“The book, that stubbornly unelectric artifact of pure typography, possesses resources conducive to the flourishing of the soul. A thoughtful reading of the printed text orients one to a world of order, meaning, and the possibility of knowing truth.” - Douglas Groothuis
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Monday, May 26, 2014
On Miles Davis
Miles Dewey Davis was born on this day eighty-eight years ago. This musical genius excellent at playing his trumpet, composing, and leading various bands with members such as John Coltrane, Bill Evans, Tony Williams, John McLaughlin, and Wayne Shorter. No one could play the horn with such sweetness--and such fire. Miles's work on mute is without peer as well. He brought out the best in nearly all the musicians in his bands. A book of his paintings was recently released as well.
Sadly, Miles the man was another story. He was famously moody, fathered several children out of wedlock, was foul mouthed, beat at least one of his three wives, and was for long periods addicted to drugs.
I suggest that you listen to some Miles Davis today or tomorrow. The classic is "Kind of Blue," but his early fusion was remarkable as well. Consider "In a Silent Way" and "Bitches Brew."
Davis illustrated the Pascalian principle of "deposed royalty." He was a prince of a musician, but a pauper in his moral life. There is no evidence that he sought the grace of God in Christ for his redemption. Nevertheless, we can receive much of his music as gifts from the Giver of every good and perfect gift.
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Jazz
Jazz makes up only a small part of the music market; but it makes up a giant part of American history and culture. It is something uniquely American, although it thrives offshore in places like France and Japan.
After attending a jazz performance last night, I realized again the hospitality and conviviality of jazz--the easy enjoyment, fellow-feeling, and buoyancy of the music. Jazz musicians tend to smile at each other during performances--and root each other on--more than any other musical form I have seen. Jazz musicians know the standards--the canon of traditional tune--and can play them without rehearsal. They esteem history and deep feeling.
I love jazz. You should, too.
After attending a jazz performance last night, I realized again the hospitality and conviviality of jazz--the easy enjoyment, fellow-feeling, and buoyancy of the music. Jazz musicians tend to smile at each other during performances--and root each other on--more than any other musical form I have seen. Jazz musicians know the standards--the canon of traditional tune--and can play them without rehearsal. They esteem history and deep feeling.
I love jazz. You should, too.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Beyond Crood: A Film Review
The film, "The Croods," is based on the general assumption that humans evolved from sub-human creatures. This is the humorous story of their ascent. While I don't accept this Darwinian explanation of man, the film is worth seeing for several reasons.
First, the computer animation is stunning (at least to me). The characters' expressions and gestures, the landscapes, and the animals (all hybrids of known animals) are so far from the animation that I saw as a child that it seems to come from another civilization. (Maybe it does.)
Second, while the films assumes a naturalist view of the world, it undermines itself wonderfully. The Crood family begin as fear-based pre-humans (or semi-humans) whose only goal is not to die. But their teenage daughter wants more. She wants to live and be curious. By meeting a more evolved character, the Croods begin to think about "tomorrow" and end up "following the light."
It is all delightfully done, mind you--the hyper-slapstick and constant verbal and physical humor can be nearly hysterical. But it does not fit Darwinism, which allows for no transcendence of the material world. The Croods, you, see begin to act beyond instinct and conditioning. They dream; they explore; they hope. They are not merely evolved animals.
Thus, the human essence, made in God's image and likeness, shines through even this supposedly Darwinian tale, which makes it even better. This also chimes in with a New York Times article which recently related that an atheist group was holding "services" and wanted more of a sense of "transcendence."
First, the computer animation is stunning (at least to me). The characters' expressions and gestures, the landscapes, and the animals (all hybrids of known animals) are so far from the animation that I saw as a child that it seems to come from another civilization. (Maybe it does.)
Second, while the films assumes a naturalist view of the world, it undermines itself wonderfully. The Crood family begin as fear-based pre-humans (or semi-humans) whose only goal is not to die. But their teenage daughter wants more. She wants to live and be curious. By meeting a more evolved character, the Croods begin to think about "tomorrow" and end up "following the light."
