'25 SUMMER READING LIST, #22 - "TOTAL TRUTH" BY NANCY PEARCEY

Those who regularly read this blog know that I use different fonts. The font I chose for today is one Blogspot calls "Philosopher," and that's a fitting font for writing about "Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity" by Nancy Pearcey, who was influenced by Francis Schaeffer's L'Bri Institute. 

This book starts off looking at the major philosophical views, which she terms as lower story and upper story. Lower story, or Aristotlean, focuses on the physical, what we can sense, what we can explain rationally and logically. Upper story, or Platonic, is more focused on values, aesthetics, beauty, etc. The second section deals with evolution, pointing out that its popularity is because it's a plausible naturalistic creation theory. Part three of the book focuses on the role of truth with evangelicalism.

I do have some disagreements For example, she has the view that the various forms of creationism (i.e. both old earth and young earth theorists) ought to stop debating each other and turn our fight to the common enemy of evolution. While I see the rationale for her opinion, I also see why young earth creationists hold that view strongly. And while I'm sometimes hesitant to call myself evangelical, I am more in that camp than she is. Neverthe less, this is a book designed to make you think.

And if you want more, there's her follow-up "Saving Leonardo," where her focus is a history on the arts, looking at what she terms "two paths to secularism," which are the lower story (here called determinism) and lower story (or the continental tradition) theory from "Total Truth." She does a great job at looking at the two views. One thing is she showed several paintings which were large colored geometric shapes. There were artists from both angles that painted that way, but the determinist had solid dividing lines, while the edges of the continental was more fuzzy. By the way, there was also a picture in that book painted by my friend Grace Carol Bomer (Becky and I got to visit Grace's studio in Ashville about 25 years ago).

 

SATURDAY CONTROVERSIES - HOW OLD IS THIS EARTH? (PART 6)

Creation Museum, Petersburg, KY

The age of the earth is a controversy among believers. Are the non-theistic scientists correct in their calculations on when the universe began? Or do we take God's Word to mean what it says?

Let me start by identifying the four main views (there are others, but they are close to one of the four):

1. THEISTIC EVOLUTION. God started the evolutionary process.
2. PROGRESSIVE CREATION. This view rejects Darwinian evolution, but agree with the earth being billions of years old. Christian geologists and astronomers often hold this view. The professor who taught biology while I was at Bible College held to this view.
3. RECENT CREATION. This view goes to the Bible, and interprets "six days" to mean "six days." The omnipotent God created everything in 144 hours, as it says in Scripture. 
4. GAP THEORY. No connection to the clothing store. Believes that there's a gap between the first two verses in Genesis, with the creation account starting in verse 3 referring to a re-creation. I learned this view with it seeing Satan's fall occurring during this view; some see that as being when the dinosaurs showed up. The above mentioned teacher described the view in these two sentences: "There is no scientific proof to this theory. There is no Biblical proof to this theory."

Did I let my bias show? Well, if I didn't, I will now. I definitely am a recent creationist. I'm not a scientist, but there are Biblical and theological reasons I hold to this view. 

• Romans 5:12 states that by one man sin entered the world, and death through sin. The only view where death is seen as a result of sin as opposed to a natural occurrence is Recent Creationism. 
• Hebrews 11:6 says without faith it is impossible to please God. Recent Creationism believes God is able to create this universe in six days - this reflects faith in God being able to do anything (a truth reflected repeatedly in Scripture). Sorry, but my impression of Theistic Evolution and Progressive Creation has faith in the interpretations of scientists, some unbelievers and some antagonistically so.
• In the Pentateuch, "day" usually means a 24 hour period of time. Did the flood last 40 million years? Uh, no. In Exodus 20:8-11, God compared His command for Israel to work 6 days and rest the 7th with His creating the heavens and the earth in 6 days and resting on the 7th. Are we to work 6 million years and then rest a million? I don't think so. Now some appeal to 2 Peter 3:8, with a day with God being a thousand years and vice versa, but in context, 2 Peter 3:8 has nothing to do with creation, and is not giving us liberty to reinterpret Biblical numbers.

