March 3, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton
closeAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
In the comments of a previous post, “Of Sure Words and Last Words,” I mentioned that I believe some paradigms are better than others for giving us access for truth and that there are tools available to us to determine which paradigms those are. Typically, when I teach on these tools it’s in the context of my teaching on worldviews, which I’m using interchangeably with paradigms.
A worldview is the set of beliefs a person holds. These beliefs can be something like, “I believe it was wrong for Luke and Leia to kiss in Star Wars because they’re siblings.” However, it also includes more subconscious beliefs most people don’t utter like, “I believe in the law of non-contradiction.” All of our life experiences are bound up in our worldview; it is incredibly difficult to escape seeing things through the belief system we already have in place. Worldviews act like glasses. If we wear red glasses, then everything we see is tinted red. If I try to be a consistent atheist, then I must see only an organized clump of cells when I look at other human beings. However, if I’m a Christian, then I see other human beings as valuable creatures made in the image of God.
Our postmodern culture, including many in the Emergent Church movement (ECM), would have us believe that no worldview or paradigm is better than another. They tell us that since we cannot escape our worldviews, we cannot see if our worldview grants us more access to truth than others (Specifically, Spencer Burke). This is of course self-refuting, since they posit their worldview (that we can’t tell which are better) as better than those that claim we can tell which are better.
So how do we tell? I believe there are three tools available to determine the validity of a worldview.
1) Practice. Can we live out our worldview in the real world? Say someone believes all truths are socially constructed. In other words, they believe their community constructs truths true for them but not necessarily true for other people. When this person travels to the opposite end of the planet they will invariably drop at the sound of gunfire and look both ways when they cross the street. They cannot live consistently (for long) with their belief that truths are social constructs.
2) Experience. Do our beliefs resonate with what we experience in the real world? Hindus tell us that evil does not exist. However, this does not correspond with what most people encounter on a day-to-day basis. It’s hard to believe evil does not exist when we consider the Nazi gas chambers and Saddam’s torture chambers. Some worldviews don’t resonate with our experiences of the real world.
3) Logic. Are our beliefs logically consistent? Someone who says, “There is no truth,” fails this test since they believe “there are no truths” is true (it’s self-refuting). Each belief must be consistent with all other beliefs in the worldview.
Whatever worldview we hold must pass all three tests to provide us the greatest possible access to truth. The only perfect worldview is God’s, which we do not have. Our goal should be to continually reform our view to His. The Christian is the only person whose worldview corresponds to reality (experience), is coherent (logic), and is liveable (practice); and the standard for this worldview is the Bible.
Posted in Main Page, Philosophy, Roger's Posts
1 Comment »
We saw tonight the dangers of using stories to pass on your ideas to others. The Academy Award for Best Picture went to Million Dollar Baby–a movie with the despicable message that if you're handicapped, your life isn't worth living, and it's a noble and brave thing for you to end it (I wonder what Christopher Reeve's widow would have to say about that). What makes all of this so disturbing is that I've heard several Christians (smart and good people) say they loved the movie, recommending it to others.
Now obviously, if you were to ask these same people, “Do you think that assisted suicide is a beautiful thing if a person suddenly becomes handicapped, and would you like to promote that idea?” they would say, “Of course not!” How, then, were they taken in by this movie? It's simple. Stories have a way of getting around our defenses. They bypass our minds and go straight for our hearts. Suddenly, the gatekeeper for what we accept is not our minds, but our emotions. Million Dollar Baby moves us–hooray! We love it! We let it in, and the ideas enter into us, sneaking past the part of us that knows better.
