Letter Sent to Unbelievable Radio

Here's the radio show: Stephen Law's 'Evil God' Hypothesis...

28887817-6078-4565-8dd5-483f7dacef04.mp3

Here's my letter in response:

I love your show, and I listen to it as often as I have time, but sometimes I find it quite a frustrating exercise, because I wonder why the Christian apologist is taking a particular angle in the discussion. I found myself in this precise situation listening to Glen Peoples. I must say that I might never have the courage to go on a radio debate, so I certainly applaud Glen in his efforts. And I do think that the Moral Argument does weight in against the Evil God Hypothesis quite well, and he did a great job of making this argument clear.

But I wonder why he didn't use what I feel is the ultimate trump card: Jesus as the Revelation of God. Let's accept the fact that moral evil exists. The Bible doesn't question this at all. In fact, the Bible makes it quite clear that God, being holy and just, will ultimately judge the moral evil that we not only see in the world, but do contrary to His expressed will. And here's the real kicker in the revelation of both Jesus Christ and the Biblical God: God took the form of a man in Christ to be the Lamb of God and pay the penalty for our sin. The Bible says that "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." And he did this as the expressed will of God to show his love and mercy. This is the classic verse that almost the whole world knows, John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." It's a huge trump card to me. I don't see any way that an evil god would be merciful and forgiving, adopting sinners as members of His own family who put their faith in the finished work of Christ on the Cross. And so, since there is this great evidence for the goodness of God, the whole premise of Stephen Law's hypothesis fails ingloriously. Yes, there is evil. But God has dealt with the issue personally. This shows irrefutably that God is good without appealing to any scales whatsoever.

God in the end will not use any type of "good v. evil" scale to judge sin. He will use Himself as the holy standard to which we must all be compared. Now let's talk about the pebble weighing in against the boulder! And in this regard we all fall short, and we need a Savior, and God in His goodness has provided that Savior in Jesus Christ.

Justin, may God bless you for running this show.

OCHEA Presentation Sept 19 2011

Here are a few things to consider if you decide to switch tracks:

1. Homeschooling honours the Biblical model of education.

a. Proverbs 22:6, "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it."

b. Deuteronomy 4:9, "Only take heed to yourself, and diligently keep yourself, lest you forget the things your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life. And teach them to your children and your grandchildren."

c. Ephesians 6:4, "And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord."

d. Also, non-christians should not be teaching your children, “Can the blind lead the blind and will they both not fall into a ditch?”

2. The Home becomes the filter for all other social influences.

a. Parents cognitively remain as allies not antagonists.

b. Media and Peer Pressure are effectively deconstructed.

c. When it is time for our kids to enter another educational environment such as Public High School, College, or University, they already have the personal resources they need to maintain their integrity as Christian thinkers.

d. From article The Challenge Of Cultural Filters by Cindy King, 2008: “The problem with cultural filters is that they often inadvertently lead to cultural prejudice. And cultural prejudice creates two problems; You cannot develop an effective cross-cultural communication; It is not easy to educate someone with strong cultural prejudice.”

3. Homeschooled kids don’t fall into cliques as easily as those who are divided by age/grade/class, and so the older kids are natural mentors for the younger.

Implication: It matters whom your kids hang out with

a. 1 Cor. 15:33, "...Bad company corrupts good character."

b. Prov. 27:17, "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another."

c. A Thomas Jefferson Education, pg. 38-39, "It's not a great stretch of the imagination to see how the grouping of children according to birth year can breed envy of those older, contempt for those younger, and alienation from siblings."

4. Personal life goals are formed without undue influence.

a. John Dewey, founder of Public Education, A signer of the Humanist Manifesto, Antagonistic to Christian philosophy of education

b. Phil Fernandes from the Institute of Biblical Defense has this to say about John Dewey: "When you really read Dewey's views of education, he basically wanted to graduate high school students at the point where they could barely read and write so they'd be very easy to manipulate by the government leaders. At the same time they would learn a good trade so they would be productive members of a socialistic society."

5. Self-education is encouraged as a life-long habit. If your kids see you learning they will embrace a continual habit of self-education.

a. From A Thomas Jefferson Education: "Teaching, not education, should be our focus, because great teaching inspires students to educate themselves. Great teaching will solve our educational problems – in public, private, and home schools. Find a great teacher, in any setting, and you will find a group of students diligently, enthusiastically, and effectively educating themselves. Teachers teach and students educate. Students are the only true educators. Historically, every other method of education fails. Education occurs when students get excited about learning and follow through; students do this when they experience great teachers."

