Addressing Atheism's Difficulty With the Supernatural

These thoughts came as a response to some friends of mine we've been discussing addressing atheistic/agnostic/new-age ideas and realizing that the proponents of such ideas are not irrational, not always dishonest in their approach, and should be treated with respect, not dismissal. Richard Dawkins, the prominent atheist was one example mentioned. One of their problems is that they just cannot accept the supernatural claims of Christ. I can't remember the exact context that this occurred to me a little while ago. It seems the reason that they look at us in frustration is because they associate our position with "magic". After all, we believe in supernatural things, and that's the same thing in their minds as carriages turning into pumpkins at 12:00. How do we hold to one thing and deny the other?

It's interesting, that when you study the new birth (read Piper's new book, I highly recommend it, "Finally Alive") that it is the, if I can use an evolutionary term, "big bang" of all spiritual life. By it is created a new life, a new nature, a new attitude, a new thinking, new desires, new passions, new pursuits, new understanding, new action, new effects; What is not is made to be, by the word of God. The pattern of creation is repeated in the soul of the one who is regenerated, God speaks life into being.

This is miraculous in the literal sense of the word. It's not like saying, "oh, I got saved from being run over a bus, that was miraculous." That's not literally a miracle, the laws of nature were at work (unless you were saved by teleportation or the like), and it safe to say that how you were saved from that bus can be naturally explained - cause and effect. Of course God was involved, but he didn't need to supersede the laws he created for you to be saved from the bus. The new birth is a technical miracle in the literal sense since the laws of nature cannot account for it. How a rebellious, determined sinner becomes a permanently God-pursuing saint is without satisfactory human explanation. It is, if you want to put it crassly, true magic.

The irony is that the person who reacts against this as "magic" is denying the very thing that he or she needs in order to experience the existence of the thing that he or she denies. Therefore, this is a self-limiting belief system.

I reiterate, it is true that these people are rational, that many of them are attempting an honest pursuit. But their very approach, as I think I have shown, is self-limiting. How do you explain the existence of light to a single blind man but by relating your own experience? If he denies it, because his experience tells him otherwise, you'd call him a fool - but he is undeniably consistent in his own system. But if a million blind men lived together, then all of a sudden their belief that light is a myth takes on a new strength, and becomes a valid belief system. But that doesn't change the truth... no matter how rational their argument. And we should realize the parallel is very much the same. It's just that there are more blind people than light-exposed in the spiritual realm, that is why the power of their belief is so palpable, if misguided.

In this context, it is interesting then, what John says (from John 1):

4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it...
...9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him.

The light analogy here is vivid. And I'll relate it to my point. They cannot see the light, therefore they reject the light. And why?

3:19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.

While rationality cannot be denied of those who reject Christ... it all comes back to one thing... their sin keeps them from Christ.

On one hand, it can be very discouraging. But on the other hand is God, who is outside the system, who supersedes it. He is the only one who can and does intervene, and because He is who He is, and because He is who we are not, it is why we are not cowed in the face of an onslaught by the blind Richard Dawkinses of the world. For we can face the onslaught with a secret smile, knowing, that just by one word by the Lord whom he denies, Richard Dawkins would bow His knee and come to love Jesus, who is the one true Lord and eternal life. It is not for us to cause the change, and this is good news both for both the Richard Dawkinses and those who preach Christ to him.

We don't need to "save" Christ as Deepak Chopra so snarkily puts it. We just preach Him, and He does the saving.

So stand strong, in Christ.

Not too little, not too great

Hence it is necessary that Christians contend on both sides against the devil and their own flesh. For when they begin to repent and would gladly become different people, then they first feel the devil's influence, how he excites, hinders and controls them, so that they make no progress, but remain in their old state, etc. Again, if they cannot prevent this, and in spite of the devil turn to God and call upon him, he will attack them with weak courage and cowardice. First, he makes sin so very small, and puts them so far beyond the reach of the eyes and hearts of men, that men may despise them and not desire grace, or they put off repentance. Then on the contrary, he makes sin really too great, as he can blow a fire from a spark greater than heaven and earth, so that it will again be difficult to lay hold of forgiveness, or to bring into his heart the words: "God be thou merciful to me!" Thus indeed it is and will continue to be a great art, and we may well take this publican as our example, our teacher and doctor, and learn of him, and call upon God that we may also obtain the end of our faith.

Martin Luther, The Publican & The Pharisee

Amen. All that is left is for me to say, "God be merciful to me, a sinner".