It is all delightfully done, mind you--the hyper-slapstick and constant verbal and physical humor can be nearly hysterical. But it does not fit Darwinism, which allows for no transcendence of the material world. The Croods, you, see begin to act beyond instinct and conditioning. They dream; they explore; they hope. They are not merely evolved animals.
Thus, the human essence, made in God's image and likeness, shines through even this supposedly Darwinian tale, which makes it even better. This also chimes in with a New York Times article which recently related that an atheist group was holding "services" and wanted more of a sense of "transcendence."
Sunday, May 11, 2014
Almost everything I need to know I learned from my mother (1930-2010):
1. Pray.
2. Say "please" and "thank you."
3. Ladies first. That means opening doors in and out.
4. Write thank you notes.
5. Don't interrupt people.
6. Italian food is the best.
7. Show special concern for older people.
8. Finish what's on your plate. I had an intuitive sense of this.
9. Stay in touch with family and friends.
10. Write letters to the editor.
There is more, but thank you again, Mom.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
How to be a Bad Teacher
How to be a Bad Teacher
1. Fail to be taught by good teachers.
2. Fail to study the teaching of good teachers.
3. Think that teaching is easy because the best teachers make it look easy.
4. Do not prepare.
5. Forget that God is watching and holding you accountable for every word.
6. Forget that you are informing the eternal destiny of all whom you teach.
7. Model yourself on characters you watch on television.
8. Fail to police your mannerism, speaking voice, and verbal ticks
9. Try to speak in an informal, casual way.
10. Think that the classroom should copy what is going on in the rest of the culture.
11. Enslave your teaching to "learning styles" of students.
12. Be more concerned with "getting through" the outline than in imparting knowledge.
13. View questions from students as interruptions.
14. Use pointless video clips.
15. Abandon lecturing since it is no longer cool.
16. Never improvise because you are not deep enough to do it well.
17. Use a small vocabulary.
18. Teach on line.
1. Fail to be taught by good teachers.
2. Fail to study the teaching of good teachers.
3. Think that teaching is easy because the best teachers make it look easy.
4. Do not prepare.
5. Forget that God is watching and holding you accountable for every word.
6. Forget that you are informing the eternal destiny of all whom you teach.
7. Model yourself on characters you watch on television.
8. Fail to police your mannerism, speaking voice, and verbal ticks
9. Try to speak in an informal, casual way.
10. Think that the classroom should copy what is going on in the rest of the culture.
11. Enslave your teaching to "learning styles" of students.
12. Be more concerned with "getting through" the outline than in imparting knowledge.
13. View questions from students as interruptions.
14. Use pointless video clips.
15. Abandon lecturing since it is no longer cool.
16. Never improvise because you are not deep enough to do it well.
17. Use a small vocabulary.
18. Teach on line.
Friday, May 02, 2014
Sunday, April 27, 2014
Christianity and Art-Making
The Gordon Lewis Center for Christian Thought and Culture will host a seminar on Christianity and art-making in later May. Please stay tuned to find out the details. The instructor and discussion leader will be R. Wesley Hurd, painter and philosopher and my long-time friend and ministry partner.
Friday, April 25, 2014
The Essence of Spiritual Formation
"The Word of God well understood and religiously obeyed is the shortest route to spiritual perfection. Nothing less than a whole Bible can make a whole Christian."
—A. W. Tozer
—A. W. Tozer
Jars of Lies
My response to the Jars of Clay singer who endorses same-sex marriage:
The love of Jesus is never expressed against his character and that of the Bible, which fulfills and authorizes. God ordained heterosexual monogamy as the pattern of God's creation and design. Same sex couples can no more be married than a square can be a circle. To pretend otherwise, is simply sin. To be an influential Christian and to claim otherwise is an especially heinous sin. This is further evidence of the decline of American civilization and the apostasy of so many who name the name of Jesus Christ.
Monday, April 21, 2014
Theism and Personality
If we, as theists, believe that the universe is fundamentally personal in character, it follows that our ultimate understanding will not be in terms of things, which occupy space and may or may not possess certain properties, but of persons, who characteristically do things. Action, not substance, will be our most important category of thought. It is a truth too long neglected by philosophers--J. R. Lucas, Freedom and Grace, p. 111 (as quoted in Nicholas Wolterstorff, Art in Action)
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Evidence for Easter
Millions of Christians celebrate Easter every year, a day commemorating an event that distinguishes Christianity’s founder from all other religious leaders—the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It’s not about colored eggs or cute bunnies. It’s about one who claims authority over all creation as the living Lord. Is there good reason to believe this?