6. Homeschooled kids naturally set their own pace by learning things when they are personally ready. This avoids unnecessarily imposed standards.

a. This may be an important factor if your child is:

- cognitively or developmentally delayed

- advanced or "gifted"

7. Homeschooled kids get one-on-one attention, so they don’t fall through the cracks of the System.

a. Lawrence Rudner Interview, 1999: "Homeschooling is one-on-one. There’s the utmost level of parent involvement."

b. Richard Hardy, Learning Without School, “It’s hard to argue with the advantages of one-on-one instruction, of extensive parent involvement, and of a curriculum tailored to every child’s needs. Home schooled children are winning spelling and geography bees and going on to top-notch colleges.”

c. Maralee Mayberry 1989: “Children are individuals and parents should know what their child is capable of....Schools should try harder to teach the children individually and not expect Home schooling everyone to be the same. I wanted my child to have more one-on-one training.”

8. There are more opportunities for life lessons and skills to be developed by everyday life rather than by citing references in a more sterile environment.

a. Math skills learned by cooking, finances

b. Science learned by field trips, activities

c. History by documentaries, museums

d. Geography, Logic learned by games

9. Homeschooled kids excel beyond public school standards.

a. Dr. Jay L. Wile, Homeschooling: The Solution to Our Education Problem, Why Do Homeschoolers Excel?

a. The Love of Learning is not socialized out of them.

b. Learning is generally more interesting for students when the curriculum is tailored directly to them.

c. You can’t beat the teacher/student ratio!

d. Homeschooling teaches independent learning.

e. Homeschooling parents impart by example that education is important.

I hope you found this presentation encouraging. There’s a lot at stake for our kids growing up in this generation. Biblical faith and practice are continually marginalized by our increasingly humanistic, pluralistic, and secularized culture. We can’t expect our churches to undo a week’s worth of ungodly influence in one hour of Sunday School. It’s up to Christian parents to point their kids in the right direction. Homeschooling is a great way to do that.

- Don Boone, OCHEA, 09/19/2011

PS: This was a bit of a break from the norm, but I wasn't sure where else to put this piece.

on Kierkegaardian Faith

I hear this all the time from atheists who are debating the Christian faith, saying that faith is defined as "believing something regardless of the facts."

Here's the thing that bothers me: A lot of Christians seem to live as if faith is just that; a leap in the dark, a Kierkegaardian/PeterPan disconnect between faith and reason.

It sickens me to see well-meaning Christians live this way, because in fact they simply don't have to.

The Christian faith is based on evidence. Jesus is the revelation of God to man. His life, ministry, death, and resurrection are a matter of public record. It's called the Bible. The Bible tells us that God showed us mercy in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.

We are putting our trust in a God who has actually done something within history to reconcile us to Him.

This trust IS the biblical view of faith.

It has nothing to do with believing something so hard that it becomes real to us. It has everything to do with trusting the promises of a God who has already shown Himself trustworthy.

When Christians give in to the elusive game of make-believe, then they have already lost the battle. Because at that point it really doesn't matter what you believe as long as you believe it hard enough. And this position relativizes ALL beliefs. Then we can no longer weigh any system of belief according to how realistic or all-encompassing it is. We must simply play the game of Tolerance and say "That's nice for you."

Thoughts on Limitless the Movie

First of all, I loved it. It was a thrill ride, and the movie was very well made. I especially liked the cinematography: how the "picture" changes when the "hero" is on the "genius drug"; the "cosmic zoom" where the camera (representing the hero) travels at high speed thru streets, crowds, and scenarios. Also, if I remember right, I like the fact that the character seemed to make his best decisions when he was NOT on the "genius drug."

Secondly, I hated the implications of the movie.

Look at what "being a genius" meant for the "hero": monopolizing discussions at parties, taking advantage of women who thought smart was sexy, capitalizing on stock market trends to rake in loads of cash, etc. To me it seemed like this movie simply reinforced the adage, "educated a sinner and you get an educated sinner." The "genius drug" did absolutely nothing to actually make him a better person. Do we all want to become as megalomaniacal as the "hero" in this film?

