The Insanity of Logic Estranged from God

Stephen Hawking has announced that that God is no longer necessary in order to start the Big Bang:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/09/02/stephen-hawking-picks-physics-god-big-bang/

He also is warning us to abandon the earth or face possible extinction:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/09/02/stephen-hawking-picks-physics-god-big-bang/

The latter, resonates with what the the recent Discovery Channel bomber James Lee was saying. James Lee, influenced by Daniel Quinn's series of books and Al Gore, believed that humanity was "filthy", that the earth would be better off without us, and that we faced extinction if we didn't stop global warming. He believed we needed to stem the population growth by no longer having children:

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/09/02/stephen-hawking-picks-physics-god-big-bang/

Before I go any further, let me be unequivocal in saying that I do NOT for a moment place Mr. Hawking in the same category as Lee in terms of a proclivity towards violence.

But both of these men share dire predictions, building their reasoning upon humanistic, naturalistic presuppositions.

I would actually agree with their conclusions that if the world is merely a product of naturalistic random processes, independent of God, then we are doomed unless we can take extreme actions.

One can be logical but be wrong. Logic is as only as truthful as its presuppositions. Both a young-earth creationist and an evolutionist can look at the same Grand Canyon but logically come to different conclusions based upon different presuppositions. The evolutionist will claim, a lot of time and a little water formed the Canyon. The young-earth creationist will claim that a lot of water (Noah's Flood) and a little time formed it.

Positivism is a philosophy that says that science can NOT say what is ultimately true. It can only correlate observations. In other words, it can only connect the dots.

The task of science is not to find out what nature is, but only what we can say about it.

Science can ask what and how. This line of questioning is authenticated by technology. Science can not answer "why". This is the domain of religion. When one asks "why", one is inherently asking about purpose and purpose is ALWAYS tied to someone's will. "Why" is therefore tied to "who". For the atheist, "who" is us. It is me and you. For the person of faith, this "who" is outside of ourselves. "Who" is God.

It is funny for me to watch atheists and agnostics moralize, asking questions along the lines of, "If there is a God, why does evil exist?" as if they can justify a logical definition of good and evil outside of God's very own existence. If God doesn't exist, why can't I eat pork or abort a baby in the womb? Because YOU say so? Or because the law might say so?

As C.S. Lewis learned when he was an atheist, for him to say the world was broken assumed that he had a reference point (the idea of good). But where did this reference point come from? A fish doesn't complain about being wet. It doesn't even know it is wet because all it has known is water.

"If you are really a product of a materialistic universe, how is it that you don't feel at home there?" --Encounter with Light

I greatly respect Mr. Hawking and have learned a lot from him. My respect comes from the fact that he is extremely gifted in his use of logic. But logic alone will cause one to go insane (ala Mr. Lee). As G.K. Chesterton pointed out in his classic book "Orthodoxy", the paranoid person is also logical.

They believe everyone is out to get them. When you tell them that is not true, they say, "Well of course you'd say that. You're out to get me. You would say that." Reasoning can not penetrate such thinking. Logic has limits. Its limits are in the realm of faith.

For more information, check out:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/08/18/129289331/can-science-explain-creation
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/08/27/129471676/my-covenant-with-mystery

Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/chesterton/orthodoxy.html

Also, check out my favorite blog 13.7's post on Hawking and God:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/09/08/129736414/hawking-and-god-an-intimate-relationship#more

The Truth We Dare Not See

This 18 year old girl had her nose cut off by the Taliban. We live in a world where bad things happen to good people. This picture is one of the greatest proofs that you and I can't choose truth based upon what we like, or what makes us feel comfortable.

So often, I write in this blog about how we are afraid to look at truth. But I believe that it is healthy for us to look at these things. The truth will set you free. This is why I believe in eternal damnation. It is NOT because I like the doctrine of hell. The fact that I hate this doctrine proves that I am not projecting or engaged in wishful thinking. To reject a belief because it is unpleasant would be equivalent to rejecting the existence of death itself. But it is wise to write a will and to buy life insurance.

The truth will set you free, if only we dare to see.

A Great Storm, A Greater Message

I'm concerned about the state of my country and the broader world. These observations will not be constrained by the political ramblings of those who hold strong party loyalties. If my politics is coherent with my philosophy, it too will be about seeing the bigger picture that transcends Republocrat and Democan.

911 changed everything. Osama Bin Laden targetted the world trade center because it was a symbol of America's economic strength. That economic strength is a key to our military strength. That military strength is a threat to Bin Laden's worldview. Bin Laden is an enemy of Israel. I believe Israel's strength has been given to it by God. But He has used the U.S. in the process.

