Mark Driscoll, I guess I'm a pansy then

#pansypride?

(In response to http://theresurgence.com/2013/10/22/is-god-a-pacifist)

Response to Ray Comfort's Evolution vs God video

Hey. I just had a friend ask me my thoughts on Ray Comfort's Evolution vs God video that's recently come out. Since I typed a whole big thing up, I figured it works as a blog post too.

Here's the video:
Evolution vs God

Here's my response:

That's not how "observation" works in science: there's a LOT of stuff we don't see with our eyes that we consider a scientific "observation." Observation is NOT the same thing as "seeing." We base a lot of science on observed cause-and-effect.

For example, take our knowledge of the spectrum of sound. We know that there are sounds that animals can hear, but we can't. We know this because we can see an animal react, and we can measure it via tools. We don't "see" it, but we're "observing" it.

Ray also doesn't realize he's being given the evidence he's looking for. They're telling him about the finches, the fish that evolve. The point is that, given enough time, speciation (creating of a new "kind") happens over millions and millions of years. It's a gradual process that scientists use to account for all the variety of animals we see in the world today. If you breed 2 types of dogs, they'll eventually keep producing new types of dogs (shorter legs. different shaped heads. etc). Expand that over time, and you'll eventually see a different subtype of dog.  Keep that process going over millions of years, then their descendants get all mixed up and some of them become a different type of animal altogether.

OK, since we've established that we can't "see" macroevolution (nobody says that we can), we just go to the fossil record. And the fossil record is incredibly supportive of the theory of macroevolution. (see my first link below).

He also uses very dishonest tactics. He selectively edits people's responses to make his own seem legitimate. They often don't have anything to do with making his point (which is that macro-evolution doesn't happen. that's his point, i think), and resorts to making people look like they don't know what they're talking about. That implies that because these people don't know what they're talking about, that there's actually no evidence for evolution. This is wrong. This is Michael Moore type of stuff. He's going for "GOTCHA!"s more than anything else.

Here's scientific evidence of evolution. This site is run by Christians:
http://biologos.org/questions/category/scientific-evidence

And here's a bunch of questions that they tackle, both scientific and theological :
http://biologos.org/questions

Infact, Biologos.org is just a good site to go to for evolution/Christianity stuff in general.

And here's something that we, as Protestant Christians, should ask ourselves: If the Jews, Catholics, and Greek Orthodox can accept evolution, why is it we can say the fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture is better than theirs?

God can create the world however He wants. With all observable data, it looks like it was through evolution.

SEX SEX SEX

The best description of the Christian ideal of sexuality that I've ever come across (the highlighted post by EsquilaxHortensis):

http://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/i31yo/any_redditors_who_waited_until_marriage_to_have/c20jv10?context=1

But here's a counterpoint:

http://arealrattlesnake.com/2013/08/18/virginity-its-an-illusion/

Taken together, I think they portray the appropriate vision of what God intended humans to use their sexuality for. Sex is ultimately about being able to give yourself wholly to another person, and as the ultimate expression of romantic love. In our secular society, it's often treated as simply pleasure and gratification. It's not that Christians are prudes... in fact, we love sex! We love it for its multiple dimensions, the way it pulls and binds two people together. It does need the appropriate setting for it to flourish, though.

On the other hand, the 2nd link tackles the flip side of this issue for Christians. Whether we meant to or not, we've sometimes given the impression to young women that their worth is atleast somewhat tied into their sexuality. It is not. We can't seriously say that someone's "virginity" is something that makes them more valuable. That's textbook idolatry (getting your value from another source than Jesus Christ), and reeks of works-based righteousness. In other words, we have no right to feel more "righteous" for abstaining. Because we've all lusted before, and that already makes all of us sexually impure. Yes, we should indeed hold out for the one we will eventually love forever, because that's ultimately best for us, and best for our future spouse. But our abstaining in the process does not make us any more "pure" than anyone else. Our purity is an illusion.

God's not a killjoy. It's not that He wants us to abstain before marriage because he doesn't want us to have fun. Instead, He's doing what He always does: teaching us how to love even more deeply, even better than we ever imagined.

Penal Substitution vs Christus Victor

A quick warning. Here's where I start presenting stuff that's not your typical run-of-the-mill American evangelicism. If you were raised a certain way, you will likely think there are doctrinal errors in what I'm about to present. That's fine. I'm always open to the discussion. Here we go.

Have you ever heard this typical explanation of Jesus's death, and why it atoned for the sins of the world? It usually goes something like this:

God created us and loved us. However, in the Garden of Eden, we rebelled against His rule, and fell into a cycle of sin that separated us from Him. 

God wants to get us back, but there must be justice done. We are now evil creatures, and evil creatures need to have their sins atoned for. Yes, God is perfect love, but He is also perfect justice. And justice cannot allow our rebellion and evils to go unpunished. So God had a plan. He would send down His son. And the son would die on the cross, and on the cross, God would unleash all of the wrath He had stored for humanity upon His son. Jesus would pay off all the legal debts of our sin. If you put your faith in Jesus, God would look upon you as if you'd never sinned at all, because Jesus had already paid that debt on the cross.