In a pluralistic culture, diverse religious ideas are often viewed as merely products of subjective faith. A religion is “true” if it “works,” if it gives a sense of meaning to life and a connection to a community of faith. Matters of objective fact are dismissed in order to avoid controversy and strife. However, Easter makes no sense apart from the reality of a historical event. The Apostle Paul wrote to the early Christians, “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith” (I Corinthians 15:14).
In a free society every religion is allowed to make its case publicly without fear of censure. All have the constitutional right to practice any religion or none. But this does not answer the question of what faith—if any—one ought to embrace. Easter offers an answer based on the compelling evidence that the story of Jesus coming to earth to redeem his people from their failures is vindicated by his space-time resurrection from the dead.
No blind leap of faith is required to believe that the resurrection of Jesus is more than a nice religious idea. The Gospel accounts that attest to the resurrection were written by people in a position to hunt down and check out the facts. They were either disciples of Jesus (Matthew and John) or individuals who carefully interviewed those closest to the event they described (Mark and Luke). These accounts were written shortly after the events they narrate; there was insufficient time for such mythological additions as a resurrection. The Apostle Paul, writing sometime in the 50s, spoke of Christ publicly appearing to many people, many of whom were still living at the time he wrote (1 Corinthians 15:1-8). Had there been no resurrection, this kind of statement would have been suicidal, since hostile witness could have refuted Paul’s claim. We have no record of a refutation.
Moreover, all the New Testament books have been accurately preserved over time. Scholars have access to thousands of ancient Greek manuscripts from which to translate our modern versions of these books.
The earliest record of the Christian movement (the Book of Acts) reports that the church proclaimed a resurrected Christ as the source of its courage and drive. The first Christians weathered intense persecution for their resurrection-faith; yet they persevered—some even unto death. Had the notion of the resurrection been fabricated, it would have unraveled under the relentless social and political pressures it faced. As former Nixon aide Charles Colson has pointed out in his book Loving God, he and the other White House conspirators could not pull off the Watergate cover-up, despite their unmatched political clout. When the crunch came, the truth was quickly flushed out. The early Christians had no such power to obfuscate or intimidate; but they never recanted. Their resolve is best explained by their knowledge of the resurrection.
Those hostile to these determined followers of Jesus could have easily refuted the nascent movement by simply exhuming the dead body of Jesus and displaying it as the decisive evidence against any claim to his resurrection. Both the religious and the political authorities of the day had reasons to resent these Christians and to stop their evangelism. But there is no evidence that anything of the kind occurred. The tomb was empty.
Belief in the resurrection of Jesus is entirely different from the fascination many people have in supposedly supernatural events (of "The X Files" variety) that have no logical support. When Christians observe Easter they stand on the solid ground of history, looking upward with rational hope for a better life in the world to come.
In a pluralistic culture, diverse religious ideas are often viewed as merely products of subjective faith. A religion is “true” if it “works,” if it gives a sense of meaning to life and a connection to a community of faith. Matters of objective fact are dismissed in order to avoid controversy and strife. However, Easter makes no sense apart from the reality of a historical event. The Apostle Paul wrote to the early Christians, “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith” (I Corinthians 15:14).
In a free society every religion is allowed to make its case publicly without fear of censure. All have the constitutional right to practice any religion or none. But this does not answer the question of what faith—if any—one ought to embrace. Easter offers an answer based on the compelling evidence that the story of Jesus coming to earth to redeem his people from their failures is vindicated by his space-time resurrection from the dead.
No blind leap of faith is required to believe that the resurrection of Jesus is more than a nice religious idea. The Gospel accounts that attest to the resurrection were written by people in a position to hunt down and check out the facts. They were either disciples of Jesus (Matthew and John) or individuals who carefully interviewed those closest to the event they described (Mark and Luke). These accounts were written shortly after the events they narrate; there was insufficient time for such mythological additions as a resurrection. The Apostle Paul, writing sometime in the 50s, spoke of Christ publicly appearing to many people, many of whom were still living at the time he wrote (1 Corinthians 15:1-8). Had there been no resurrection, this kind of statement would have been suicidal, since hostile witness could have refuted Paul’s claim. We have no record of a refutation.