Storytelling is effective for those promoting ideas and dangerous for those who are taking them in if they're not careful. This is one of the biggest problems I have with postmodern Christians such as McLaren who promote storytelling as the best way to communicate ideas. In his book A New Kind of Christian, McLaren avoids having to openly defend his ideas by embedding them in a story. Not surprisingly, he ends up using emotional–and I would even say manipulative–language and imagery as his main method of persuasion (you can see examples of this in the critique at the end of my summary of his book here). This is extremely effective for McLaren. If he doesn't make open arguments, who can refute him? The reader absorbs the ideas and comes away with a sense that anyone who opposes McLaren's view is going against the Holy Spirit–even though McLaren has not given concrete reasons to believe this is the case. Further, McLaren denigrates the very idea of analysis and debate, successfully convincing the reader not to analyze McLaren's ideas (lest he be “a Pharisee”). Once this opposition is removed, the reader easily accepts the ideas.
Now, whether or not McLaren is correct in the ideas he is promoting is not at issue here. I am merely saying that it is not wise to listen to any sort of storytelling without carefully paying attention to and analyzing the ideas you find there.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Culture, Emerging / Emergent Church, Main Page
No Comments »
I was recently asked why God would want us to praise and worship Him. This is a question I hear every so often since we immediately assume that a person who demands praise is a pompous big-head. I think there are many Christians out there who secretly wonder about this–afraid to ask the question (lest they be thought unspiritual), but bothered all the same.
God is completely self-sufficient and doesn't need our praise and worship. However, He does deserve it. Would you agree that it is right and good to praise someone who is worthy of praise? We instinctively know this and praise people for all sorts of achievements. We praise the people we love and admire, and it's not right or good for us to withhold praise from them.
We all understand the concept of praise being due certain people. Imagine that you crafted an incredibly beautiful sculpture and won a prestigious award for your creation; but when the time came for the award ceremony, they gave the prize for your sculpture to the wrong artist! That would not be just, right, or good. In the same way, God–as the only being perfect in goodness, justice, love, etc.–is worthy of our praise. We do, in fact, owe Him that praise. He wants us to praise Him because it is right and good for us to do so. Since God wants us to do right and good things, of course he wants us to praise and worship Him.
Beyond the praise being right and good (and because of its being right and good), worshiping God also brings us joy and enhances our relationship with Him. We see this in human relationships as well–think of a man with his wife. Doesn’t it bring him great joy to praise her?
Finally, God created us for His pleasure (just as we create delightful things for our pleasure). Praising God–acknowledging His goodness, love, perfection, and all the incredible things He has done for us–brings Him pleasure. If you have children, you know what a beautiful thing it is to have them praise you. You also know the pain of having them selfishly take you for granted and ignore you. When that happens, neither you nor your children are enriched, and your relationship is strained. In the same way, the right response from us toward God is praise because He deserves it. When we act out our love and acknowledgment of Him in this way, we fulfill our purpose; and when we are rightly fulfilling our purpose, we have the best possible joy–God is pleased, our relationship with Him is enhanced, and He has rightly received what He deserves. Luckily, this is not a difficult command to follow, for when we truly love Him, our praise will flow naturally from that love.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Main Page, Theology
3 Comments »
If it's true that the desire to be loved by everyone can be deadly to the spread of truth, then we must surround ourselves with objects and thoughts of inspiration to combat this almost irresistible impulse. I may complain that this is a danger in the Emergent Church movement, but I've certainly had my own disappointing failures in this area, and it's at these times I think of Spider-Man. Yes, it always comes back to Jesus (our first inspiration for standing strong in the face of hatred), but it also often comes back to Spider-Man. Who can watch Spider-Man 2 and not be motivated to keep trudging along, doing good in the face of undeserved evil?
Here's another quote I read when I'm feeling weak. This is from Amy Carmichael:
“If I am afraid to speak the truth lest I lose affection, or lest the one concerned should say, 'You do not understand', or because I fear to lose my reputation for kindness; if I put my own good name before the other's highest good, then I know nothing of Calvary love. If I am content to heal a hurt slightly, saying peace, peace, where there is no peace; if I forget the poignant words, 'Let love be without dissimulation' and blunt the edge of truth, speaking not right things but smooth things, then I know nothing of Calvary love.”
Start collecting bits of encouragement to stand strong–Bible verses, quotes, movies, songs, books, paintings–whatever makes your heart swell with determination. (Any suggestions?) Immerse yourself in thoughts of bravery, strength, self-sacrifice, and the kind of love that puts the good of others above your own comfort. This is a most difficult kind of love, and we need all the help we can get!