Usually, a court of law analogy is used. You are the defendant. God is the judge. He fairly sentences you to Hell, but then Jesus comes in and says that he will take the punishment instead. God agrees, Jesus takes the punishment, and you are found innocent. You're free!

And now that I've explained the typical presentation of the Gospel, here's an article explaining why it's mostly wrong:

Penal Substitution vs Christus Victor: Understanding the Cross from the perspective of grace rather than legalism

This is important. I believe that a lot of atheists are jaded by the view that they have of God. I can't really blame them. An accurate picture of God is of vital importance, and I believe that the penal substitution model that is so often pushed is damaging in many ways, and people see God as less beautiful than He actually is.

I can honestly say this article changed my life. This article is pretty much the catalyst for me to really start exploring my Christian faith in a deeper way. I hope it atleast gets you thinking.

Fear Not of Man

"Well, from my understanding people get better
when they start to understand that, they are valuable
And they not valuable because they got a whole lot of money
or cause somebody, think they sexy
but they valuable cause they been created by God
And God makes you valuable
And whether or not you, recognize that value is one thing" - Mos Def

You are not defined by your resume, your looks, your skills, your power, your money. Society says that's what you're worth. You're not. Don't buy the lies of this world.

You are defined by being a precious creation that God loves, and would did die for. You are valuable because you are God's beloved, and He'd stoop down to our wicked, fallen world for you. That's your true value, that's your true worth. Don't forget it.

Man of Steel

On this blog, I plan on trying to point out the Christian motifs of movies I come across. I think it's a cool thingto do: it's good to see how our art portrays matters of faith. It helps us conceptualize these Christian ideas better. Stuff like that, ya know

However, for a Superman movie, I think this movie is surprisingly light on the Christian motifs, especially when you consider that Superman is an artistic rendition of the Messiah figure. But there's some stuff here...the stuff I did see was: ransom theory, and spiritual warfare.

Wikipedia Article: Ransom Theory

The analogy of the ransom theory seems intentional here. You essentially have a situation where General Zod holds the world captive, and demands Superman as the price for keeping the world safe. The Ransom Theory takes Jesus's words literally (Mark 10:45), where he states that he came to serve and give his life as a ransom for many. This theory also assumes that Satan has some sort of power or control over the world currently, which has Biblical support as well (1 John 5:19). The movie analogy gets sort of loose at this point: General Zod doesn't really have direct control of the world in this movie (although I suppose it could be argued he could easily take control at any moment.) The other loose part of the analogy is that Superman doesn't actually defeat death.. he just sort of breaks free from General Zod and continues the battle after that. But, on the whole, as a concept, it seems like a pretty decent portrayal of Ransom Theory.

The other major one that struck me was spiritual warfare. Admittedly, this could be seen in a bunch of major action movies, because the Good vs Evil motif is explored a lot. I think the most notable thing is the fate of the people involved in the crosshairs of the ongoing battle. There's collateral damage, a bunch of it. But it's not something that God wills. This relates to the problem of evil... there is no "reason" for people being hurt. Not all bad and evil things can be explained that easily. The battle between Supes/Zod, and how it ends up affecting humanity, gives us a decent glimpse at that.

The Cross and The Sword

This sermon series actually did change my life. No hyperbole here. If there's anything I would want anybody to read on this entire blog, this is it. It seems to me to be of massive importance.

If you knew me in high school or college, I was really into politics. I'm not anymore. If you wondered why that side of me seemed to fall off so drastically, this blog post is your answer.

This blog post also took a long time, because I felt my notes needed to do the sermon series justice. But then I realized that if I kept trying to write "perfect" notes, this would just never get done. So I encourage you to listen to the sermons if you're interested AT ALL about the relationship between Christianity and politics. I did the best I could with my notes, to keep it short (lol yeah right), but to convey all the information it needed to. In the future, I'll probably be revising these notes constantly anyways.

The Cross and the Sword: Sermon Series


What Kingdom Are We Fighting For?

There is a difference between the "Kingdom of the World" and "the Kingdom of God." And it makes all the difference, and since most Christians don't make a distinction, it has tragic consequences to the people the church are trying to reach AND the church itself.

Kingdom of the World (the Sword) - This is a "Power-Over" type of kingdom. In order to function, it conforms the behavior of its' citizens via threats ("don't break this law, or you'll go to jail"). It ultimately isn't concerned with motives, only behaviors. In other words: the state does not care that I hate my neighbor, it only cares that I do not murder him. Also by nature, it is tribal: it protects a certain group of people from other groups of people that may choose to harm it. It looks out for its' own citizens, they're the #1 priority ("bring jobs back to America!" is a common political sentiment)

Kingdom of God (the Cross) - This is a "Power-Under" type of kingdom. In order to function, it aims at serving its' citizens. This radical love and service will transform the heart of its' citizens, which will lead to changed behaviors, because they are changed people. They'll love because they first received love (1 John 4:19). It's all about the heart. If you hate your neighbor, you have murdered him (1 John 3:15.) By nature, it is also universal: there are no tribal restrictions as to who is allowed to enter the Kingdom of God. Americans aren't the #1 priority: all of humanity is. (Galatians 3:28)

Music: Josh Garrels

This guy is basically a Christian Bon Iver.