9 years later and look at our economy today. We have record unemployment and seemingly no end to this recession. Those in political power today believe we can spend our way out of such woes believing that economic growth starts from the top down. They bailed out financial institutions saying they were "too big to fail", took over a controlling interest in GM and nationalized our health care.

The other side of the political fence spent money on war. In Afghanistan, I ask whether or not we have a clear definition of victory. Do we have a clear achievable objective? I'm not so sure... In Iraq, we toppled Saddam, but inadvertently strengthened Iran as a result as we upset the balance of power in that region. Now Iran is on the verge of becoming a nuclear nation with a tyrant in control who has visions of bringing about the next Islamic Imam through an apocalypse with Israel, "the little Satan", in his sights.

Back at home, our defecit is on target to match our national debt in a few years. China is funding our overspending by buying t-bills. "He who has the gold, makes the rules." The only way we can continue our massive spending on bailouts and two wars is to borrow from them.

Our nation's leaders, just as dependent upon financing, are beholden to corporate lobbyists that influence them to support policies that gut our middle-class by outsourcing their jobs overseas. Yes, we get great prices by buying imports at Wal-Mart and Target that were made in China, but look at how this has impacted our employment numbers.

Goldman Sachs, Fannie Mae and the like collapsed in part because our nation's leaders relaxed regulations saying everyone should have a right to own a house. But when you add to the outsourcing of jobs overseas, you can see how many people who once worked in blue-collar jobs in auto manufacturing, or even in white collar high-tech, lost their jobs and could no longer pay those mortgages.

Pretty depressing eh? Why do I write such things? I am a Christian. Post 911, Every weekend I have walked through the doors of churches and NOT heard a hint of these things. Yes, I've seen the effect of these things as I've watched brothers and sisters lose jobs and struggle. But week after week, I've only heard messages while important and valuable, are mostly insular. Those messages have been on how to become better people in the form of internal Spiritual transformation.

Don't get what I'm about to say out of context. I believe that the root of the problems that I have described is due to the church's lack of ability in being a powerful influence in the field of debate. We have failed to transform our culture's worldview. The path that I have described is a logical path of a secularist, humanist culture clashing with religious extremists (the terrorists).

Spiritual transformation is at the root of the problem. That transformation will only come about as Christians first BE the change that we preach, and secondly communicate that message. We have failed to be an effective influence. Many times, we are saying the right things in the wrong way. Space does not permit me to expound here but I've went this direction in other blog posts.

With the above said, my concern is this. When the storm that is brewing comes, who will buy into the church's credibility? If we have been only talking about how to be better people, but have been silent in warning the flock and non-believers when they lend an ear, aren't we rendering ourselves to being irrelevant and undiscerning?

How can I trust Christians in shining light on my soul's spiritual path, if they can't even demonstrate such wisdom on national and world issues right in front of our noses?

I'm laying out the warning now so that I don't fall into the same pit. I don't have a crystal ball and I hope I'm wrong. But get your house in order. Save your money now. Buy gold as a safer currency. And most importantly pray, pray, pray. Build your house upon the rock so that when the storm comes, it will stand.

When the greater storm comes, perhaps the wisdom and foresight that you'll see in this post will grant me the authority and credibility for you to lend me your ear in hearing the greater message that I have been speaking in this blog and in my life.

For more information and greater detail from a brilliant economist, check out Paul Craig Roberts' article: http://www.infowars.com/the-ecstasy-of-empire/

Despite, his rants against Israel, he has an enlightening perspective.

Avoiding Meaning

I walked into a popular Mexican food chain today and ordered a burrito. This is one of those places that customizes the toppings in front of you according to your direction. When I asked for onions, they almost acted like I was from Mars! You would have thought that NO ONE EVER puts onions on a burrito but me. I know this chain's competitor does....

I feel like this when I ask the simple question "why?". I feel like people treat me like I'm from Mars. It often seems as if I'm asking a question that is not obvious to most people but VERY, VERY obvious to me.

I wonder if the "why" question is obvious to everyone, but is the "pink elephant" in the room that everyone knows to ignore, but I never received that memo. Here it comes.... "why?" Perhaps we are afraid of meaning. Sure it could give us a fulfilling life but meaning means purpose and purpose always involves someone's will. Volition means being and we don't want to face the only being that could possibly give life transcendent meaning.

Why does the pink elephant look like God?

Remembering for the wrong reasons

The great thing about traditionalism is that it has a good memory. The bad thing about it is that it remembers the wrong things. It has forgotten why it should remember in the first place.

Why? Well that is the problem... It doesn't ask the question "why"?

