We very rarely encounter formally stated logical arguments but very frequently encounter arguments being made calling themselves logical arguments. How is a person to evaluate the claim being made? In my major, philosophy, this is something that we focus on a lot. Following the rule of charity we should reconstruct someone's argument by putting it in general form. The rule of charity is that you should always try as best you can to reconstruct someone's argument before evaluating it.
All logical arguments are either deductive or inductive. Deductive logic is the easiest and most intuitive for people to understand. I believe that part of what it means to be human is to think rationally. I also believe that God built the ability to see logical truths into the human mind. Inductive logic has not been formalized and does not give us the precision accuracy that deductive logic does. Here is one of the easiest general forms for a 2 premise deductive logical argument
P1. If X then Y
P2. X
___________
C. Y
P stands for premise and they are numbered in sequential order. C stands for conclusion.
This is most basic type of deductive logical argument in general form. By adding premises and sub conclusions they get increasingly complicated.
When evaluating a logical argument you cannot dismiss the conclusion because you don't like it or it doesn't fit into the framework of your preconceived notions. It is the truth of the premises that give the conclusion its justification. So if you want to evaluate an argument you analyze the premises NOT the conclusion. If you can falsify one of the premises, which occurs when you show a counter example to the premise, then you can logically reject the conclusion. If any one of the premises can be shown to be false then the conclusion must be rejected because it relies on the truth of all of the premises for it to be justified as true.
This is very entry level understanding of deductive logic and I would encourage everyone to take a logic course to understand it better. For those of you at Clarion, enroll in Dr. Phillips Logic 1 class, he teaches at least 1 section every semester.
Join the Relentless Fight Against Opression!
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
EPISTEMOLOGY: A Descartes Joke
Credit for this joke does not belong to me but my friend Chris.
Descartes walked into a bar and the bar tender asked him if he wanted a drink. Descartes said "I think not" and then he immediately vanished in a puff of logic. ;)
Descartes is famous for his foundational belief called the cogito, which is "I think therefore I am". It is the only indubitable claim that we can know, which means it cannot be doubted, because when you try to doubt your existence you have to do it by thinking which proves that you exist. If you don't get it then ask me about it sometime.
Descartes walked into a bar and the bar tender asked him if he wanted a drink. Descartes said "I think not" and then he immediately vanished in a puff of logic. ;)
Descartes is famous for his foundational belief called the cogito, which is "I think therefore I am". It is the only indubitable claim that we can know, which means it cannot be doubted, because when you try to doubt your existence you have to do it by thinking which proves that you exist. If you don't get it then ask me about it sometime.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
EVANGELISM: The Invitation to the person of Jesus
In InterVarsity we talk a lot about doing evangelism as a natural outflow of our love for Christ and a step into maturity for the Christian. What is our mindset about sharing the Gospel? I confess that up until this point I have been treating Jesus Christ as a theological concept instead of real person. I have been acting as Jesus defense in the trial of life to all skeptics of His existence, divinity, and relevance to their lives.
The New Testament is full of examples of disciples of Christ given their testimony to the skeptics and the nonbelievers. Upon a fresher look at these examples I realized that somewhere along the way I forgot about Jesus role in evangelism. That I am not inviting someone only to subscribe to a set of intellectual beliefs but to the real and ALIVE person of Jesus Christ. York Moore, an IV evangelist, actually phrased this Truth better than I could by saying that God is inviting us to take part in the work His is already doing in the hearts of nonbelievers and skeptics all over the world.
These Truths of God already doing the work of evangelism and the person of Jesus Christ as who we invite people to meet, should change our mindset of evangelism. We should be excited about who God must have set up to talk with us about the most amazing Truth in the whole world. We should invite skeptics to wrestle with the claims of Jesus in the Gospels and to trust that the Holy Spirit is the one doing the convicting in the hearts of humans. This may seem simple to you but an amazing Truth to me that I have forgotten.
The New Testament is full of examples of disciples of Christ given their testimony to the skeptics and the nonbelievers. Upon a fresher look at these examples I realized that somewhere along the way I forgot about Jesus role in evangelism. That I am not inviting someone only to subscribe to a set of intellectual beliefs but to the real and ALIVE person of Jesus Christ. York Moore, an IV evangelist, actually phrased this Truth better than I could by saying that God is inviting us to take part in the work His is already doing in the hearts of nonbelievers and skeptics all over the world.
These Truths of God already doing the work of evangelism and the person of Jesus Christ as who we invite people to meet, should change our mindset of evangelism. We should be excited about who God must have set up to talk with us about the most amazing Truth in the whole world. We should invite skeptics to wrestle with the claims of Jesus in the Gospels and to trust that the Holy Spirit is the one doing the convicting in the hearts of humans. This may seem simple to you but an amazing Truth to me that I have forgotten.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
METAPHYSICS: Is Life After Death Possible?
The following is a deductive argument for life after death being possible.
