Duct Tape and, Evolution is Politics

I know, like every good, red-blooded, American male that you need two things to make really tough things stick together in the face of impossible circumstances: Duct-tape, preferably lots of it, and MacGuyver on hand in case you don't remember how to do it without a ball-point pen and paper-clip. Newsweek seems, unfortunately, to have neither. And unfortunately neither do many Christians. In this absence, those writing the article and some it is writing of only demonstrate exactly what evolution truly is: A "political" decision in beliefs, one that retains its commitment not to science or even reasonable thought but one that will vote for anything (or against anything) as long as it isn't for a Creator God that could hold us all responsible! Upon reading a recent article over at Newsweek entitled: God's Numbers I was struck by two things. First, the subline has an odd "also." Second, the conclusion other stats in the article seem to make of Christians is also "odd."

"The latest NEWSWEEK poll shows that 91 percent of American adults surveyed believe in God—and nearly half reject the theory of evolution. Also, Americans on John Edwards and the Senate's goal for troop withdrawal."

I must admit I am struck by the staggering numbers that are listed there but struck even more by the absence of any discussion concerning the facts that seem to support such large numbers. How could anyone record,

"Nearly half (48 percent) of the public rejects the scientific theory of evolution; one-third (34 percent) of college graduates say they accept the Biblical account of creation as fact. Seventy-three percent of Evangelical Protestants say they believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years; 39 percent of non-Evangelical Protestants and 41 percent of Catholics agree with that view."

and not do a little digging on why so many are convinced of the faults in the theory of macro-Evolution? Where is the discussion about the giant of Evolution teetering at the top of an ill-defensible beanstalk? Where is the investigation of the many scientists, philosophers and theologians all standing at the bottom of the stalk pointing at its shallow roots speaking of its impending fall? That is regardless of the fact that, any little boy (or girl) armed with the axe of thermodynamics could chop it down with one swing. Can you see anyone trying to quickly unfurl as much Duct tape around the falling base of that vine? Is MacGuyver there? No, he is too smart for that. What is it that almost fifty-percent of the public sees that Newsweek won't investigate? Give me a break. Is there nothing more interesting about the decay of evolutionary explanations in every realm of science and the consistent juggernaut of Scriptural testament marching over it with the combined and the consistent models for a lawgiver in the realm of natural laws and the mass of people who believe so in one fashion or another? Should it be quickly left with an "also?" Where's the integrity? But of course, that is the issue. This isn't an issue of integrity, evolutionary debate hasn't been for a long time. Perhaps it was early on--Darwin sure said so enough times. His consistent expectations that he could be disproved over the thinnest of arguments is well known. He knew the beanstalk was thin! Yet, the allegiance of the world is not to evolution, it is a political decision to be loyal to anything but God. Romans 1:18 and following makes that clear if one would read it... (Romans 1) Evolution really isn't about science, it is about politics and voting for any idea that would proffer even the thinnest excuse for a life without a responsibility to a Creator God.

(See an interesting article by Edward Humes, writing for the LA Times, as he tries to brush off evolutionary challenges with a re-invention of its definition-something
he accuses those proposing intelligent design of doing. Note his "absense" of presuppositional bias in the title of his book the article refers to in header. His effort at justifying macro-evolution by referring to micro-evolutionary proofs is like trying to explain the speed and nature of stellar light by watching the lights on a Christmas tree flicker in a dim living room. Insufficient, even if they seem to relate doesn't begin to describe it. The truth is he himself is joining in the "dumbing down of evolution..to kill it." Look for the line where he says: the "real" evolution, "does not try to explain how life originated — that remains a mystery. The truth is that many scientists accept evolution and believe in God.")

Why? why, why, why? This tragic irony in both articles mentioned impresses me with a second, even stranger thing. Strange, not because it was unexpected but because it should appear so to anyone reading. The Newsweek article says:

"A belief in God and an identification with an organized religion are widespread throughout the country, according to the latest NEWSWEEK poll. Nine in 10 (91 percent) of American adults say they believe in God and almost as many (87 percent) say they identify with a specific religion. Christians far outnumber members of any other faith in the country, with 82 percent of the poll’s respondents identifying themselves as such."