It seems that many people throw out their brains for denial purposes. I think the dominant mindset says something like, "If I think, I'll find that my faith is not true and have to face the idea that it is just my crutch."

With that said, I think this is an ill-formed opinion. Reason necessitates its own limitations. It is reason that says that the earth doesn't revolve around me, i.e., their are truths that exist outside of my ability to know them. To believe in such things would therefore require faith. But such faith can be informed.

For instance, we believe that the universe is expanding not because we can directly see it expanding, but rather because we can see a red doppler shift in the light spectrum of the cosmos. And just because we can't even begin to imagine what it is expanding into, or what is beyond space, doesn't mean that we can't believe in the expansion.

"He alone stretches out the heavens..." - Job 9:8

Traditionalist Christians have (and still do among many Catholics) conducted their worship entirely in a dead Latin language that died with the Roman empire. Why? If they even ask this question, how can they come up with any other answer except, "because that's what we've ALWAYS done."

"An unexamined life is not worth living" - Socrates

Question your traditions. If they have outlived their purposes, why not throw them out? This is not a repudiation of traditionalism. On the contrary, traditionalism tied to purpose, is to be lauded.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. " - George Santayana

Traditionalism tied to purpose says, "Remember, so we don't repeat the same mistakes our others before us have."

THAT is why we remember. THAT is the purpose of traditionalism.

"Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead." - G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy

Torchdown Jesus

I've come to the realization over the last few years that I am more embarassed by some of my fellow Christians than I am of Christ. The "Touchdown Jesus" statue's recent demise is just another example.

I'm sure that the church that erected it had the intention of using it as a sign to point people to Christ. But this is the problem with many of my Christian brothers and sisters. They are trying to give the world simple answers to complex problems. Speaking in baby-talk to adults, they will sport bumperstickers that read, "Jesus Saves", while the non-christian is scratching their heads wondering what they need saved from. Another popular bumpersticker reads, "Jesus Is the Answer", while the non-believer might be asking, "What is the question?" "Lord save us from your followers" is a more aptly written bumpersticker.

Most non-christians who passed the giant Jesus statue on I-75 have deeper issues that keep them from coming to Christ. Those issues are much deeper than simply seeing a giant statue. They need to be engaged by Christ followers who demonstrate God's love through acts of kindness and whose lives well lived, demonstrate they have found the real answers to life's deepest questions. In many cases, non-believers don't even know the questions they should be asking. They need believers lives to be the questions they should be asking. They aren't ready for answers personified on the highway to questions they haven't yet asked.

To my Christian brothers and sisters who doubt me, I ask. Why has God hung this whole thing on the ambiguity of faith? He could have given a witness clearer and more explicit than a giant Jesus statue. Have you not noticed the paradox of the Gospel? Examples of these paradoxes include, "If you want to lead, you must serve" and "if you want to receive, give."

This pattern of paradox is reverberated by St. Francis of Assisi, "Go forth and preach the Gospel and if you must use words."

The depths of the truth that God has given us are too great to be expressed in a giant statue. Don't give the world answers. Give them questions. Make them think with an honest heart.

If you want to teach, first learn. If you want to point the way, first walk the way. If you want to make a difference, first be a difference. If you want to show people answers, be the questions. Is THIS not why God is pleased by faith instead of certainty?

Messages in the Experiential

Atheist's often embrace death as something to be accepted as natural and normal.

But what does the above picture say to you existentially? In other words, how does the image of death make you feel?

Not exactly feeling warm and fuzzy? Why is such a negative visceral reaction so natural and normal?

Contrasted with the end of life, what about the natural and normal responses we experience looking at the start of life?



Is it insane to act like these feelings don't exist when we look at the end of life while hypocritically embracing them when looking at the beginning of life?

I would be the first to stand up and say that a life lived only by feelings is a life lived in folly and will be cut off prematurely. But should these feelings totally be ignored?

Could it be that the feelings we experience looking at these things are signposts? If so, how can we reconcile the sign of a newborn's birth telling us to celebrate a life that inevitably ends in death?

It is enough to make one insane. Insanity is the height of brokenness. But perhaps instead of letting this dissonance break us, we can let it break the world. The world is indeed broken. By recognizing this, I can rise above the cocophany of dissonance and look for what ought to have been.

But one cannot acknowledge what should have been without presuming upon the idea of purpose. And purpose always has a purpose maker.

These Greek pillars are beautiful works of art. We couldn't also call them ruins unless we knew that their original purpose was to support a coliseum.



Don't ignore the questions of purpose. They are the most important questions of life, illuminating our understanding and pointing to a greater purpose maker.