P1. Some individuals have survived the death of their body
P2. Actuality entails possibility
P3. There is no relevant distinction between myself and those individuals
_____________________________________________
C. It is possible that I can survive the death of my body
The evidence in support of premise 1 is the many accounts of near-death experiences that have been documented by doctors in hospitals, the resurrection of Christ, and many others.
Premise 2 is a simple logical truth that cannot be refuted.
Premise 3 is true for the near-death experience people. There is a major distinction between Christ and any of us in that He was God and man, while we are only human. In the other historical accounts of Biblical figures being resurrected like Lazarus and Dorkus there is no relevant distinction.
What I love about this argument is the skill of using premise 2. While the conclusion of the argument is not a strong Truth claim it at least leaves the door open for a deeper consideration of a spiritual world for the materialist. All you have to do is prove that at least 1 person in all of history has survived the death of their body and that makes it possible for it to be true for anyone else!
P1. Some individuals have survived the death of their body
P2. Actuality entails possibility
P3. There is no relevant distinction between myself and those individuals
_____________________________________________
C. It is possible that I can survive the death of my body
The evidence in support of premise 1 is the many accounts of near-death experiences that have been documented by doctors in hospitals, the resurrection of Christ, and many others.
Premise 2 is a simple logical truth that cannot be refuted.
Premise 3 is true for the near-death experience people. There is a major distinction between Christ and any of us in that He was God and man, while we are only human. In the other historical accounts of Biblical figures being resurrected like Lazarus and Dorkus there is no relevant distinction.
What I love about this argument is the skill of using premise 2. While the conclusion of the argument is not a strong Truth claim it at least leaves the door open for a deeper consideration of a spiritual world for the materialist. All you have to do is prove that at least 1 person in all of history has survived the death of their body and that makes it possible for it to be true for anyone else!
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
INTERVARSITY: 10 Reasons Why I Love IVCF
1. Student Leadership. A core commitment of IV is that it is a student run fellowship on each campus. The great benefit of student leadership is that the students better understand the spiritual needs of the campus and it creates an indigenous group that reflects the Christian students of the campus. IV does not go around the country and have a cookie cutter mold that they make ever campus fit into. They have core commitments which are essential to a Christian fellowship but the specifics are formed by the student leaders of each chapter.
2. Women in Leadership. IV has the reputation of propelling women in positions of leadership without the student chapters and in the organization as a whole. This has been a place of growth for me since I have come to college but I have learned how the correct interpretations of leadership show that it is fully Biblical for women to take these positions. IV is at the forefront of this church issue and celebrates the gifts that Christian women bring to our chapters. I am personally serving on our chapters servant leadership team with 4 sisters in Christ. While I would love to have more men represented on the team I do not doubt God's gifting to my 4 amazing sisters in Christ.
3. Biblical Training. What thrust me into the vision and passion of our IV chapter was attending my first conference, Chapter FOCUS Week, at the end of my freshmen year. There I received amazing Bible expositions and practical tools to grow deeper in my faith and live it out loud back on campus. I can mark the milestones of my spiritual journey at IV conferences, because at each one God met me in a specific area of my life that I need to grow. These great training conferences included: School of Leadership Training, Global Projects, MAC Training, Urban Plunges, Urbana Missions Convention, Fall and Spring Conferences, and Chapter FOCUS Week.
4. InterVarsity Press. Being a logical minded person who loves to worship God with my mind I love to read books that grow my faith. IV Press is committed to publishing Bible centered teaching on specific issues of growth for the church. IV Press has a reputation of scholarly work. Christian scholars who want to publish there books come to IVP because they know they have an audience of college students and faculty and a history of scholarly publications.
5. Evangelism. The deeper I go into the leadership of IV the more I see a heart and passion for evangelism from people who have the gift and from those who don't. Since coming to Clarion this has been an area of huge growth for me. IV has taught me how important conversational evangelism and friendship evangelism is and the relevance to the college campus. On our campus IV is the Christian fellowship who is always pushing for more evangelism and is willing to be bold in proclaiming Truth in compelling ways to our campus.
6. IV Staff. Jesse, my staff worker, has had more of a positive impact on my spiritual growth that any other single person in my 5 years of college. Jesse continually challenges me in the areas that I am weak and encourages me in the areas of my strengths. All the IV staff that I have ever met at conferences love their job and love building up college students to be successful in leading their chapters. This has had such a positive impact on me that I have been called to participate in the ministry by going on staff. Jesse has now become more than just my staff worker but my friend as well.
7. Social Justice. I have not really thought much of my responsibility as a Christian to stand up and fight for social injustice in the world. I guess this comes from a very narrow view of my world being the world. Participating in IV conferences has taught me that I need to view my faith through the lens of AIDS, genocide, child sex slaves, and all other kinds of oppression. This is a relatively new area of growth for me but I am really open to it. I love how IV is so committed to putting hands and feet on Christianity and wanting to teach students how to use their position of privilege to stand up for the oppressed people who have no voice.
