Truth Decay

In two national surveys conducted by the Barna Research Group the following was found:

• By a 3-to-1 margin (64% vs. 22%) adults said truth is always relative to the person and their situation.
• 83% of teenagers said moral truth depends on the circumstances, and only 6% of said moral truth is absolute.
• Just one out of ten of our country's born again teenagers believes in absolute moral truth - a statistic that is nearly identical to that of non-born again teens.
• The alarmingly fast decline of moral foundations among our nations young people has culminated in a one-word worldview: 'whatever.' The result is a mentality that esteems pluralism, relativism, tolerance, and diversity without critical reflection of the implications of particular views and actions.

Very sad.

Flu Vaccine Exposed

I'm not a big fan of vaccines. When I went to India, I did a lot of research on vaccines, and decided to only take anti-malaria tablets and skip all the suggested vaccines. I also opt-out my son from school vaccines. Here's a short video that summarizes the information on which I based my decision years ago to never get a flu shot:

Comedy in Theology

“Because of piety’s penchant for taking itself too seriously, theology–more than literary, humanistic, and scientific studies–does well to nurture a modest, unguarded sense of comedy. Some comic sensibility is required to keep in due proportion the pompous pretensions of the study of divinity. I invite the kind of laughter that wells up not from cynicism about reflection on God but from the ironic contradictions accompanying such reflections. Theology is intrinsically funny. This comes from glimpsing the incongruity of humans thinking about God. I have often laughed at myself as these sentences went through their tortuous stages of formation. I invite you to look for the comic dimension of divinity that stalks every page. It is not blasphemy to grasp the human contradiction for what it is. The most enjoyable of all subjects has to be God, because God is the source of all joy.”

-- Thomas C. Oden quote from his three volume Systematic Theology

Science & Technology: A False Hope

Human beings have an innate need to worship. Modern people are too sophisticated to worship idols of wood or stone. Instead, we idolize sex, self, security, power, money, and particularly science and technology. The sophistication of modern idolatry is quite high. Neither atheists nor believers bow down to a statue of Science or sacrifice animals on the altar of Science, but when you examine where people place their trust as an ultimate authority, even unaware Christians bow the knee to Science and its twin god, Technology. One of Satan's more heinous tricks is the subtlety of substituting science and technology as the ultimate authority over and above the authority and promises of God's Word.

Many people have written on the rise of scientific authority and technological progress in the modern and post-modern era, so there is no need to repeat that here. The bottom line is science is an unstable foundation for ultimate truth seeking, i.e. answering the "big questions" in life. Scientific progress is accomplished by adherence to an ethic of uncertainty. Technology will not lead us to utopia. The atom bomb proved that without doubt. Science is a shifting sand of doubt based on questioning the current paradigms of human understanding, and it is limited in its ability to answer the big questions in the domain of theology and philosophy. Technology is a false hope for ultimate human redemption.

Even something as apparently absolute as the law of gravity is subject to change with advancement in scientific understanding. For example, Newtonian gravity isn't as precise as Einstein's view, and who is to say that Einstein's description of gravity won't be replaced by some new understanding in the future? Such is the evolution of science, and this is a good evolution for understanding the universe around us. However, there is a not-so-good evolutionary mindset among scientists today called Darwinism. This scientism has taken control of science over the last century even through there are a few bright lights that things may be changing.

The unfortunate outcome of pitting science and technology against God as the ultimate authority is to is to build up a false dichotomy for truth seeking. I am disturbed by how many Christians allow the atheistic scientism of Darwinism to be more authoritative in their thinking than the Word of God, but I've met relatively few people who chase down their assumptions to this level of consideration. Most people seem to be too caught up in the idolatry of consumerism, money, etc. to really consider the big questions at the root of their belief systems.

The good news is eventually true science will realign with God's Word, or errant understandings of God's Word will be corrected and realigned with true science. History shows this pattern. Human scientific understanding grows in fits and starts, and for periods of time science is sometimes at odds with Biblical truth. But, if God's Word is as important as Jesus claimed that it was, then ultimately human beings will discover there is no conflict between the Bible and science when both are correctly understood.

Time

Did God create time? I used to think so. When studying physics many moons ago, I learned that time is a 4th dimension in addition to the three spatial dimensions. According to Genesis 1, God created space and matter, so I had assumed God created time too. That implies God is "outside" the space-time continuum. Now I'm not so sure about this implication. Here's why:

There are two ways to interpret the mathematical core of Special Relativity. On Einstein’s interpretation, there is no absolute “now” in the world; rather what is now is relative to different observers in motion. If you and I are moving with respect to each other, then what is now for me is not now for you. But on H. A. Lorentz’s interpretation, there is an absolute now in the world, but we just cannot be sure which events in the world are happening now because motion affects our measuring instruments. Moving clocks run slow and moving measuring rods contract. The Einsteinian and the Lorentzian interpretations are empirically equivalent; there is no experiment you could perform to decide between them. But I want to argue that if God exists, then Lorentz was right. Here is my argument:

1. If God exists, then God is in time.

This is true because God is really related to the world as cause to effect. But a cause of a temporal effect must exist either before or at the same time as its effect. So God must be in time.