No, this isn't a salvation issue. However, I did hear one late Christian leader speak of recent creationism with disgust. What? Why should a Christian get upset when another Christian believes the Bible means what it says? 

BOOK REVIEW - REFLECTIONS ON THE EXISTENCE OF GOD: A SERIES OF ESSAYS BY RICHARD E. SIMMONS III

 

 Is your philosophy consistent with real life? Are your beliefs concerning God and the origins of this planet and life based on careful study and examination of said belief system, or is it really based on wishful thinking? If you find your view don't match up to reality, do you admit you're wrong and adjust your thinking, or do you defend those views even if they border on nonsense?

In "Reflections on the Existence Of God," Richard Simmons III (not to be confused with the energetic exercise guru) gives a series of 56 essays dealing with these questions. Topics on these include the existence of evil and suffering, beauty, whether we have consciousness or are just robots, the debate on macro-evolution and intelligent design, and whether Christianity is historically accurate.

I found this book both thought provoking and enjoyable. Simmons has a conversational style, and treats other authors with respect, regardless of whether he agrees with them.

This is an ideal book either to challenge a friend or to give yourself things to think about and energize your own faith.

 

SUNDAY PSALMS PART 10 OF 48 - PSALM 33:15

 

Lionfish, Nashville Zoo at Grassmere

He fashions their hearts individually;
He considers all their works.
                    Psalm 33:15, New King James Version

 

B&R used to have 31 different flavors of ice cream each month, plus, of course, chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla. Do you know how many combinations are possible for mixing and matching those 31 flavors and, of course, chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla on a double dip cone? I do. 595! So how many choices do I have if I want two scoops?

Would you believe ten? Maybe on a good month, 15, and possibly as many as 21? 

I'm sure you're scratching your head. Only 10-21 choices when there are 31 flavors (and, of course, chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla)?

First off, I didn't say 10=21 choices; I said  10, 15, or 21 choices. Is that different? Yes, and I'll explain.

Even before I look at the list of 31 flavors, I know I'm not getting chocolate, strawberry, or vanilla - I can get those anyplace! I also already know I'm mixing, not matching - too many flavors to limit myself to just one. 

Then, when I look at the list, I will pick the flavors that grab my interest. Normally, that would be five, and I have ten choices on how to mix those flavors. Should it be a good selection, the flavors I'm considering might rise to six (15 possible mixes) or seven (making it 21).

So what does this have to do with Psalm 33:15? Simple. It reflects on how God fashioned me. He fashioned me to have no interest in the common flavors of chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla, as well as wanting two different flavors. Not everybody is fashioned that way. 

Let me take a different angle, one I just thought of. When looking at my photos, I thought the one of the lion fish above was excellent. You notice how beautiful that fish is? Which do you think is more likely: God fashioned the lion fish that way, or over millions of years the fish managed to get the color scheme right? Yeah, I'd go with God fashioning this fish - the other is too ridiculous.

But that fish is not beautiful to everyone, and that is also due to another aspect of God fashioning. At the Nashville Zoo at Grassmere, it explained the lion fish is one of many examples where a species is taken from its native envioronment - the one God fashioned this creature for - and puts it in another. In the case of the Lion Fish, he's removed from his natural predators and in its new home the fish overpopulates and becomes a threat. 

So the point is God made you for a purpose. Nothing is an accident - don't be dumb enough to think that you have the power to undo God's will and design for you. Attempts to do so are as disastrous as relocating the lion fish. 

PRE-OSCAR LOOK AT MOVIES THAT HAD AN IMPACT ON ME, PART 3 OF 12: FANTASTIC VOYAGE

 

 This may be the highest on my list of favorite movies of the ones I've looked at so far. It's one I keep rewatching every five years or so. Part of it is the special effects. I will admit that I've been exposed to Sci Fi at this point (Dad took me to see "Robinson Crusoe on Mars," "The Day The Earth Stood Still", and "Planet of the Apes" at this point of my life.