8. Racial Reconciliation. My personal growth in this area has only been in the past 2 years. Sadly this is an area that the Christian Church as a whole is very lacking in. IV is committed to the hard task of helping students of different ethnicities reconcile their differences and celebrate their diversity in Christian community. The IVP book More Than Equals is one of the best books written on the subject. This is a hard area of growth for me as a white person to admit that my former views were racist and that I need to be proactive in sacrificing my culture and comfort to go into the culture of other ethnicities and build them up not by making them assimilate into my culture but learning how to lift up their culture and bring it into the spotlight.
9. Vision. One of the most attractive things about IV for me is their vision to make world changers. It is so full of passion and identifies the strategic place that the university campus is. The top 1% of the worlds population graduate from college with a degree. These are the people who will run the businesses of the future, make the laws, publish books, educate our youth, and create tomorrow's media. In short, these are the people who will change the world for better or for worse in the future. The more that become Christians in college the more Christian workers who represent a Biblical worldview in the secular marketplace. Change the University and you change the world!
10. Inductive Bible Study. IV is fully committed to the inductive Bible study method. I had never heard of this kind of Bible study before and as I have learned that most people outside Bible college never hear of this study method. This method has truly revolutionized the way I understand and read the Bible. It completely reveals the Bible for all its wonderful mystery. It guards anyone who uses it from bad interpretations and shows the Bible's academic value. I love the inductive Bible study method, I have never learned so much in my spiritual growth prior to college then I have in the last five years of college at my inductive Bible studies. When done with a manuscript it makes you do the hard work of observing then in the context of community discover the riches it has to offer. I still love to look back over my manuscripts from the past 5 years of inductive Bible studies and see what I have learned.
2. Women in Leadership. IV has the reputation of propelling women in positions of leadership without the student chapters and in the organization as a whole. This has been a place of growth for me since I have come to college but I have learned how the correct interpretations of leadership show that it is fully Biblical for women to take these positions. IV is at the forefront of this church issue and celebrates the gifts that Christian women bring to our chapters. I am personally serving on our chapters servant leadership team with 4 sisters in Christ. While I would love to have more men represented on the team I do not doubt God's gifting to my 4 amazing sisters in Christ.
3. Biblical Training. What thrust me into the vision and passion of our IV chapter was attending my first conference, Chapter FOCUS Week, at the end of my freshmen year. There I received amazing Bible expositions and practical tools to grow deeper in my faith and live it out loud back on campus. I can mark the milestones of my spiritual journey at IV conferences, because at each one God met me in a specific area of my life that I need to grow. These great training conferences included: School of Leadership Training, Global Projects, MAC Training, Urban Plunges, Urbana Missions Convention, Fall and Spring Conferences, and Chapter FOCUS Week.
4. InterVarsity Press. Being a logical minded person who loves to worship God with my mind I love to read books that grow my faith. IV Press is committed to publishing Bible centered teaching on specific issues of growth for the church. IV Press has a reputation of scholarly work. Christian scholars who want to publish there books come to IVP because they know they have an audience of college students and faculty and a history of scholarly publications.
5. Evangelism. The deeper I go into the leadership of IV the more I see a heart and passion for evangelism from people who have the gift and from those who don't. Since coming to Clarion this has been an area of huge growth for me. IV has taught me how important conversational evangelism and friendship evangelism is and the relevance to the college campus. On our campus IV is the Christian fellowship who is always pushing for more evangelism and is willing to be bold in proclaiming Truth in compelling ways to our campus.
6. IV Staff. Jesse, my staff worker, has had more of a positive impact on my spiritual growth that any other single person in my 5 years of college. Jesse continually challenges me in the areas that I am weak and encourages me in the areas of my strengths. All the IV staff that I have ever met at conferences love their job and love building up college students to be successful in leading their chapters. This has had such a positive impact on me that I have been called to participate in the ministry by going on staff. Jesse has now become more than just my staff worker but my friend as well.
7. Social Justice. I have not really thought much of my responsibility as a Christian to stand up and fight for social injustice in the world. I guess this comes from a very narrow view of my world being the world. Participating in IV conferences has taught me that I need to view my faith through the lens of AIDS, genocide, child sex slaves, and all other kinds of oppression. This is a relatively new area of growth for me but I am really open to it. I love how IV is so committed to putting hands and feet on Christianity and wanting to teach students how to use their position of privilege to stand up for the oppressed people who have no voice.
8. Racial Reconciliation. My personal growth in this area has only been in the past 2 years. Sadly this is an area that the Christian Church as a whole is very lacking in. IV is committed to the hard task of helping students of different ethnicities reconcile their differences and celebrate their diversity in Christian community. The IVP book More Than Equals is one of the best books written on the subject. This is a hard area of growth for me as a white person to admit that my former views were racist and that I need to be proactive in sacrificing my culture and comfort to go into the culture of other ethnicities and build them up not by making them assimilate into my culture but learning how to lift up their culture and bring it into the spotlight.