2. If God is in time, then a privileged observer exists.

Since God transcends the world and is the cause of the existence of everything in the world, His perspective on the world is the true perspective.

3. If a privileged observer exists, then an absolute now exists.

Since God is a privileged observer, His “now” is privileged. Thus, there is an absolute now, just as Lorentz claimed.

This is a very startling conclusion, indeed. But I am firmly convinced that if God exists, then a Lorentzian, rather than Einsteinian, theory of relativity is correct. It is hard to imagine how religion could have any greater relevance to science than this, to show that one theory is wrong and another is right.

[Source: What is the Relation between Science and Religion? by William Lane Craig]

Perhaps time is not so much created in the manner of space and matter, but merely a result of creation being in relative motion compared to God, yet God is also transcendent and omnipresent "for in him we live and move and have our being." Maybe time simply ceases to exist at God's point of being as the privileged observer which could account for God's timelessness. Who knows? What I do know is I really don't know with any degree of certainty what I thought I used to know!

So, what about something like an absolute zero temperature region or a perfect vacuum where all molecular motion ceases or no matter is in motion? Does time stop there? Nope, not in relation to God since this region or vacuum has motion relative to the position of the privileged observer, i.e. God.

Even if this line of thought holds water in the context of Special Relativity, it has been 20 years since I gave much thought to General Relativity. And, even though I was a physics major in college I didn't fully grasp General Relativity even when I studied it. Someone much smarter than I will have to consider the ramifications in the context of GR.

This line of thought reminded me of Psalm 46:10a: "Be still, and know that I am God."

Tozer on the Unknowable

In the chapter on the self-existence of God in his classic work The Knowledge of the Holy, A. W. Tozer writes:

Philosophy and science have not always been friendly toward the idea of God, the reason being that they are dedicated to the task of accounting for things and are impatient with anything that refuses to give an account of itself. The philosopher and the scientist will admit that there is much that they do not know; but that is quite another thing from admitting that there is something which they can never know, which indeed they have no technique for discovering.

To admit that there is One who lies beyond us, who exists outside of all our categories, who will not be dismissed with a name, who will not appear before the bar of our reason, nor submit to our curious inquiries: this requires a great deal of humility, more than most of us possess, so we save face by thinking God down to our level, or at least down to where we can manage Him. Yet how He eludes us! For He is everywhere while He is nowhere, for "where" has to do with matter and space, and God is independent of both. He is unaffected by time or motion, is wholly self-dependent and owes nothing to the worlds His hands have made.

I used to think I was the furthest thing from a mystic when it came to my Christian faith, but the older I get the more I resonate with guys like Tozer and Oswald Chambers. I've also been hearing more about younger generations of Evangelicals going over to the Eastern Orthodox church. I wonder what is afoot here?

Mr. Fix-It

Dr. John Gray of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus fame calls it Mr. Fit-It. It has probably been over a dozen years since I read that book, but I remember identifying with Mr. Fix-It a lot. If you articulate a problem around men, we look for a solution. If you articulate a problem around women, they tend to empathize and talk it out. There is a definite gender difference in how the sexes deal with personal problems. I have been reminded of this difference in some very significant ways just recently.

In the last couple of weeks, I've had a rash of personal problems popping up all around me with friends and family: two marriages blowing up of two couples I care about deeply, issues with my teen-age boys, getting along with co-workers, etc. I've discovered that being Mr. Fix-It is exhausting. The Bible has some powerful wisdom on how to deal with personal problems.

First, get the log out of your own eye. That is often my first problem. Dealing with someone hypocritically (especially our children) is usually a train wreck waiting to happen. Romans 2:3-5 addresses this directly and without pulling punches. Then, realize there are two sides to every story. Proverbs 18:17 is one of my favorites: "The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him."

My most recent discovery is realizing that in the midst of their messes, others are not just problems to be fixed, but people to be loved. I often forget that when I'm in the middle of a crisis situation and looking for a solution. Jesus gives a great example on striking the balance when he was approached by the rich young man. The version of this story in Mark 10 has some additional insight beyond the synoptic version in Matthew 19. Mark's gospel gives this account:

17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

18 "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone. 19 You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.'"

20 "Teacher," he declared, "all these I have kept since I was a boy."

21 Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

This passage is almost always used for teaching about money and possessions, but it also teaches us the art of helping someone with a personal problem. First, be careful of giving unsolicited advice. In this case, the rich young man came to Jesus asking for help. Second, work from a position of log-free humility. Jesus was perfect yet he deferred the goodness and honor given to him over to God rather than engaging from his position of perfection. None of us have a perfect position from which to counsel others.