One thing I appreciated in this movie when I watched it as an adult is to realize that this was my introduction of creation vs. evolution, and it didn't make you think the creationist was an idiot either.

SUNDAY PSALMS PART 3 OF 48 - PSALM 11

Not positive what kind of bird this is. It's in the South American section of Cincinnati Zoo's Wings of the World exhibit. Looking it up, my closest guess is a Guam Rail, but that guess might land in fowl territory.

1   In the Lord I put my trust;
    How can you say to my soul, "Flee as a bird to your mountain"?
2   For look! The wicked bend their bow,
    They make ready their arrow on the string,
    That they may shoot secretly at the upright in heart.
3   If the foundations are destroyed,
    What can the righteous do?

4   The Lord is in His holy temple,
    The Lord's throne is in heaven;
    His eyes behold,
    His eyelids test the sons of men.
5   The Lord tests the righteous,
    But the wicked and the one who loves violence His soul hates.
6   Upon the wicked He will rain coals;
    Fire and brimstone and a burning wind
    Shall be the portion of their cup.

7   For the Lord is righteous,
    He loves righteousness;
    His countenance beholds the upright.

Psalm 11:1-7, NKJV

Doesn't the first three verses of this Psalm sound like the society we live in? Actually, it fits in the world we live in. In many countries Christians are kicked out of their jobs, houses, families, and villages. In our country, we're supposed to be tolerant of 1) those who disagree with us including what is right and wrong and 2) the refusal of those who disagree with us to show us the same tolerance. Maybe not many are picking up bows and arrows to shoot at us, but they're picking up pen and Facebook post and discrimination lawsuits and the like.

I remember a cartoon Ken Ham shows. It shows two castles: The one on the left is labeled Humanism and is on the foundation of Evolution, with balloons floating with names like "abortion," and "homosexuality." The other castle is labeled Christianity and is on the foundation of Creationism. The Humanists have their cannon aimed at the foundation of Creationism and are shooting at it. The Christians are shooting their cannon at Humanism's balloons (as well as each other). Which strategy sounds better? And can you see why Psalm 11:3 makes me think of this picture?

However, if the first three verses of this Psalm reflect the current times, much more so the final four verses. God is in control. He tests (or allows to be tested) all men, including the righteous, But did you notice what the last line of verse 5 says about the wicked and those who love violence? Does it say that God hates them? Doesn't that contradict what we hear in John 3:16 and 2 Peter 3:9? One thing I learned in Old Testament survey: 

1. God loves and blesses the righteous and those who love Him.
2. God hates and punishes the wicked and those who despise Him.
3. God loves to forgive and be merciful to all who turn from sin to Him.

That first point is in agreement with the last verse of this Psalm.

 

 

BOOK REVIEW - THE GRAND CANYON: A DIFFERENT VIEW BY TOM VAIL

Are there facts that don't quite fit the typical view that the Colorado River has been carving out the grand canyon for millions of years? Is there an alternative view that should at least be considered and not  dismissed because it doesn't agree with naturalism?

The Grand Canyon: A Different View is narrated by Tom Vail, who is a boat guide at the Canyon, and also includes comments by various creationists. The book starts with an overview and then looks at various issues such as the rocks, the water, fossils, and the plants and animals. The book is also filled with photographs.

The book is 100 pages, and, as stated above, plenty of pictures. If I taught a class, I might include this as one textbook, but not the sole one. For me, this is perfect to put on the coffee table to spark conversations.

I would be interested in seeing what my progressive (old earth) creationist biology teacher would have thought of this book. That teacher was a geologist, and was not convinced of the flood being the cause for much of this earth's geology. This book does bring out good points, such as how the rocks are formed in the canyon.

I learned of this book seeing it on the book shelf of a friend, pulled out and easy to see. I'm glad I saw it, and highly recommend it.