9. Vision. One of the most attractive things about IV for me is their vision to make world changers. It is so full of passion and identifies the strategic place that the university campus is. The top 1% of the worlds population graduate from college with a degree. These are the people who will run the businesses of the future, make the laws, publish books, educate our youth, and create tomorrow's media. In short, these are the people who will change the world for better or for worse in the future. The more that become Christians in college the more Christian workers who represent a Biblical worldview in the secular marketplace. Change the University and you change the world!
10. Inductive Bible Study. IV is fully committed to the inductive Bible study method. I had never heard of this kind of Bible study before and as I have learned that most people outside Bible college never hear of this study method. This method has truly revolutionized the way I understand and read the Bible. It completely reveals the Bible for all its wonderful mystery. It guards anyone who uses it from bad interpretations and shows the Bible's academic value. I love the inductive Bible study method, I have never learned so much in my spiritual growth prior to college then I have in the last five years of college at my inductive Bible studies. When done with a manuscript it makes you do the hard work of observing then in the context of community discover the riches it has to offer. I still love to look back over my manuscripts from the past 5 years of inductive Bible studies and see what I have learned.
Monday, February 12, 2007
LAW: The Slippery Slope of Selective Obedience
I was talking with my friend Steve and someone made a comment about how Dr. Rourke wouldn't let anyone jaywalk on the streets of Washington, D.C. while we were there for the March for Life. Then Steve asked me, do you know why he doesn't do that? I wasn't sure, then Steve responded explaining how Dr. Rourke has a conviction that as a Christian he cannot pick and choose which laws to break and which to obey, because it becomes a slippery slope of continually making compromises that start out small and eventually end in ruin. How interesting!
This of course got me pondering over this concept. Should this be a standard by which all Christians should follow?
About 2 years ago my best friend and former roommate, Greg, was convicted about his use of illegal software and collection of illegal media. He uninstalled all the illegal software and deleted the install files and deleted his illegal media. This really fascinated me because just 2 years earlier during our freshmen year Greg was hording all of the illegal software he could find and even bragging about how large his collection got. This is a dramatic change my friends. Myself and Niki (now his beautiful wife) were surprised that he would do such a thing. I remember thinking how it seemed unnecessary and breaking such a small law wasn't hurting anyone.
Was Greg's collection of illegal software and media hurting anyone? Was his action of deleting it unnecessary?
For as long as I have known him, my missionary friend Sam, was always a gentle and compassionate man of God. He was also known for never going above the speed limit (even if it meant being late) when driving. I heard many of my friends from home make comments about how he is really extreme in his convictions, especially about obeying the speed limit.
Is Sam being extreme by not breaking the law? Since when did obeying the law become extreme to Christians?
I cited these 3 examples because I can think of many Christians who break all these "unnecessary" laws very frequently. To those it applies, why do you do it? Why do I do it? I break all 3 of these examples just about everyday. The sad thing is that no one has ever called me out on it except for Greg, who one day asked me why do I still have illegal software and media on my computer? I had no answer for him because I knew I was breaking the law on purpose. He didn't mention it anymore. He didn't have to, because I knew I was wrong.
Why do so many of us in the Body of Christ purposefully break these laws? We should be challenging each other to do better. The only example we find of Jesus breaking the laws are when the violate God's Word. The Pharisees twisted many of God's laws into keeping a set of rituals instead of worshiping God. These are the only times that Jesus breaks the law, because they violated the law of God in the Torah. The same is true for the Apostles. Peter and John were brought before the Sanhedrin in Acts 5 and were commanded to not preach in the name of Jesus. They broke this law because it went against God's commands. It is not documented anywhere in Scripture where anyone broke a law other than if it was contrary to the will or commands of God.
How many of us, Christians, would call Jesus extreme today? Not because of his teachings or times when he did purposefully break the laws but for all the times he obeyed them?
I agree with Dr. Rourke that we are setting ourselves up for a slippery slope to fall down when we pick and choose which laws to obey. Imagine if a non-Christian called you out on it, you would look as stupid as I did when Greg asked me the question. We would be hypocrites. Any Christian who does this would also wash out the foundation of the moral standard that God holds for us.
The more I learn about God and grow closer to Him, the more I am beginning to see how consistency in all areas of my life is what He wants. This is true Lordship of Jesus Christ. If you break even the smallest law that is not against God's will or Word, you are sinning. This includes me.
Since I want to purge my life of all sin so that I can run faster to Jesus and be more effective witness I am deleting all my illegal media. I have already deleted my illegal software. I am also going to follow the example of brother Sam and only drive the speed limit. I hope that you will follow my example as I am trying to follow Jesus, like my awesome brothers Dr. Rourke, Greg, and Sam.
This of course got me pondering over this concept. Should this be a standard by which all Christians should follow?