I like to tease math teachers about "when are we ever going to use the stuff?" but I would like to demonstrate it now for those watching as I actually just like the teasing and use it all the time, of course. Her we go: 90 percent of Americans believe in God with 82 percent claiming to be Christian. (I am not going to debate labels versus actual citizenship in the universal invisible body of Christ--just go with the numbers for now, its math!) And, 48 percent of the total disbelieve in evolution. That means, discluding the overlap of those from the ten-twenty percent that aren't Christian, there are a lot of Christians that remain in their insecurity concerning Genesis and actually believe in an evolutionary model of Creation despite the current teetering of the theory in general! The only question is why? There are now Christians holding onto something that a large percentage of top-of-their-field scientists question, and some aren't even Christian! I find it incredibly strange that such a large percentage of Christians, even those labeled "Evangelical Protestants" (about thirty percent,) don't feel more comfortable sticking with the revelation of God starting with the first book of the Bible and the first line, "In the Beginning God created the Heavens and Earth." What is it that almost fifty percent of the public (including some "Christians") do not see? Why wouldn't they do the same digging that the Newsweek writers wouldn't? Could this be politics as well? It ought not to be.

Consider the words of Romans 1 again, yet only a few verses prior to the verse I pointed to prior, verses 16-17: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith,as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” It is the power of God! I am missing the politics there. Keep in mind the context then of the very next verse and its contrast! It is the wrath of God revealed from heaven against those who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. Would any believer want to put that "old man" from which he was saved, back on? Yeah, I will stir the pot and say it- Christ died for such unrighteousness! The response of the believer is to be the opposite. In fact, 2 Corinthians 10:5 says, "We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." As Romans 1:16-17 points out, our God is not only a Creator-God, he is a Redeemer as well. The non-debate over macro-Evolution and Creationism is one in which no believer should question their position or belief. The text of Scripture is clear (despite the attempts of textual critics) as is the evidence found in Creation. Even if a believer doesn't understand the intricate debates in science over information origins, semiotics, or irreducible complexity (for a good start though, you can head over to AIG) every believer can be sure of the steadfast Word of the Lord and we have the answers therein that will destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God. Not relying on Scripture is like taking that Duct-Tape and placing it over our eyes, and certainly over our mouths. We should not be counted in the camp of evolution-politicians, and certainly not forget the incredible weight of a text that has stood longer than any other known to man. It is not an issue of pride, that we ourselves have the knowledge or, that we could have come to it without God's grace but, that it is secure for use. Delving first in Scripture and the delving of God's Creation as natural revelation, not the voting of politically motivated "science," should be our effort and argument. No believer should ever be sorry to be little Jack chopping at the thin and shallow root that holds Evolution in the clouds. That giant will fall even if Newsweek doesn't think so, or John Edwards, myself, you or, anyone silly enough to try and stand on the thing stalk of political science. Duct-tape in hand is nice but not helpful in this case.


PS: This article in no way disparages the use of Duct-tape. You should keep your Duct-Tape but for other things like, fixing car engines or, locking your bedroom door or, carefully preserving the bind on silly Newsweek magazines.

Why Pray, indeed?

I was recently speaking with another Christian (yes, Christian--for those that will gasp when I finish this sentence)that happens to be an "Arminian." It is not that I think necessarily that he would even qualify himself this way but the term sums up what he said by the end of our conversation. "I just don't understand why anyone could believe in this predestination stuff," he said in mixed company. I say mixed because I realized shortly that he was actually speaking with a group of people comprised of those with similar understanding as he...that is all but me, a pretty avowed biblical Calvinist.