Posted in Amy's Posts, Main Page, Theology
1 Comment »
February 24, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton
closeAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
There are many teachers I respect, read, and listen to who seem to have much more to offer than I could ever learn. One such man is a professor at Wheaton College, Dr. Jerry Root. I met him while I was working at Hume Lake Christian Camps some four years ago. I’ve had the opportunity to attend a number of his lectures since then (both at Hume and at Biola) and every time he amazes me. What’s odd about this is that every time I see him he tells the same stories. It seems like countless times that I’ve heard about when he first learned the meaning of “portion,” or his discussion with a professor over dinner in Oxford about how faith in humanity can let us down, or his son’s disappointment over the completion of a play he acted in. The truth is, if I knew Jerry were coming to speak next week, and he was only going to tell these same stories all over again, I would still drop everything and go. Jerry has a way of reaching in and grabbing my heart and mind together in a way no one else ever has. As he would put it, he doesn’t want to stand in front and tell us things, he wants to step to the side and show them to us. He doesn’t just speak of God’s glory and majesty; he points to God and pushes us closer to Him. I could go one, but I have a different point to this post than how much I love Dr. Root.
One of Jerry’s teachings that are often repeated, for good reason, is the distinction he makes between sure words and last words. All of us speak sure words, but none of us will ever speak a last word. What you are reading right now is a post on a blog- this is a sure word. It is a true statement concerning the object, but there are many more truths not conveyed by the statement. I could say that the name of the blog you’re reading is The A-Team Blog, or that the author of the post is Murdock, or that Murdock’s real name is Roger. All of these are sure words, in that they tell us something about the post, but yet there’s still much more. I could start to describe the history of how I came to begin blogging, or how blogs came about in the first place, or how the Internet was not actually invented by Al Gore. Still more could be said. In final analysis, I can say no last word about this post. There is no sentence, paragraph, book, or other compilation of words I can utter that could fully describe this post.
Why is this? There are a number of factors, like time, resources, etc. But there is one especially necessary restraint upon me to do so. I lack omniscience. There’s no way I can know everything there is to know about this post, that is, to have a last word about it. There is, however, someone who is not limited in this way. God is omniscient. Since God knows all He has the last word; He is the last Word. It’s not that last words don’t exist; it’s that they are bound up in the incomprehensibility of God.
Does a lack of last words produce a lack of certainty? No. You can be certain you’re reading this post right now; regardless of the number of sure words or lack of last words you have about it. Since I can have no last word, should I cease pursuit of knowledge? Far from it. We are to learn as many sure words as possible, since knowing more about God will bring us closer to Him. As J.P. Moreland often says, our goals as learners, and I would argue as Christ’s ambassadors, is to believe as many true things as possible while disregarding as many false things as possible. It is with a fuller breadth of sure words with which we will come to worship God in spirit and in truth.
Posted in Main Page, Philosophy, Roger's Posts
1 Comment »
I am genuinely thrilled that Air America is back on the airwaves here in Los Angeles. Oh, how I did miss it! I've always been fascinated by ideas that differ from mine, and this never ending pipeline (if you, good liberals, will excuse my use of the word pipeline–I know pipelines, of late, are of great concern to you) of leftist thought has been my greatest joy the last couple of days. I just want to understand why they think what they think and hear their reasoning straight from the horse's mouth. I'm sure I'll be giving you updates here and there of tidbits I hear. I could give you the details of how George Bush planted the infamous fake memo at CBS, or all the ways Bush is uncannily like Hitler (did you know Hitler declared war on terrorism?!) As they said on Air America, you won't hear about this from the corporate news stations, so I'll try to keep you informed.