Jesus Starter Pack: Why believe in any of this?

Step One: Dealing with morality and the purpose/meaning of life

http://whchurch.org/sermons-media/other-media/conferences-seminars/letters-from-skeptic
Check out Week 2's Introduction: "Why Believe in God?"

OR

this testimony (it's the same as above, a bit more detailed):
http://reknew.org/2013/05/gregs-testimony/

OR

C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity (here's the entire book):
http://usminc.org/images/MereChristianitybyCSLewis.pdf


My notes: This is my favorite theologian, Greg Boyd (you'll be seeing a lot of him on this blog. Probably too much), and it's a sermon that revolves around his testimony. The main points revolve around dealing with finding meaning in life. He talks about his struggle with nihilism, dabbling in drugs and Eastern religions, and going in and out of the Christian faith.

The main tidbit here is his realization: If life has no purpose or meaning, why should human beings almost universally evolve to desire purpose and meaning? Where does that come from? There's no other unfulfilled desire in the world that has no answer for it: when we're hungry, we can eat. When we're horny, we can have sex. This is very similar to C.S. Lewis' main argument in Mere Christianity: If there is no meaning to life, how should we ever realize that there is none?


Step Two: Why believe in Jesus as the son of God

http://whchurch.org/sermons-media/sermon-series/jesus-for-thinking-people

Check out the entire series

My Notes (summary of the above sermons. However, I suggest you listen to it, because Boyd is much better at presenting this argument. I'm seriously just taking notes here):

Testimony

Eh, my testimony isn't the most exciting thing in the world. But I think it's probably the appropriate place to start anyways.

"Were you raised as a Christian?"

My testimony has to begin with the fact that I can't really answer that question. It's an ambiguous answer. I can give you both answers, "yes" or "no", and I don't feel like I'm lying either way.

I grew up in a household that doesn't talk about religion or spirituality. Like... at all. I can count all of the instances on one hand, and not even use up all my fingers on that hand. I remember my mom talking to us about my dad's Buddhist beliefs after my cat died. She explained the Buddhist hope of my cat reincarnating with better karma, which hopefully meant he came back as a "higher-level" species, perhaps even a human being. The only other time I've heard religion discussed is as an identity, as a part of a culture war, when my dad's family was (and still is) strained by religious differences. Then, at one time, there was a very quick discussion of Hell, spurred on by the fact that my parents asked me about what I watched at the movies that day (it was a documentary exploring the concept of Hell. yes, this is how i have fun. It was the first time I've ever been completely alone in a movie theater lol)

Those are the only times I can ever remember spirituality being discussed. In my family, it's just an entirely personal thing. My dad has told me on several occassions clearly: he doesn't care what I believe, but I should always respect what others believe. I mean, my dad's a Buddhist, and yet I don't even know if he goes to that Buddhist temple we have in town. That's how the dialogue of religion and spirituality works in our family: it's your own thing. It's personal, and on the level of my family as a unit, it's a non-factor.

Yet, in this environment, it still feels like God raised me as a Christian. There has been Christian influences throughout my life, enough to sustain me through my upbringing. In kindergarden, I went to a private school and learned basic Bible stories there. I'd also visit my family in Taiwan quite often, and from there, my Christian aunt continued my Christian upbringing (after i expressed an interest in it, because of the Bible stories I had been taught in school). Although these trips to Taiwan were only during the summer, it was enough for me to take these teachings to heart. There were other little things sprinkled in, like I remember going to a Vacation Bible School as a kid (at the recommendation of a family friend), and being in productions of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat in summer camp, but the bulk of my spiritual growth came from my aunt in Taiwan.

Introduction

Hi guys. I'm just a regular dude exploring Christianity. It's been a journey, and somewhere along the line, I realized I just wanted to keep track of all the great stuff I come across. I wanted to organize it so I could refer back to it all... so in actuality, this blog might be more for myself than anything else. HOWEVER, I do believe that a lot of the stuff I come across is really really frickin good, and I wish more people knew about it! So hopefully, whoever is reading this eventually gets as much out of this as I do. Cool? Cool.

I think, in general, I'll just be posting stuff I come across, and if I feel my input would help, I'll add my thoughts as well. Sadly, I don't quite think I'm too eloquent, so if I don't feel I can add much valuable input, I'll probably just keep my trap shut. We'll see, I guess.

Small warning: I might post stuff that won't seem exactly Christian... Good. I don't really want a blog filled with your textbook Christian cliches. I'm aiming to not hold anything back. I believe any atheists who happen to stumble across this blog would appreciate that. And ultimately, in the eyes of other Christians, some of the stuff I put here will challenge their concept of Christianity (I hope it does! It's a faith worth exploring), or I may have simply strayed into heresy. Either way, I don't mind too much... I ultimately am pretty confident in my relationship with Jesus Christ. I get my life and value and worth from a relationship, not from correct theological beliefs. But of course, any Christian brothers/sisters reading can point out anything if they'd like (act as a heresy-check), and I'd love feedback.

Here goes.