Super Size Me

Fair or not fair, whether too simplistic or unbalanced, I think some great points are made. This is the entire movie.

[edit: Hulu's only available for viewing in the US]

New insights on poverty and life around the world

It's hard not to like this guy, and he makes some vivid points using statistics. Hans Rosling is his name. I appreciate his emphasis on the complexities of global development, and the need to stop dividing the world into "developing" and "industriallized" or any such simplistic distinctions.

Stay tuned for a surprise at the end.

The Heavens are Telling the Glory of God

I'm no physicist by any stock of the imagination, so I'll be the first to admit I can't begin to understand the technicalities of what I'm about to discuss, but even at surface level this "junk" is mind blowing. So please feel free to clarify my understanding.
http://www.cebaf.gov/news/internet/1997/spooky.html
http://www.braungardt.com/Physics/Quantum%20Nonlocality.htm

Since I'm not a scientist (duh), my interest is metaphysical: which is the connection that fascinates me.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v1/n1/unification-theory
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=434

Now string theory and m-theory are still being defined, and so it's not totally valid to postulate connections between those speculative ideas (eg., a ten-dimensional reality) with metaphysics as yet, I would imagine... but the claims of Quantum physics have been repeatedly produced by experiment, therefore a connection to reality has already been demonstrated. Which, as the article points out, means that what we perceive as matter is in fact infinitesimal charges of electric energy and empty space, not just subatomic particles. Yes, this is demonstrable science.

And then the whole issue of Quantum nonlocality. I'm not even going to go into how mind-blowing that is, because its possibility apparently irritated even Einstein, who despised Quantum physics because of it messing with the "rules", enough said. This ties in with teleportation. Yes, this too is demonstrated science.

Makes you wonder. As of today, broadly speaking, science is mostly an atheistic or agnostic curiosity... and the presuppositions are definitely atheistic (you could say anti-theistic implicitly as a suppression of the glory of God). But I wonder, when does Romans 1 emphatically kick in? While general revelation (the universe) does not provide answers that lead to salvation, we know that creation points to a creator. In that sense, I think biblically, speaking for humanity as a group, humanity's pursuit of discovery will lead man to God (whatever the outcome). Am I mistaken to ask - Is that not guaranteed? Will scientists start bridging the (technically non-existent) gap between the "physical" and metaphysical?

Maybe we see some of this already today. For instance: What, technically, is considered a miracle? It's the setting aside of the physical laws of the universe to accomplish something. If you read the dude's section (in the answersingenesis link) on "Zero-point energy field" the very underlying elemental foundations of all matter contradict the classical laws of physics, so that the unexpected is expected. For example, it is postulated that the expansion of the universe means that zero point energy is constantly being created out of nothing (the universe does not become diluted). There's a sense that (and this is my own take) realistically, the very underlying principle of all existence is miraculous (if defined as the setting aside of known laws).

And with these discoveries, questions arise of existence and the impact of the individual on reality, and the connection between the metaphysical and the natural. It seems the deeper science goes, it moves not away from those questions and their answers, but right into the maelstrom of the fundamental questions of spirituality.
As a rank amateur, I'm flabbergasted.

People, Psalm 8.

Economy of Scale

If you tried to name them, one a second, naming all the stars in our galaxy...I don't mean all the stars in the universe, just this galaxy here...it takes 3000 years. And yet, that's not a very big number. Because if those stars were to drop one dollar bill on the earth during a year, each start dropping one dollar bill, they might take care of the deficit which is suggested for the budget of the United States.

- Richard Feynman, Physicist, from a 1983 interview.

Speaking from a more directly spiritual point of application, think of this scale in terms of a man's faith:

And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.
Genesis 15:5,6

This is the account of a 90+ year old man with a wife who was aged and barren. To believe that God would provide a single child is faith enough. But God did not stop there in pushing Abraham beyond the realms of probability. The Lord outlined a plan that was beyond believable, and used a metaphor that even today is incomprehensible - "so (as the number of stars) shall your offspring be".

When Abraham is said to have believed God, it is a synonym for faith (in other words, trust). Faith can be then explained as to come to a point where your mind and heart and soul agree with reality; and reality is that the resources to accomplish God's righteous will are completely outside one's capacity. It is the realization that God alone can accomplish what He wills of you. Therefore, the only right human response is complete abandonment of oneself to God. This is the faith that God counts as righteousness, the opposite of work - absolute dependence.