Beyond the constant mocking of Christianity (not just conservative Christians, but Christianity itself), here is the thing that has most struck me: they have no idea what the positions of conservatives are or why they hold them. This is strange to me. I listen to Dennis Prager pretty consistently (AM 870, 9:00-12:00), and he is very careful to make sure he understands the opposition. After having listened to Air America, I can see that Prager was highly accurate about their positions–I'm hearing what I expected to hear. But let me tell you, no liberal who went from Air America to Dennis Prager would recognize a thing he heard there. They simply do not understand our reasoning or our motivations. It would be comical if it weren't so sad. No wonder people hate us! I'd hate us too if we were the mindless, science-hating, bigoted Nazis they make us out to be.
So please, please set your dial for AM 1150. If you don't, you may never know that Christians want to destroy the environment so that Jesus will come back.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Main Page, Politics
No Comments »
February 23, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton
closeAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
From theonelion.net…
DAVID KEHR writes: As the residents of Narnia like to whisper, “Aslan is on the move.” And so he is. But for the moment, Walt Disney Pictures has him on a very short leash.
Aslan, a talking lion with mystical powers, is the central figure in “The Chronicles of Narnia,” the much-beloved seven-volume series of fantasy novels written by the British academic C. S. Lewis in the 1950's. By the year's end, if Disney marketers have their way, he will have joined Mickey Mouse, Pinocchio and Buzz Lightyear in a long line of characters that have periodically provided the Burbank giant with entertainment's most valuable asset, a new fantasy to trade on…
But this time, the pros at Disney are wrestling with a special challenge: how to sell a screen hero who was conceived as a forthright symbol of Jesus Christ, a redeemer who is tortured and killed in place of a young human sinner and who returns in a glorious resurrection that transforms the snowy landscape of Narnia into a verdant paradise.
That spirituality sets Aslan apart from most of the Disney pantheon and presents the company with a significant dilemma: whether to acknowledge the Christian symbolism and risk alienating a large part of the potential audience, or to play it down and possibly offend the many Christians who count among the books' fan base.
Can't you just see it… Mickey, Pumba, and Aslan all dancing together in the next Disneyland parade? It makes me want to puke. Here's some comments I made last May on the subject:
“If you read my Troy movie review (if you haven't it's here- Movie Review: Troy), then you saw my comments regarding the revision of literature. Specifically, if they can take the gods out of Homer, they can take God out of the Chronicles of Narnia. My fear has been, since Disney bought the film, that they will attempt to di-Christianize it as much as possible. Aslan will be a nice cuddly lion who prances around singing about the circle of life and telling the children to follow their hearts.” (full post)
This latest report doesn't help my anxiety over this. Yes, Douglas Gresham is a Co-Producer and will have some impact on the content of the film. The problem is he will have no impact on the marketing or franchising Disney does. At least this way we may get some nifty Aslan antenna balls.
Posted in Culture, Main Page, Roger's Posts
No Comments »
To continue the discussion on Prager's article, I'd like to point out an idea I have found to be key with both political liberals and postmodern Christians. Prager says, “The liberal preoccupation with whether America is loved or hated is also entirely feelings-based. The Left wants to be loved; the conservative wants to do what is right and deems world opinion fickle at best and immoral at worst.”
I think the desire to be loved by everybody is a driving force behind many of the Emergent Church leaders. Above all, they don't want to offend anyone or drive anyone away from Christ. This is not a bad desire in itself…except when it comes at the expense of truth. The emergents wrongly assume that the highest good is that everyone love and respect Christians. They also wrongly assume that if anyone does not love and respect Christians, then it is because the Christians have done something very, very wrong.
For Christ, the highest good was not to make everybody comfortable. In fact, he drove away many of his disciples with his difficult sayings (see John 6:53-69). Jesus offended them with the truth because it was the truth, and the most loving thing he could do (even though the rejection would no doubt hurt him) would be to tell that truth to those who needed to hear it.
Compare Jesus' words to those of Brian McLaren (Emergent Church leader) from the article on Evangelical leaders in Time (February 7). McLaren's response when asked what he thought about gay marriage sums up all I've said here: “You know what, the thing that breaks my heart is that there's no way I can answer it without hurting someone on either side.”