Third, engage the other person on the basis of Biblical truth. Jesus gave the rich young man the law from the Book. Fourth, note how in v.21 Jesus loved him. This is more than just warm fuzzies and emotional affirmation. It is telling the truth in love rather than what would tickle his ears. Jesus gave this rich young man some hard truth and still loved him. Finally, the ultimate advice always points back to Jesus himself. We do well to follow Him, and point others in the same direction.

9/11 Nonsense

On this eve of 9/11, a friend of mine sent me this purported interview of President Obama by Hollywood actor Charlie Sheen.

http://www.infowars.com/twenty-minutes-with-the-president/

It sounded fishy from the beginning, but I was immediately skeptical anyway because I recognized the Infowars.com domain. Infowars.com and PrisonPlanet.com are the work of conspiracy theorist and self-proclaimed truth seeker Alex Jones. If you read through this piece of fiction concocted by Mr. Sheen, you find this little nugget at the bottom:

"Author’s Note: What you have just read didn’t actually happen… yet."

Thankfully I didn't waste my time reading this nonsense. My chagrined friend alerted me to the skullduggery he inadvertently passed along before I got around to reading the material myself. This is exactly why I pay nearly zero attention to Alex Jones, and why I'd recommend any serious minded truth seeker should ignore him as well. 95% (maybe more?) of the people who hit this link won't read the fine print at the bottom or will overlook it in their zeal to pass it along to a "truth seeking" friend who is like minded in their skepticism regarding the official conspiracy theory about 9/11.

Mr. Sheen's work of fiction will inadvertently be passed along as truth, and I have no doubts that is the intent and desire of Mr. Jones who is also promoting this work of fiction on his PrisonPlanet.com banner ad as I'm writing this blog entry. In Mr. Jones's world, truth is not only stranger than fiction, fiction is presented as truth (until you read the fine print). It is no coincidence this propaganda piece showed up on Mr. Jones's web sites during the anniversary week of 9/11. Alex Jones and Charlie Sheen are obviously running a propaganda program of their own. It gives Alex Jones more fodder for his online radio and TV shows. I guess when fighting "infowars" lying...or "fiction" purported as truth (with a little disclaimer)...is okey dokie on Mssrs. Sheen and Jones's moral compass?

In my world view, fighting lies with lies only results in more liars. Why should Alex Jones or anyone else believe Charlie Sheen as a credible authority on the 9/11 controversies and mysteries? Because he is a Hollyweird celeb? Give me a break!

An Aphorism

Truth invites scrutiny of the evidence, but error demands tolerance of opinion.

Dave Ramsey on "Cash for Clunkers"

With all the buzz about Cash for Clunkers, it’s easy to think that it was a great way for people to get a better set of wheels. But was it really? No way! Cash for Clunkers was simply a way for broke people to buy cars that they really couldn't afford. It was a bad idea on multiple levels. But before digging into that, let’s take a little history lesson.

About a decade ago, a fair housing program was started, called a sub-prime lending market. The idea behind it was that everyone “needed” to own a home—including broke people. The government decided to start a program to reinvest in communities, which allowed pretty much anyone to borrow money to buy a house. Lending companies charged high interest rates, causing already struggling families to go even further into debt.

Basically, this was a program designed to encourage broke people to buy houses. Most people didn’t even know it existed until it unraveled and became the number-one cause of our recent recession. The government took those stupid loans back and securitized them, which created the financial mess last fall. Helping broke people buy houses didn’t turn out to be a great government program. Guess what? Helping broke people buy brand-new cars—and now home appliances—will turn out just as bad.

The Cash for Clunkers program was designed exactly for people who should not take advantage of the program. You trade your $2,000 clunker in for a brand-new, shiny $20,000 car, and the only way you can afford it is with a high-interest payment. That just means you really couldn’t afford it to begin with. Doesn’t this sound like the sub-prime mortgage problem all over again?

When you drive that new car off the lot, you’re immediately going to lose $4,500. The worst car accidents happen on the showroom floor. New cars go down in value like a rock. The government thinks it’s going to save the American auto industry by putting broke people into cars they can’t pay for. It’s going to come back to bite them—and the rest of us—in the form of taxes galore.

Another bad thing about this program is that we, the taxpayers, are paying for the new cars! It’s morally wrong of the government to take money away from us—against our will—in the form of taxes and give that money to someone else to buy a stupid car they can’t afford in the first place! This is theft, plain and simple.

Cash for Clunkers is a program that redistributes wealth in the name of the environment, and it’s going to be a curse on the car dealer and the manufacturer that carries the paper. It’s going to hurt the broke person who bought a car he couldn’t afford. And it’s already a problem for our country, because it’s adding dollars to the national debt.

There’s always a twist with government programs like this. They try to think of creative ways to help people, but the situation usually ends up worse than it did before they “helped.” In the end, I should decide what to do with my own money. If I want to buy you a car, I will! And if you can’t buy a car without actually paying for the whole thing, then you’re better off keeping your “clunker.”

So good riddance to a really bad program that has done more damage than good.

Source: http://www.daveramsey.com/etc/newsletters/company/082809.cfm?ectid=cnl0909.1_05#1