Moreover, all the New Testament books have been accurately preserved over time. Scholars have access to thousands of ancient Greek manuscripts from which to translate our modern versions of these books.
The earliest record of the Christian movement (the Book of Acts) reports that the church proclaimed a resurrected Christ as the source of its courage and drive. The first Christians weathered intense persecution for their resurrection-faith; yet they persevered—some even unto death. Had the notion of the resurrection been fabricated, it would have unraveled under the relentless social and political pressures it faced. As former Nixon aide Charles Colson has pointed out in his book Loving God, he and the other White House conspirators could not pull off the Watergate cover-up, despite their unmatched political clout. When the crunch came, the truth was quickly flushed out. The early Christians had no such power to obfuscate or intimidate; but they never recanted. Their resolve is best explained by their knowledge of the resurrection.
Those hostile to these determined followers of Jesus could have easily refuted the nascent movement by simply exhuming the dead body of Jesus and displaying it as the decisive evidence against any claim to his resurrection. Both the religious and the political authorities of the day had reasons to resent these Christians and to stop their evangelism. But there is no evidence that anything of the kind occurred. The tomb was empty.
Belief in the resurrection of Jesus is entirely different from the fascination many people have in supposedly supernatural events (of "The X Files" variety) that have no logical support. When Christians observe Easter they stand on the solid ground of history, looking upward with rational hope for a better life in the world to come.
Tuesday, April 08, 2014
Outline for my Talk at University of Colorado Law School Today
CIVIL
LAW, MORAL LAW, AND GOD
I.
WHAT IS LAW THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT IT?
A. Declaration
of Independence :
inalienable rights granted by our Creator
B. The
Nuremberg war
trials and Nazi “crimes against humanity” (See John Warwick Montgomery, The Law Above the Law)
C. Martin
Luther King and the reform of civil law based on higher, moral law
D. Questions
of jurisprudence: philosophical basis; justification of law; meta-ethics
II.
ARTHUR LEFF AND THE JUSTIFICATION OF LAW
A. “The
modernist impasse” or the secularization of law in the West (see Phillip E.
Johnson, “Nihilism and the End of the Law”)
1. Law
as independent of God: “We’re free of God”
2. Law
as expression of contingent human arrangements only: “Oh God,
we’re free”
B. Arthur Leff’s “Unspeakable Ethics, Unnatural
Law,” Duke Law Review
1. Thesis:
Authority of law depends on an ultimate Evaluator; without this
Evaluator all law is arbitrary, however it is formulated.
2. This God would have to be
personal, moral, and communicative.
3.
Moral statements as “performative utterances”
4.
The conditions of performative success: authority in a situation
5.
The absence of God in the moral sphere: no moral authority
C. Other
non-divine principles for establishing the law
1. Descriptivism/conventionalism:
leaves everything alone; no outside judgment upon established legal systems.
Legal positivism.
2. Personalism:
authority in individuals (godlets)—anarchy
3. Majoritarianism:
no basis in a moral principle beyond godlets
4. Constitutionalism:
not infallible, requires interpretation; not exhaustive
III.
LEFF’S DILEMMA AND THE MODERNIST IMPASSE
A. All
other evaluators fail to perform; morality and law are unjustified,
unauthorized.
B. No
one can replace God as the ultimate Evaluator and justification of moral
law
and civil law (“There is none like unto the LORD”).
C. Nevertheless: evil exists; heroism exists
(“Sez who?”).
D. Either God or nihilism (“God help us”)
IV.
ANWERING LEFF’S DILEMMA
A. An
argument for the Ultimate Evaluator (by modus
tolens)
1. If
there is no God (P), then morality
and law lose their foundations and there is no objective good and evil (Q). (Leff and other arguments:
Nietzsche, Sartre, Dostoyevsky.) If P,
then Q.
2. There
is objective good and evil. Leff: “There is in the world such a thing as evil.”
(See Romans 2:14-15 on the law written on the human heart.)
