:00

What do you think of the report in the New York Times article below? Who is in the right?

February 17, 2006

Investigators for U.N. Urge U.S. to Close Guantánamo

By WARREN HOGE

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 16 — Human rights investigators working for the United Nations called on the United States on Thursday to shut down the Guantánamo Bay camp and either try its detainees quickly or free them.

Arguing that many of the interrogation and detention practices used in Guantánamo amounted to torture, the investigators' report said those who ordered or condoned abusive practices should be brought to justice "up to the highest level of military and political command."

The 54-page report, based largely on interviews with former detainees and publicized information, including news accounts, is not legally binding. But it urged that Guantánamo be closed, "without further delay," and called for American personnel to be trained in international standards for the treatment of detainees.

The White House promptly dismissed the report, suggesting that the investigators had based their conclusions on false information spread by terror suspects.

"I think what we are seeing is a rehash of allegations that have been made by lawyers representing some of the detainees," Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said Thursday.

"We know that Al Qaeda detainees are trained in trying to disseminate false allegations."

The report, released Thursday after a draft circulated this week, said the United States should immediately revoke all "special interrogation techniques" authorized by the Defense Department. It called upon the United States "to refrain from any practice amounting to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, discrimination on the basis of religion and violations of the right to health and freedom of religion."

Mr. McClellan asserted that the American military already treated detainees humanely. "These are dangerous terrorists that we are talking about who are there," he said. "Nothing has changed in terms of our views."

The report was requested by the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva and compiled by five independent scientists, lawyers and academics in the last 18 months. As such, it does not prompt any official United Nations action, and Secretary General Kofi Annan, who has no direct authority over the commission, distanced himself from its specific recommendations.

"I cannot say that I necessarily agree with everything in the report," he said Thursday. "But the basic point that one cannot detain individuals in perpetuity and that charges have to be brought against them and their being given a chance to explain themselves and be prosecuted, charged or released, I think is something that is common under any legal system."

Mr. Annan added that "sooner or later there will be a need to close Guantánamo, and I think it will be up to the government to decide hopefully to do it as soon as possible."

In a response included in an appendix to the report, the United States rejected the findings, noting that the investigators had turned down an invitation to visit Guantánamo Bay and accusing them of using information selectively to support their conclusions.

Among the practices the report said amounted to torture were the use of excessive force during transportation, force-feeding detainees through nasal tubes during hunger strikes, shackling, chaining and hooding prisoners, placing them in solitary confinement, subjecting them to severe temperatures while naked and threatening them with dogs.

It also expressed "utmost concern" about "attempts by the United States administration to redefine 'torture' in the framework of the struggle against terrorism in order to allow certain interrogation techniques that would not be permitted under the internationally accepted definition of torture."

The United States is holding about 500 detainees at its Guantánamo Bay naval base on the coast of Cuba, and some have been there since the camp was opened in early 2002. Some of the detainees' lawyers, however, have cited Pentagon documents as showing that only 45 percent of the prisoners have committed a hostile act against the United States or its allies, and that only 8 percent have been classified as Qaeda fighters.

The report for the Human Rights Commission was based on the work of the five United Nations rapporteurs, or investigators, who look into accusations of arbitrary detention, torture and other abuses.

They said they based their conclusions on interviews with former detainees now in Britain, France and Spain, lawyers representing current inmates, news accounts, reports from nongovernmental organizations and answers to a questionnaire submitted to the United States government.

The investigators had been seeking permission to go to Guantánamo Bay since June 2004, and obtained it this fall to go in December. But they turned down the invitation when the United States said they would not be permitted to talk to individual detainees. Such interviews were a "totally nonnegotiable precondition" for the trip, the investigators said.

The report said that the "executive branch of the United States government operates as judge, prosecutor and defense counsel of the Guantánamo Bay detainees," and asserted that this constituted "serious violations of various guarantees of the right to a fair trial."

In a Jan. 31 letter appended to the report, Kevin E. Moley, the American ambassador to the United Nations offices in Geneva, said the United States objected to most of the report as "largely without merit and not based clearly on facts."

He said "it selectively includes only those factual assertions needed to support those conclusions and ignores other facts that would undermine those conclusions."

The investigators report to the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva but are not employees of it and have only their expenses paid by the United Nations.

The commission itself has come under intense criticism for admitting notorious rights violators like Sudan and Zimbabwe, and intense efforts are under way in New York to replace it with a more credible entity before its annual meeting in March.

But recommendations for change have not included the investigators, and the United States has cited them in the past as reliable monitors of rights violations.

On Monday, after a draft of the investigators' report began to circulate, Sean McCormack, the State Department spokesman, said, "The United States has tried to work with these individuals, these rapporteurs who have gone around the world and done some good work in other places, but in this case, I'm sorry to say it's just not the case."

The prisoners held at Guantánamo have been classified as enemy combatants and have not been brought before American courts. As a result, many remain in a state of legal uncertainty, and to protest their indefinite confinement some have tried suicide and engaged in hunger strikes.

Great Words of Wisdom

2006-02-15T20:03:00.000-06:00

I'll admit that what I'm about to include here has nothing to do with philosophy directly. But, I found these words of wisdom to be quite good:

Ministry is giving when you feel like keeping,
praying for others when you need to be prayed for,
feeding others when your own soul is hungry,
living truth before people even when you can't see results,
hurting with other people even when your own hurt can't be spoken,
keeping your word even when it is not convenient,
it is being faithful when your flesh wants to run away.