About 2 years ago my best friend and former roommate, Greg, was convicted about his use of illegal software and collection of illegal media. He uninstalled all the illegal software and deleted the install files and deleted his illegal media. This really fascinated me because just 2 years earlier during our freshmen year Greg was hording all of the illegal software he could find and even bragging about how large his collection got. This is a dramatic change my friends. Myself and Niki (now his beautiful wife) were surprised that he would do such a thing. I remember thinking how it seemed unnecessary and breaking such a small law wasn't hurting anyone.
Was Greg's collection of illegal software and media hurting anyone? Was his action of deleting it unnecessary?
For as long as I have known him, my missionary friend Sam, was always a gentle and compassionate man of God. He was also known for never going above the speed limit (even if it meant being late) when driving. I heard many of my friends from home make comments about how he is really extreme in his convictions, especially about obeying the speed limit.
Is Sam being extreme by not breaking the law? Since when did obeying the law become extreme to Christians?
I cited these 3 examples because I can think of many Christians who break all these "unnecessary" laws very frequently. To those it applies, why do you do it? Why do I do it? I break all 3 of these examples just about everyday. The sad thing is that no one has ever called me out on it except for Greg, who one day asked me why do I still have illegal software and media on my computer? I had no answer for him because I knew I was breaking the law on purpose. He didn't mention it anymore. He didn't have to, because I knew I was wrong.
Why do so many of us in the Body of Christ purposefully break these laws? We should be challenging each other to do better. The only example we find of Jesus breaking the laws are when the violate God's Word. The Pharisees twisted many of God's laws into keeping a set of rituals instead of worshiping God. These are the only times that Jesus breaks the law, because they violated the law of God in the Torah. The same is true for the Apostles. Peter and John were brought before the Sanhedrin in Acts 5 and were commanded to not preach in the name of Jesus. They broke this law because it went against God's commands. It is not documented anywhere in Scripture where anyone broke a law other than if it was contrary to the will or commands of God.
How many of us, Christians, would call Jesus extreme today? Not because of his teachings or times when he did purposefully break the laws but for all the times he obeyed them?
I agree with Dr. Rourke that we are setting ourselves up for a slippery slope to fall down when we pick and choose which laws to obey. Imagine if a non-Christian called you out on it, you would look as stupid as I did when Greg asked me the question. We would be hypocrites. Any Christian who does this would also wash out the foundation of the moral standard that God holds for us.
The more I learn about God and grow closer to Him, the more I am beginning to see how consistency in all areas of my life is what He wants. This is true Lordship of Jesus Christ. If you break even the smallest law that is not against God's will or Word, you are sinning. This includes me.
Since I want to purge my life of all sin so that I can run faster to Jesus and be more effective witness I am deleting all my illegal media. I have already deleted my illegal software. I am also going to follow the example of brother Sam and only drive the speed limit. I hope that you will follow my example as I am trying to follow Jesus, like my awesome brothers Dr. Rourke, Greg, and Sam.
Thursday, February 8, 2007
HISTORY: How should Christians view History?
As a person with a history minor and being a Patriot of my beloved America's history, I often look for what Christians have done in history. Recently it has occurred to me how we should not be afraid of history. There is no historical fact or discovery that has or will ever discount God. When I grasped this concept ever further it came to me how we need to embrace this. We may be living in one of the most anti-Christian era's in recent history but the past can never change. Even if God is erased from the current public eye, as long as accurate history is taught and written about then the great Christians of the past who made their zeal for Christ known publicly cannot be denied.
This is where our first hurdle comes into focus. For those of us who have taken history classes we know how each historian has a biased (for good or for evil) and often attempt to rewrite history, we call this historical revisionism. It is not new, it is Satan's oldest trick in the book. Remember what the serpent said to Eve in the Garden? "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" Satan was attempting to rewrite history, to retell the rules God has laid down in a different way.
What does this mean for the Christian now? Firstly, this means that we need Christian historians who will make sure the great cloud of witnesses for Christ who have gone before us are not forgotten. That their stories and impact on secular and church history not go untold. Here is an example in American History of what I am talking about. The Puritans who came over on the Mayflower and founded the Massachusetts Bay Colony had deeply Biblical convictions. So much so that when writing the Mayflower Compact they cited the reason for settling America was to advance the Christian religion in the new world and see it grow. Currently there are versions of this document in school text books that purposefully cut that part out, calling in unnecessary to the story. What is that? That is the purposeful attack on historical Christianity by contemporary atheists and secularists.
Secondly, this means that Christians now need to make their faith known in the public sphere. So that they can affect what is going on now but also that they will be recorded in history as among the Christians who dramatically improved his country for the better.
The atheist must fear history because it is His Story, the Christian only has to tell the Truth with nothing to fear.