3. Therefore:
it is false that morality and law lose their foundations and there is no
objective good or evil. (not-Q)
4. Therefore:
God exists as the Ultimate Evaluator (Leff, illogically, to the contrary). By modus tolens: not-Q; therefore, not-P.
5. Therefore;
nihilism is false.
B. An
argument against atheism, the claim that there is no Ultimate Evaluator
1. If
there is no God (P), then morality
and law lose their foundations and there is no objective good and evil (Q). If
P, then Q.
2. There
is no God. (Leff: “It looks as if we are all we have.”) (P)
3. Therefore:
morality and law lose their foundations and there is no objective good and evil
(nihilism: “God help us”). By modus
ponens: P; therefore, Q.
4. But:
Leff: “There is in the world such a
thing as evil.” Objective good and evil do
exist. (not-Q)
5. If
not-Q; therefore: not-P. By modus tolens
6. Therefore:
God does exist as the Ultimate Evaluator (same conclusion as the previous argument).
7. Therefore,
nihilism is false (same conclusion as the previous argument).
C. The
simplified argument (disjunctive
syllogism)
1. Either
God exists (P) or nihilism is true (Q). P
or Q.
2. Nihilism
is not true. (not-Q)
3. Therefore,
God exists. (P)
D. Responses
to three objections to God as the basis of morality and law
1. Making
God the ultimate Evaluator makes morality and law arbitrary.
a. God’s
commands are based on God’s character and the nature of the
world God has created. “I the Lord do not
change” (Malachi 3:6).
b. God’s
evaluations and commands are not arbitrary edicts of
changeable divine will, but are based on
wisdom (Proverbs 8).
c. Christian
perspective: God’s character is demonstrated historically in Jesus Christ (Luke
1:1-4; John 1:1-3; 14-18).
2. Moral
truth can exist objectively apart from God’s existence.
a. Moral
law needs a Law-giver, imperatives, claims upon us, duty.
b. A
godless world coupled with human knowledge of objective moral principles is
exceedingly unlikely give an impersonal, chance universe.
3. Recognizing
God as the Evaluator would lead to a dangerous theocracy.
a. A
theological basis for law does not entail a theocracy; consider early
American law and jurisprudence.
b. An
unacceptable nihilism seems to be the only other alternative;
consider the USSR . Law and rights were created
by the State alone.
V.
CONCLUSIONS: GOD CAN HELP US
A. Modernist
impasse is not solvable given its own premises: “God help us.”
B. God
as Ultimate Evaluator gives a solid basis for morality and civil law.
C. Two
qualifications to my argument
1. Not
a complete apologetic for Christian theism, although a foundation for
personalist theism and some suggestions. Many other arguments available.
2. Much
more is required for a good society than well-rooted, authorized civil law:
moral and spiritual renewal and consistency.
VI.
RESOURCES ON GOD, MORALITY, AND LAW
A. Stephen
L. Carter, The Culture of Disbelief: How
American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion (New York: Basic
Books, 1993). Examines the secularization of law and how it marginalizes
religion.
B. Douglas
Groothuis, Truth Decay: Defending
Christianity Against the Challenges of Postmodernism (Downers Grove , IL
C. Douglas
Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A
Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2011). See especially, “The Moral Argument for God,” which draws on
Arthur Leff’s essay, “Unspeakable Ethics, Unnatural Law.”
D. Douglas
Groothuis, “Thomas Nagel’s ‘Last Word’ on the Metaphysics of Rationality and
Morality,” Philosophia Christi, 2nd
series, no. 1 (1999):115-122. A critique of one attempt by a notable
philosopher to establish objective morality and rationality apart from the
existence of God.
E. Phillip
E. Johnson, “Nihilism and the End of the Law,” First Things, March 1993, 19-25. A reflection on Leff’s dilemma and
how it relates to contemporary debates about civil law in America .
F. Arthur
Leff, “Unspeakable Ethics, Unnatural Law,” Duke
Law Journal, 1979, no. 6 (December):1229-1246. A pivotal and penetrating
analysis.
G. John
Warwick Montgomery, The Law Above the Law
(Minneapolis, MN: Betheny Publishers, 1975). Considers the relationship between
civil law and theology.