(Insert sound of oxygen leaving the room as those reading this debate whether I am a good Christian for being in the same room as an Arminian or others fill their lungs with horror because I just associated Christian and Calvinist.) I am pretty sure he didn't know my own understanding of Scripture as he continued to disparage the doctrines of what has been labeled "Calvinism" with a good amount of fervor, even suggesting that it may have something to do with people's understanding of Scripture as to why they maintained such error. I politely listened, I love the man, and decided to just consider his argument. Anyone that knows me will tell you that I am not afraid to jump into such debate with perhaps more than the necessary counter-fervor but I do believe it is important to do something strange every once in a while and, yup, listen. I am glad I did. The more he spoke the more his very set beliefs seemed to move further than Scripture itself and this was more than unfortunate. It slipped largely into an argument based upon love and God's and "logic" concerning man's decision-making abilities with little reference to Scripture at all. (By the way, you can check my Shelfari in the left column for a book that addresses God's Love and issues of "logic"and others with real excellence by, John MacArthur, Jr.)
I decided to ponder on his considerations as a matter of preparing a better response to such debate in the future. As I was pondering it throughout the week the Lord brought many passages to mind that I could list out here in machine-gun-style but many would be known by both sides of the argument with presuppositions already formed. Then, last night my wife told me something of a discussion she had at Bible study. In the course of her conversation with the other ladies they were considering Lydia and the special grace God showed in calling her to himself. Then, repeating the conclusions of another author they were considering my wife repeated something very profound--"Why Pray?" She wasn't' asking, she was telling. I had a real moment of clarity-that which is so clarion it can only be the Holy Spirit's breath over the repeated discussion of the Word. (I love it when that happens.)
I have often studied passages in the Psalms,commands in the New Testament to pray "without ceasing" and Christ's examples and parables in response to the disciples' question, "teach us to pray" and never had the practical conclusion her simple words impressed. I have even taught others on prayer, stressing its positioning of the believer correctly before God, in obedience and glorification with a healthy dose of total reliance. I have encouraged others to pray for others and their salvation as the right pleading of a believer for the lost, just as much, as a participation not only in the ordained ends of God but his means as well. Yet, I had never just considered the simple question: If God is not the total agent of salvation, then why pray to him as agent in the salvation of others? In fact, why pray to God to accomplish anything if he cannot accomplish this great and necessary task in the heart of the believer. Why would one be satisfied requesting self-provisions, bread, food, water, home, if these alone God supplies? Would God supply these alone to those he loves? Would he answer the believers as a hateful father giving only these lesser things but not that which we desperately need? And would he prescribe prayer not only by command but example in Christ himself? It is almost as "illogical" to assume such as a father giving his son a snake when he asks for fish! Is any believer willing to stand up and say, "Yeah, you know, I only pray because I love my friend and want him to come to Christ, but I know God can only wait for him?" Wouldn't it make more sense to pray to the individual you want to be "saved" by this impotent God than to pray to that God which cannot effect the salvation of he for whom you pray?
The Arminian (including that dear man I listened to in"discussion") must first assume a God able to move with Sovereign impunity to accomplish the salvation of those loved ones, or enemies, for whom they pray. Of course, so do I, and that isn't Arminian, that is decidedly Calvinist--it smacks of predestination and God's total sovereignty. Such a conception is a prerequisite for all prayer--including even Christ's prayer in Luke 11. To the non-Calvinist (specifically, those that deny God's predestination) the main issue is that of God's designation of those whom he will save and those he will not. The bur is the passages that seem to suggest that man is responsible for "choosing" God. This logical dilemma has answers and I would suggest that it is first solved by a reference to Scripture and then if the dilemma continues perhaps praying to the God who loves to reveal himself, sovereignly, transcendent and intimate and hears every word we utter--and can do something about it. Boy, I am glad he not only hears my words in prayer and responds: "My dear son, I wish that person wanted to be saved too...but there is nothing I can do about it. I guess we will have to wait and see what they do..."

For more on this subject from those who are more knowledgeable than I, see: Why I Am a Calvinist (Summary & Conclusion) over at Pulpit Magazine.