An Italian atheist tries to sue priest for saying Jesus existed 2,000 years ago

2006-02-11T20:34:00.001-06:00

An italian atheist attempted to sue a local priest and schoolmate, Enrico Righi, for saying that Jesus existed 2,000 years ago. Not only did the judge dismiss Luigi Cascioli's request to bring the case to court, but the magistrate recommended that Cascioli be investigated for slandering Righi. What do you all think?

Attached below is the Reuters article:

Judge shelves case over Jesus' existence

Fri Feb 10, 7:41 AM ET

An Italian atheist lost his legal crusade against the Catholic Church on Thursday when a judge rejected his attempts to sue a priest for saying that Jesus existed 2,000 years ago, the priest's lawyer said.

Luigi Cascioli, 72, had argued his hometown priest and former schoolmate had effectively broken an Italian law meant to protect the public from being conned.

But instead of granting Cascioli his request to bring the case to court, the judge recommended magistrates investigate him for slandering priest Enrico Righi, Righi's lawyer, Bruno Severo said.

The 76-year-old priest said he was delighted by the news.

"Thank God it's over," Righi told Reuters. "I'm glad it has ended like this, because imagine if it had gone on and on."

Cascioli, author of a book called "The Fable of Christ," said the court had not yet informed him of the ruling. But he was not surprised, and said he would appeal to Italy's highest court, and then to The Hague.

Asked about the possibility he would be tried for slander, Cascioli chuckled, saying that to prove he lied, prosecutors would have to prove that Jesus existed.

"They don't have any proof," he said.

Questions about Force-Feeding Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to End Hunger Strike

2006-02-09T10:40:00.000-06:00

I just ran across a New York Times article about steps U.S. military authorities have taken to force-feed detainees that were engaging in hunger strikes at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. On the U.S. side, the concern was the possibility that many of these individuals protesting, via hunger strikes, were attempting to commit suicide to protest their indefinite detainment.

Some activities that raised eyebrows include: prisoners were being force-fed, in particular, the manner in which they were being force-fed. They allegedly were being strapped into metal chairs. The prisoners were fed, using larger tubes and once fed, the tubes were removed more violently than necessary (causing some to bleed or vomit). Moreover, certain items - such as blankets, shoes, books - were kept from those who were determined in continue on a hunger strike. People who were determined to continue in hunger strikes were even placed in cold air-conditioned isolation cells to discourage them from carrying on the hunger strike.

Setting aside any legal concerns, not to say that those are not important, what are the moral issues in this case?

Below is a link to The New York Times article, "Tough U.S. Steps in Hunger Strike at Camp in Cuba," by Tim Golden, from today (February 9, 2006):

Tough U.S. Steps in Hunger Strike at Camp in Cuba

JFA Abortion Exhibit

2006-02-05T14:03:00.000-06:00

About a year ago, on the University of Missouri campus, I saw huge Justice for All Abortion Exhibit billboards for the first time. At first blush, I really didn't know what to think of the billboards, and I was a bit skeptical about whether the billboards would in fact convince anyone that abortion is morally wrong. The goal, it seemed to me, was to convince people by using images. No arguments against abortion were presented. For those of you who know me, as a philosopher, I am interested in examining arguments for whatever position a person or group of persons defend.

Upon further reflection, however, the absence of any explicit arguments is not necessarily a problem or weakness. Justice for All, the organization that puts these billboards up at various schools across the nation, seeks to educate the general population through the use of pictures. I would be interested in getting responses from you on what you think. I've provided a link to the Justice for All website. If you want to see the images I saw on the Mizzou campus, click on "The Virtual Exhibit."

Justice for All

Should Companies be Obligated to Disclose Exactly What They're Selling?

2006-02-05T13:51:00.000-06:00

I just ran across a Reuters article on Friday, February 3, 2005, reporting that three trucks with some 75 tons of 20 year old meat were stopped. Old or unsuable meat oftentimes finds itself into processing plants to make processed foods (such as salami) or make-up. In this case, allegedly the former is the case, at least in Bulgaria. Wow, can you imagine eating salami made from 20 year old meat?

Here's a question having more to do with philosophy, ethics specifically. Should companies disclose not only what the ingredients of their products are, but how old they are, at least in cases involving meat? What do you think?

Aged Irish beef gets the chop

Fri Feb 3, 2:17 PM ET

Twenty-year-old Irish beef which may have been making its way to the processed food industry has been impounded in Bulgaria, which is toughening up food safety standards under pressure from the European Union.

Three truckloads containing 75 tons of the discolored meat was blocked at Bulgaria's southwest border with Greece last month because its papers were suspect.

"The Irish veterinary service has confirmed the beef is around 20 years old," Agriculture Ministry spokeswoman Margarita Kozhuharova said Friday.

Bulgarian media have reported that meat producers import old meat to use in salami and other processed food.

However, the bluish-purple-tinged beef is unlikely to find its way to the dinner table, processed or otherwise. The Agriculture Ministry said it would probably burn it.

Thinking Critically about Buying Used Cars

2006-01-27T09:21:00.000-06:00

The following comments do not have very much significance in terms of doctrines of the Christian faith. However, the issue is of philosophical significance. I just read an article, confirming what I tell my Introduction to Logic students each semester. When a used car salesperson tries to sell you a car, never just take that person's word for the truth. Seek other sources, such as reputation and reports, to verify the truth of the salesperson's claims. Just read a article revealing the fact that people are trying to resell cars that survived Hurricane Katrina's disaster; these cars are being resold in states across the nation.

If a car can survive Katrina, it must be good?