H. J.
P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City
Sunday, April 06, 2014
Friday, April 04, 2014
Film Review: "God's not Dead"
This film weaves several plots around the main story of a philosophy student who is challenged by an atheist philosophy professor to give arguments for God's existence. The young man takes the challenge, which exacts a cost on him, including the loss of his long-term girl friend. Other subplots relate to people considering Christian commitment in one way or another. (There is spoiler alert. I'll let you see how the movie resolves.)
The best actor is the atheist professor. However, he does not act much like a professor, since he is overly arrogant and gives few arguments for atheism. The student ends up studying apologetics and gives some decent arguments for God, including the argument from the Big Bang and biology. I could quibble, but I won't. How many movies list "apologetics research" in the credits? Rice Brooks is listed. I had not heard of him before, but he has written a book called God is not Dead. (I kept waiting for the student to check out my book, Christian Apologetics, in his research, but he did not. I will get over it.)
The rest of the acting is fair to poor and the film is overly cheesy in parts. Some of the characters are pretty thin and predictable. Nevertheless, it deals with ultimate matters with some wisdom, so it is not a bad film for both believers and unbelievers.
Let this encourage us to enter the secular world with the Christian message through films, books, articles, poems, plays, and in ever other way. Time is short; eternity long; our task is great.
I am thankful that my prediction that the movie would contain no apologetics was false!
Sunday, March 30, 2014
The Final Freedom
Inspired by Viktor Frankl:
The first and final freedom is how you, at the innermost core of your being, respond to ineluctable suffering. That is the measure of your character, formed in the crucible. Looking back on your life, how would you have wanted to live: in apathy in the face of crushing events or in responsible activity in the face of crushing events?
Sunday, March 23, 2014
Help for Becky Groothuis
Folks: If you missed it, here is the fund created by a friend to help us with Becky's medical and housing expenses. We are looking for a full-time facility for her and hope to place her there as soon as we can.
That will be far better than what we could do at home. We are thankful to all those who have given so far. It makes this nightmare more livable.
http://www.gofundme.com/groothuissupport
That will be far better than what we could do at home. We are thankful to all those who have given so far. It makes this nightmare more livable.
http://www.gofundme.com/groothuissupport
Friday, March 21, 2014
The Death of Fred Phelps
Fred Phelps is dead. How should a good person respond to his demise?
The death of any creature made in the image and likeness of God (all of we humans) is a lamentable thing. Sin, long ago, brought human death into God's good world. The consequences are ubiquitous, touch every person every day their entire lives. But death is the exclamation point of sin, its natural result.
Everyone sins, but, despite the dad commonalities of sin (lust, greed, cruelty, perversity, murder, rape, and more), we each sin in our own way. Some of these affronts to God's holy and perfect character are public. Some are not. One Day, all will be known. The sins of Fred Phelps were egregious and well known: twisting Scripture, hating wrongly, judging wrongly, and more. He was the poster boy for the press's desire to find aberrant expressions of Christianity. He was in an infinitesimal fraction of Christians in his approach to life. In nearly thirty-eight years of Christian life, I have never met anyone who heralded the hatred of men on his terms.
No, God does not hate homosexuals. No, we cannot claim that an American soldiers death is God's revenge against America. Yes, Fred Phelps was a despicable human being. Yet a human being he was, and is. His sins were broadcast across the globe and his false church became a byword, a symbol of bigotry and religious extremism.
Fred Phelps is in the hands of a just and loving God--as we all are. Given his recent death, he is also in the thoughts of we creatures under the sun and awaiting the coming of the Son of Man. Only then, will all the secrets of men and the judgments of God will be perfectly known. The wisest way of pondering the death of this sad and bad man is not to ridicule him, not to jest at his and his family expense, and certainly not to gloat. "Ask not for whom the bell tolls, for the bell tolls for thee."
We, too, shall die. Most of us will die without media attention. But we will not die without God's attention. He is the ultimate audience, the audience of One. May we all search our own conscience for cruelty, perversity, and the false handling of the Holy Bible, remember that but One lived a holy and perfect life; and he alone is the One who offers hope based on the realities of his life, death, resurrection, ascension, session, Second Coming, and eternal reign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