The Pathway to Pro-Voucher (or Pro-Private School)

I was planning to continue my blog "welcome to Meph's Table" but I must admit the entry at WorldViews today: No child left ahead, caught my attention a little. It should be (and certainly I make no bones about it) no surprise that I teach at a private school--a very good one in my opinion. Find here if interested: Briarwood. With that admission to "bias" I would love to direct eyes to the article over at WorldViews. Can any one begin to wonder at why the scores that continue to come out about school performance continue to "surprise?" Come on.


-MC

Powered by ScribeFire.

Welcome to Meph's (1): The Cripple Usurper

For those of you that may be wondering about what this web site is all about perhaps it would be best to start with the meaning of its name:
Meph’s Table is short for: “Mephibosheth’s Table.” Mephibosheth is a real person born a few thousand years ago to a lineage well documented in history. No serious historian denies his existence. His breath and form are verified both by the largest body of known historical records and archaeological evidences. In some senses there is greater proof he existed than the great Caesar! There is no question he lived. The story isn't that he lived, rather it is how he ever did.

Mephibosheth had the “misfortune” to be born the son of the King’s only heir, Jonathon. Misfortune because, when the King, Saul, had died Jonathon would have been made king but he too had perished in battle. The death of Mephibosheth's grandfather wasn't just a token to mourn it was a point of intense fear. A rival warlord had claimed the throne and Mephibosheth, through virtue of his lineage, became the only remaing claimant to the throne. At the news of the King’s death Mephibosheth was only an infant and incredibly vulnerable. His very life was sure to welcome the transported vengeance of the new king and the lord's need to eliminate any potential challenge to the throne.
Thus, Mephibosheth, a small five-year old secured a violent threat to life. In a moment, he would have been concerned with making mud, chasing small bugs, and trying to save them in his room and then, like that last thought before waking up-- it was gone. He was in danger and he didn't know it but his nursemaid did. When the shocking news came of the king's death she was holding Mephibosheth. She may have been sitting on the floor playing with blocks,he in her lap, or maybe carrying him from room to room as children that age will require. No one knows but, we do know with the child in her arms she made to flee as soon as the news met her ears. There was no time for packing or getting his toys. Only time enough to try and catch little Mephibosheth tightly into her arms and run. She knew the danger and it swept over her like a pale of a storm and in her haste to flee that very moment, she did that which she regretted her whole life: She dropped the young Mephibosheth from her arms. And he fell.
Mephibosheth's fall was as long as a convict's gaze upon the motion of a gavel felling upon a judge's bench. In that moment, the five-year old child was condemned to a life of bounds no five-year old in all their energy and verve could ever imagine possible. Due to his fall, this young boy would most certainly be crippled for life. Perhaps, if only...maybe, if his nursemaid had taken the time to stop and get the help he would have needed after such a fall? But no, there was no time, they had need to flee! What is a child's legs if he be dead and in the ground? Those feet don't run either. Or, it could be the fall was so great that nothing could be done anyway. Certainly, the love of the nursemaid cannot be questioned as she could just have abandoned young Mephibosheth’s life the moment she heard he was a pariah. Nevertheless, Mephibosheth's life-- oh the mourning! Can you not see the great helplessness of that babe! Do you see yourself trying to catch him in his fall? Yet your reach just misses him. There, twisted and broken, laying on the earth unable to rise, weeping and heaving as if he had saved all his emotions for that very moment his life becomes doubly dangerous. Not only would that tear stained young boy that just met the space beyond reach grow to live life as a marked man but as one indefensible and completely,utterly unable. Yet it was many years later that Mephibosheth was to truly learn the peril he faced, the peril that a child may not know, but an adult would, the peril of this potential cripple usurper.

2 Samuel 4

ESV Bible Blog

I had a much longer (and far more pithy) post prepared in light of the following, but Blogger just killed it. This will have to do for now: Wow! Go check this out: ESV Bible Blog