Posts Tagged natural

The Scientific Pretentions of Secularist Idolatry

The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific PretentionsThe media has recently exhibited significant puzzlement upon discovering that some people — namely, Christian conservatives — still don’t accept the theory of evolution. It may, however, come as an even greater shock to learn that such crazies are not alone. Indeed, plenty of Americans express significant skepticism over whether such theories constitute “serious science” (as Bill Keller so omnisciently discerns it).

So why is this? Are the bulk of Americans a bunch of know-nothing fools, opting for silly superstition when they could be signing up for membership at the Temple of Secularism? Is Jon Huntsman right to fret over “our side” being perceived as “anti-science” for its skepticism toward the prevailing “experts” of the day? (Huntsman? Concerned about “perception”? Nahhhhh!)

The issue, of course, has nothing to do with being “anti-science” — that is, unless you position human-constructed science and the intelligentsia’s current infatuation with evolution as some all-explaining, all-perfect source of information for understanding all things (e.g. the existence of God).

In a recent interview with David Berlinski, author of The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretentions, such questions about what science actually knows and actually can know are made clear, with Berlinski claiming in one segment that evolution “makes little sense” and is supported by little evidence. For Berlinski — an agnostic — the bloated scientific pretentions of pseudo-Christian-Mormon fushionist Huntsman’s securalist subservience amount to shameless religiosity at best.

Watch part 1 of the interview below  (for additional segments, go here):



As Berlinski explains in his book (and as Robinson partially quotes in the above video):

In many respects the word naturalism comes closest to conveying what scientists regard as the spirit of science, the source of its superiority to religious thought. It is commended as an attitude, a general metaphysical position, a universal doctrine—and often all three…[But] what reason is there to conclude that everything is [to quote philosopher Alexander Byrne] an “aspect of the universe revealed by the natural sciences”? There is no reason at all.

The irony, of course, is that this ever-expanding idolatry of so-called “natural science” and the bullying that so often Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

6 Comments

Biblical Justice vs. Worldly Justice: Avoiding the Scapegoat Mechanism

http://www.motco.com/images/90103005-main.jpg

Job's accusers were well aware of his innocence.

I am currently reading Douglas Wilson’s Heaven Misplaced: Christ’s Kingdom on Earth, and I was particularly struck by a chapter that focuses on what Wilson calls Christ’s “inexorable love.” The chapter’s fundamental argument is that Christ’s love is widely available to humanity and cannot be suppressed by natural forces.

Wilson begins by discussing the common approach that paganism has taken to achieving justice, namely scapegoating murder to achieve serenity:

Pagan civilizations have always been built on the bedrock of scapegoating murder — this kind of turmoil is managed until it gets to a crisis point, and then everyone wheels on the designated victim. After the murder of this victim, everything becomes tranquil again…For the carnal man, this is the most natural thing in the world. Accusation equals guilt, and condemnation for him equals salvation for us. (emphasis added)

But Christianity also has its fair share of scapegoating, so what’s the difference?

From beginning to end, the Scriptures stand squarely against this pagan mentality — the mentality that is always serene and self-confident about the guilt of the designated victim. Think of Joseph sold into slavery by his brothers, falsely accused. Think of Job, falsely accused by Satan in the heavenly courts and by his so-called comforters here on earth. Think of all the prophets, from Abel to Zechariah, son of Berechiah.

As we can see, Christianity is told from the perspective of the victim rather than the accuser. In addition to this, the victims are almost always innocent and are understood to be so by their accusers — a significant departure from paganism. On this point, many of Wilson’s arguments echo those of René Girard (see The Scapegoat). As we all know, Christianity’s history of scapegoating climaxes with the ultimate (and finally redeeming) murder of Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Comments

Culinary Luddites: The Historical Distortions of 21st-Century Food Faith

Hot dogs

For many culinary Luddites, hot dogs are the ultimate blasphemy.

Rachel Laudan has a great post over at Utne Reader called “In Praise of Fast Food,” which is actually an excerpt from the book The Gastronomica Reader. I came across the article via Nick Schulz over at the Enterprise Blog.