This is where our first hurdle comes into focus. For those of us who have taken history classes we know how each historian has a biased (for good or for evil) and often attempt to rewrite history, we call this historical revisionism. It is not new, it is Satan's oldest trick in the book. Remember what the serpent said to Eve in the Garden? "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" Satan was attempting to rewrite history, to retell the rules God has laid down in a different way.
What does this mean for the Christian now? Firstly, this means that we need Christian historians who will make sure the great cloud of witnesses for Christ who have gone before us are not forgotten. That their stories and impact on secular and church history not go untold. Here is an example in American History of what I am talking about. The Puritans who came over on the Mayflower and founded the Massachusetts Bay Colony had deeply Biblical convictions. So much so that when writing the Mayflower Compact they cited the reason for settling America was to advance the Christian religion in the new world and see it grow. Currently there are versions of this document in school text books that purposefully cut that part out, calling in unnecessary to the story. What is that? That is the purposeful attack on historical Christianity by contemporary atheists and secularists.
Secondly, this means that Christians now need to make their faith known in the public sphere. So that they can affect what is going on now but also that they will be recorded in history as among the Christians who dramatically improved his country for the better.
The atheist must fear history because it is His Story, the Christian only has to tell the Truth with nothing to fear.
Monday, January 8, 2007
INTERVARSITY: Fund Development for InterVarsity Staff
Being a ministry intern for IV while still finishing school was supposed to give me a head start on my fund development. I have been realizing how I have been going to the extreme of allowing it to consume all of my thinking to the point of worry and unable to do anything else or the extreme of keeping my mind and time so scheduled so that I don't stop to think about it. The result of both is that no fund development has gotten done this school year and it is half over. Jesse has been talking to me and praying for me to help motivate me to overcome my fear of doing fund development. Bottom line is that if I cannot fund raise the money, I cannot be an IV staff worker.
Jesse is really good brother in Christ and he keeps pushing me and praying for me. I realize that there is deeper issues in my heart that this brings out. Why am I avoiding working on this? Why does my heart drop out of my chest when I see Jesse's number come up on my cell phone? Why do I purposely not answer the phone when he or Paul calls? I thought I was more mature of a Christian than to be doing such foolish behavior.
I intellectually understand all the reasons why fund development is important and how it grows my trust in the Lord's provision, but this is the true test. I do not want to do this. I don't want to make the list of names or write my newsletter or make phone call asks or set up appointments. Why? I thought my intellectual knowledge of the right answers should overcome my emotions? I guess I am a more emotional guy than I realized. These are the moments that really define who we are. The ones that throw us out of our comfort zones faster that we can adapt to the change. That is when our true self rears its ugly head. I am challenged in this area of weakness. As Jesse asked me in our phone conversation on Friday, am I more afraid of God or of other people's responses when I ask for their financial support? Wow that is a cut to the core, no BS kind of question. First my mind goes to work and finds the answer but not as quickly as the sinking feeling in my heart, nor as strong. I continually yield to the feeling of insecurity and I fear man more that God.
Lord please help me through this like you have done ever other time. Give me the strength to walk by faith. I would appreciate the prayers of anyone reading this as well, thanks.
Jesse is really good brother in Christ and he keeps pushing me and praying for me. I realize that there is deeper issues in my heart that this brings out. Why am I avoiding working on this? Why does my heart drop out of my chest when I see Jesse's number come up on my cell phone? Why do I purposely not answer the phone when he or Paul calls? I thought I was more mature of a Christian than to be doing such foolish behavior.
I intellectually understand all the reasons why fund development is important and how it grows my trust in the Lord's provision, but this is the true test. I do not want to do this. I don't want to make the list of names or write my newsletter or make phone call asks or set up appointments. Why? I thought my intellectual knowledge of the right answers should overcome my emotions? I guess I am a more emotional guy than I realized. These are the moments that really define who we are. The ones that throw us out of our comfort zones faster that we can adapt to the change. That is when our true self rears its ugly head. I am challenged in this area of weakness. As Jesse asked me in our phone conversation on Friday, am I more afraid of God or of other people's responses when I ask for their financial support? Wow that is a cut to the core, no BS kind of question. First my mind goes to work and finds the answer but not as quickly as the sinking feeling in my heart, nor as strong. I continually yield to the feeling of insecurity and I fear man more that God.
Lord please help me through this like you have done ever other time. Give me the strength to walk by faith. I would appreciate the prayers of anyone reading this as well, thanks.
Sunday, January 7, 2007
QUIET TIME: Luke 1:1-4
Observations
Luke opens with an explanation and a defense of his writing an account. The word account is repeated 2x in the first section. He writes about the "things that have been fulfilled among us", which points out he was an eyewitness of of these events. Interestingly Luke does not mention Jesus directly in his opening, well at least in the TNIV. He addresses his letter to the "most excellent Theophilus." The mention of "us" would include Theophilus. Luke's only refers to his writing as an "account of the things fulfilled among us" and mentions "the things you have been taught". He clearly states his purpose in writing this account is to give certainty of the "things you have been taught". Luke shows his credibility by writing that he has personally and carefully investigated "everything from the beginning". In making such strong claims, Luke is boldly putting himself on the line in a writing to Theophilus. He says that many accounts have been written about these current events. Doing a little background commentary research shows that the Gospel of Mark was written prior to this. Luke wants to verify their Truth claims, therefore these many other accounts must be true, and Theophilus has heard them.