Also, if anyone thought this movie was in any way inspirational, I'd like to know on what level. Are we going to fall for some new form of LSD? Remember, Timothy Leary was boasting about LSD the same way this movie was about NZT. Or maybe some folks will decide to take up Trancendental Meditation or go back to college or practice the Law of Attraction, or various other means to an end. Here's the real problem: we don't even use the 20% of our brains well enough, why burn out the full 100%? Our personal computers are a great example in this case: how well do they work and for how long when we jam pack them with data and programs?

I'll preface my next point with the concession that I feel we are all meant to strive for excellence in life. And I do personally feel that we will one day experience using our brains at full potential, and this belief is consistent with my faith as a Christian. Read the biblical passages on the next phase of humanity under the rule of Christ and the restoration of all things, and you will find in this the true expression of which this movie is simply a grasping at the wind. But while we strive to accomplish the premise of this movie outside of the will and purposes of God, we simply set ourselves up as the next Tower of Babel or statue with a head of gold and feet of clay.

The issue of human potentiality MUST be a subset of a society fully surrendered to the biblical God, or else it will simply become the next fad in a long history of mankind's sinfulness and rebellion against its Creator.

And if anyone thinks this idea has never been entertained before, read Flowers For Algernon or watch the movie Charly (1968).

The Shaping of Things to Come?

I'm reading this book by Frost and Hirsch, and they want me to embrace the roots of events like the Burning Man and the movie Fight Club. They want Christianity to be able to offer a greater adventure to people who have this kind of life and expression as a frame of mind.

Sorry. I'm just not buying it. Here's what these people need to do: they need to repent.

The Church's job is not to cater to the whims of an indulgent generation. The Church's job is to be the pillar and grounding of truth. Jesus said "If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Rob Bell says that the Church has always been a reflection of the culture, and uses this as a justification to shift the Church into a post-modern paradigm. If we start "getting with the program" of the post-modern paradigm, then we would simply be falling into another kind of supply-and-demand consumerism. That's been the problem all along. The Church is too busy following the dictates of the current perceived culture rather than just obeying Jesus and doing what He said.

Here's a tid-bit for the Post-modern Emergent: The heady mucky-mucks in college campuses around the world have moved beyond Post-modernity. It's passe. It's already a dead philosophy. And once again, the Church is 10 years behind the times and still thinks its being hip and trendy by jumping on a band-wagon with no wheels.

The Church must be the influence for the World. Not Vice Versa.

Rational Response Debate

I was just listening to an excerpt from Brian Sapient's argument in his tv debate with Ray/Kirk. It's kinda funny actually, and if I am misrepresenting his line of logic, please someone correct me and I'll remove this post...

He starts off by saying that Christians have a bad habit of citing the Law of Cause and Effect to deduce that creation proves the existence of a Creator, but that Christians are unwilling to consider the possibility that maybe the Creator was also created. And then in the very next breath Brian claims exactly the same line of logic, but his "ultimate cause" is that all the matter in the universe has existed in eternity past and has led us by natural processes to this point in time.

He seems to be grasping for an explanation how this planet is teeming with life in a solar system/galaxy/universe that has thus far yielded little if any redundancy of observable biological phenomenon, but his argument is self refuting on 2 levels, briefly:

1) The laws of physics defy an infinite past. Observation reveals a universe in decay. So if we trace the timeline back infinitely then the amount of energy in the past would be infinite, which is a logical absurdity since you can't add to a group and eventually end with an infinite set. And if you start with only a potentially infinite amount of energy in an eternal past then the universe would have run out of steam a long time ago. Also an eternal universe would contain an infinite amount of time which is also a logical absurdity for reasons mentioned above.

2) Brian is replacing one Ultimate Stopping Point for another. He is not willing to believe in an All-powerful God as the source of the universe, but he is willing to ascribe to the physical universe the same qualities of deity necessary to bring about an amazing "big bang" with the endgame being an increasingly ordered and complex universe. Well we know that observation reveals a universe in decay, but besides the point, Brian is willing to put a lot of faith in the idea of an infinite all-powerful and purposeful singularity but he's unwilling to call it God*. Just like in the Epistle to the Romans, he is worshiping the creature rather than the Creator.

These and other arguments have been dealt with a long time ago. But somehow every generation seems to think they've discovered the ultimate trump cards against the claims of the Biblical worldview. It's funny... and sad... God say that if you seek Him you will find Him.

*please don't misunderstand: I am not a pantheist nor a panentheist.