In the article, Laudan criticizes what she calls “culinary Luddism” — a creative spin on the term used to describe anti-industrialists in 19th-century Britain.

Where the original Luddites had an irrational fear of free trade and technological advancement, the new “culinary Luddites” have an irrational fear of processed and preserved foods.

As Laudan explains:

Modern, fast, processed food is a disaster. That, at least, is the message conveyed by newspapers and magazines, on television programs, and in cookbooks. It is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and supermarket bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and brick ovens; to seek out heirloom apples while despising modern tomatoes; to be hostile to agronomists who develop high-yielding crops and to home economists who invent recipes for General Mills.

The strange part is that Laudan describes her culinary background as being rooted in the very principles of such anti-industrialization. Why then does she depart from her Luddite collegues?

Culinary Luddism has come to involve more than just taste, however; it has also presented itself as a moral and political crusade — and it is here that I begin to back off. The reason is not far to seek: because I am a historian.

Wait a minute. Isn’t “history” what this is all about? Aren’t we supposed to hearken back to the good old days when everyone knew how to Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Comments

Supernatural Devotion: Oswald Chambers on Self-Denial

Oswald Chambers

Oswald Chambers (1874-1917)

Oswald Chambers’ My Utmost for His Highest is perhaps the best devotional I’ve ever come across. Thus I am currently reading it for the second time (albeit off schedule).

This morning’s selection stuck out to me, particularly because it points to yesterday’s subject of self-denial and redirecting natural inclinations. The selection is titled “Why Can I Not Follow You Now?” and you can read it by clicking here.

Chambers is talking about how we often want to jump-start God’s will in our lives. Perhaps there is a vision or a calling that God has made clear to us, but we don’t feel like God has given us the final go-ahead to execute it.

As Chambers explains:

At first you may see clearly what God’s will is — the severance of a friendship, the breaking off of a business relationship, or something else you feel is distinctly God’s will for you to do. But never act on the impulse of that feeling. If you do, you will cause difficult situations to arise which will take years to untangle. Wait for God’s timing and He will do it without any heartache or disappointment. When it is a question of the providential will of God, wait for God to move.

When we think of Biblical self-denial, we tend to think of denying things that are “bad” (e.g. dishonesty, lust, selfishness, etc.). But although we must certainly deny our flesh when it comes to blatant sins, such self-denial may also be necessary when it comes to the actual things God has called us to.

This is where following the Holy Spirit is crucial. There will not always be a clear-cut Bible verse to tell you what your individual path looks like. Although we must align all of our pursuits to God’s Word, it is often the Holy Spirit that tells us which job to take, which person to marry, or which city to live in.

But even when we know God’s will (e.g. the job, the spouse, the city), our flesh still has the potential to distort the timing and the execution. For instance, Jesus’ death was the ultimate Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Comments

The Second Greatest Commandment: Love Your Neighbor as Yourself

Jesus and the Pharisees by Jacob Jordaens (1593-1678)

Was the charity of the Pharisees aligned to a love for God?

We often repeat the notion that faith without works is dead. What we talk less about is how any corresponding works must retain focus of what is primary and essential to God.

After all, the greatest commandment God gives us has nothing to do with our neighbors in and by itself.

The Pharisees once asked Jesus this: “Which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus answered with this: “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

Let’s take a moment to focus on the second part of Jesus’ answer: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Many see this is as just another spin on the Golden Rule, and thus we take Jesus’ answer too lightly — as a mere Sunday-school refrain, as a memory verse, or as a recycled proverb that is far too obvious to require any additional thought.

Others, however, take pains to misconstrue it.

These distortions take a variety of forms, a sample of which includes the following:

  1. We should love our neighbors instead of ourselves.
  2. We should love our neighbors more (or less) than ourselves.
  3. We should love ourselves first and then we will know how to love our neighbors properly.

But Jesus isn’t telling us any of these things. He’s simply telling us to love our neighbors in the same way we love ourselves. He isn’t provoking an argument about whether or how much as much as he is indicating that self-love is a core component of Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Comments