Questions arise about who is Theophilus? Why does he speak vaguely about this account and not mention Jesus? Who were the first witnesses and servants of the word?
Interpretation
It is amazing what you can find in just 4 verses of Scripture. Of course the dangerous thing about reading such a small section is that it becomes easy to interpret out of context. Luke is doing a great job at setting up his credibility and answers the sceptics from the beginning of the legitimacy of his truth claims. Luke takes extreme attention to detail which then holds up when his account will be scrutinized.
Luke addresses Theophilus as most excellent, this tittle would be used of heads of state and governmental leaders in his time. Other than that, the text does not give further evidence of who Theophilus was.
Previously I had commented on how detail and carefully worded Luke's writing style is. So why would he be seemingly vague when talking about "this account"? It cannot be that he accidentally neglected it, for that does not fit with the rest of his detailed writing, therefore he must have purposely omitted it. Why? I observe that Luke writes that himself and Theophilus knew of "the things that have been fulfilled among us". Maybe it was not necessary because the information about Jesus ministry was already being taught from Mark's Gospel and of the many eyewitness accounts.
So far the text does not yield, within itself, answers to the questions of who were the first eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Whoever they were they handed down this account to Luke and Theophilus.
Application
What do I do with all this setting up of the passage that Luke does? It shows me the importance doing a personal investigation into the truth claims being made around me. Many of which occur in the academic setting for me. I should be examining more deeply what I hear in my classes from professors and students and not just be a sponge. I need to have a Christian worldview to be able to filter this information through to during my investigation to determine whether it is true. It seems that Luke does not go on this personal investigation only to be content with keeping the answers he finds. He purposefully organizes it into this account for the purpose of giving others certainty. I can apply this by making sure that I don't pursue knowledge only to keep it to myself and allow me to be puffed up with all I know. I need to humble myself and seek to relevantly share it with the culture I am apart of. At the cost of putting myself out there with my account, that I am not ashamed of what I am saying but stand behind the Truth claims of Christ.
Luke opens with an explanation and a defense of his writing an account. The word account is repeated 2x in the first section. He writes about the "things that have been fulfilled among us", which points out he was an eyewitness of of these events. Interestingly Luke does not mention Jesus directly in his opening, well at least in the TNIV. He addresses his letter to the "most excellent Theophilus." The mention of "us" would include Theophilus. Luke's only refers to his writing as an "account of the things fulfilled among us" and mentions "the things you have been taught". He clearly states his purpose in writing this account is to give certainty of the "things you have been taught". Luke shows his credibility by writing that he has personally and carefully investigated "everything from the beginning". In making such strong claims, Luke is boldly putting himself on the line in a writing to Theophilus. He says that many accounts have been written about these current events. Doing a little background commentary research shows that the Gospel of Mark was written prior to this. Luke wants to verify their Truth claims, therefore these many other accounts must be true, and Theophilus has heard them.
Questions arise about who is Theophilus? Why does he speak vaguely about this account and not mention Jesus? Who were the first witnesses and servants of the word?
Interpretation
It is amazing what you can find in just 4 verses of Scripture. Of course the dangerous thing about reading such a small section is that it becomes easy to interpret out of context. Luke is doing a great job at setting up his credibility and answers the sceptics from the beginning of the legitimacy of his truth claims. Luke takes extreme attention to detail which then holds up when his account will be scrutinized.
Luke addresses Theophilus as most excellent, this tittle would be used of heads of state and governmental leaders in his time. Other than that, the text does not give further evidence of who Theophilus was.
Previously I had commented on how detail and carefully worded Luke's writing style is. So why would he be seemingly vague when talking about "this account"? It cannot be that he accidentally neglected it, for that does not fit with the rest of his detailed writing, therefore he must have purposely omitted it. Why? I observe that Luke writes that himself and Theophilus knew of "the things that have been fulfilled among us". Maybe it was not necessary because the information about Jesus ministry was already being taught from Mark's Gospel and of the many eyewitness accounts.
So far the text does not yield, within itself, answers to the questions of who were the first eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Whoever they were they handed down this account to Luke and Theophilus.
Application
What do I do with all this setting up of the passage that Luke does? It shows me the importance doing a personal investigation into the truth claims being made around me. Many of which occur in the academic setting for me. I should be examining more deeply what I hear in my classes from professors and students and not just be a sponge. I need to have a Christian worldview to be able to filter this information through to during my investigation to determine whether it is true. It seems that Luke does not go on this personal investigation only to be content with keeping the answers he finds. He purposefully organizes it into this account for the purpose of giving others certainty. I can apply this by making sure that I don't pursue knowledge only to keep it to myself and allow me to be puffed up with all I know. I need to humble myself and seek to relevantly share it with the culture I am apart of. At the cost of putting myself out there with my account, that I am not ashamed of what I am saying but stand behind the Truth claims of Christ.
COMMUNICATION: On the Use of Globalizing Language
I having been thinking a lot about how often people use globalizing language to describe situations or groups of people. I just had to backspace and retype that last sentence about 3 times before I said what I wanted to say without using globalizing language. This is how pervasive it is in my life. What I mean by globalizing language is expressing your thoughts about a situation or people group by using terms like always or never. These terms are all inclusive and leave no room for exceptions by definition of their usage.
Is it appropriate or even accurate to use globalizing language in any circumstance? I would like to separate it into categories of descriptive and normative. Descriptive means talking about the way things are and normative means talking about the way things ought to be. It seems like very rarely is it accurate to describe something in globalizing terms. The best examples of this comes to mind when I think about fights between friends or couples. One person will say "you always do this" and the other will say "I never do that". The use of globalizing language is most likely not accurate in these situations but merely seems like it. When in a argument the use of terms like "always" or "never" seems to keep us from fairly evaluating each situation by itself to see it that is true. There seem to exceptions to our descriptions most of the time.
I have observed in my own life that most times that I talk in globalizing terms in describing a situation I haven't done the work to analyze fairly each situation, I just want the outcome I already feel in one situation to be true for all the situations. My own stereotypes about people groups, politicians, nations, cultures, and subcultures have come from taking one situation involving an individual affiliated with one of those larger groups and painting their actions as an accurate description of the actions of all individuals in the larger groups. Democrats always do..., the French are, goth people always, women never.... The results of descriptions like this may be true of some with that affiliation, but in reality I honestly cannot be sure of what percentage does my statement accurately depict. Therefore I should not say such things.
Imagine how this would change our conversations, my conversations. It seems that it would force people to examine each person for who they are or each situation for what it is instead of my preconceived notions based on another person of their group affiliation. Wow, this would be really hard. During this blog post alone I had to retype many of my sentences because without thinking I would make globalizing descriptions of people. Something I haven't done is look at how Jesus used globalizing terms, if He ever did. If anyone wants to do that let me know if a comment.
The question that leads us to is: is it ever appropriate and accurate to use globalizing terms? If you remember back in the beginning of this post I made two categorical distinctions of descriptive and normative. Up until this point we have just been talking about the descriptive uses of globalizing terms. I believe the normative uses are appropriate and necessary to convey the Truth of the way reality ought to be or how people ought to act. For example, you should never have sex outside of marriage. This is a normative use of globalizing terms and it is true and accurate.
I hope to make all my future descriptive posts in non globalizing language, if I don't please point it out to me.
Is it appropriate or even accurate to use globalizing language in any circumstance? I would like to separate it into categories of descriptive and normative. Descriptive means talking about the way things are and normative means talking about the way things ought to be. It seems like very rarely is it accurate to describe something in globalizing terms. The best examples of this comes to mind when I think about fights between friends or couples. One person will say "you always do this" and the other will say "I never do that". The use of globalizing language is most likely not accurate in these situations but merely seems like it. When in a argument the use of terms like "always" or "never" seems to keep us from fairly evaluating each situation by itself to see it that is true. There seem to exceptions to our descriptions most of the time.
I have observed in my own life that most times that I talk in globalizing terms in describing a situation I haven't done the work to analyze fairly each situation, I just want the outcome I already feel in one situation to be true for all the situations. My own stereotypes about people groups, politicians, nations, cultures, and subcultures have come from taking one situation involving an individual affiliated with one of those larger groups and painting their actions as an accurate description of the actions of all individuals in the larger groups. Democrats always do..., the French are, goth people always, women never.... The results of descriptions like this may be true of some with that affiliation, but in reality I honestly cannot be sure of what percentage does my statement accurately depict. Therefore I should not say such things.
Imagine how this would change our conversations, my conversations. It seems that it would force people to examine each person for who they are or each situation for what it is instead of my preconceived notions based on another person of their group affiliation. Wow, this would be really hard. During this blog post alone I had to retype many of my sentences because without thinking I would make globalizing descriptions of people. Something I haven't done is look at how Jesus used globalizing terms, if He ever did. If anyone wants to do that let me know if a comment.
The question that leads us to is: is it ever appropriate and accurate to use globalizing terms? If you remember back in the beginning of this post I made two categorical distinctions of descriptive and normative. Up until this point we have just been talking about the descriptive uses of globalizing terms. I believe the normative uses are appropriate and necessary to convey the Truth of the way reality ought to be or how people ought to act. For example, you should never have sex outside of marriage. This is a normative use of globalizing terms and it is true and accurate.
I hope to make all my future descriptive posts in non globalizing language, if I don't please point it out to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