Don't let your desire to be loved immobilize you. It takes strength to suffer for the truth, and I admit that it's a struggle for me to not give in to the desire to make everybody happy and keep the peace at all cost. Just remember that Jesus promised us that people would hate us in this world just as they hated him–hated him even though he spoke everything in perfect love. If you have never suffered rejection, you had better make sure you're following the right Christ.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Culture, Main Page, Theology
No Comments »
February 23, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton
closeAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
So often it is hard to draw an appropriate line between ideas that are essential to Biblical Christianity and ideas that are secondary. For every new movement differing from tradition the question is raised- is this merely a difference of opinion between believers or do these ideas constitute a separate faith? In order to answer such questions one needs to have a firm understanding of what beliefs are central to Christianity and which are not. Furthermore, this is not a task only for academic Christians, but sense there are often many differences of belief within congregations, this is a task also for the lay believer.
Essential Truths of the Christian Faith by R.C. Sproul sets out to map the key doctrines that make Christianity what it is. The book is comprised of 102 two to three page chapters for each doctrine. These doctrines are arranged into 10 sections.
The Introduction is almost worth the cost of the book itself. Dr. Sproul highlights ten causes for the lack of spiritual maturity in our churches. He discusses causes like the confusion between child-like faith and childish faith, fear of controversies, and the replacement of devotion for study. Through this avenue Dr. Sproul sets up the need for serious theological study for every Christian, that they may become spiritually mature.
Beginning with the doctrines of Revelation, the book goes on to lay to bear The Nature and Attributes of God, The Works and Decrees of God, Jesus Christ, The Holy Spirit, Human Beings and the Fall, Salvation, The Church and the Sacraments, Spirituality and Living in This Age, and End Times. In the end there is practically no theological stone left unturned.
I found at least two problems with the book. It is likely next to impossible to discuss essential doctrines of salvation without bringing up the differences between the Calvinist and Arminian perspectives. So while I think for many people it is a secondary issue (though there are folks on both sides who go too far off base), the differences should at least be brought up. Dr. Sproul does more than this; he spends numerous chapters describing and defending the Calvinist perspective while dismantling the Arminianist one. While I agree with most of his points, I think this is out of place in a book outlining the essentials of the faith.
The other problem is more specifically with Dr. Sproul’s doctrine of Original Sin. “We are sinners not because we sin. Rather, we sin because we are sinners.” Dr. Sproul offers nothing to back this up, unless one reads into Psalm 51:5 this view. His weak argument and lack of Biblical evidence for the doctrine has actually caused me to question it, rather than hold it to be a foundational doctrine of the Christian faith.
Despite these select problems, overall I found the books to be enriching. Every chapter adapts doctrine to language easily understood by lay people, with occasional deeper discussions. I read this as part of a book group; which I highly recommend doing. The section and chapter divides are great for weekly reading and prompts for discussion. Additionally, at the end of each chapter are summary points and several verses related to the doctrine. There are also some illustrations, though some are more useful than others.
Overall grade: A-
Posted in Book Reviews, Main Page, Roger's Posts
1 Comment »
February 22, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton
closeAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
Dennis Prager's column today, Liberal Feelings vs. Judeo-Christian Values, is a MUST read.
The dichotomy is simple: In general, the liberal left holds their views and decisions based on how they feel, while the conservative right bases them on what they believe are objective truths. This is why the left doesn't argue for positions, they tell stories (remember Al Gore, “Now let me tell you about 83 year Ethel Swanson. She has no teeth, half a lung, cyphilis, and she takes 342 different medications!”). The right puts forth arguments, often with evidence to substantiate their arguments (see Bush's stem cell research speech). It may be that the right is wrong in some cases, but in putting forth arguments they appeal to more than the mood they're in when they're talking.
During the last election I was startled, at first, to see how many “Kerry/Edwards” stickers there were on vehicles at my church. For a congregation that isn't taught to think about issues, though, this makes sense. The more you base your views on emotional appeal the further left you go, and this is descriptive of what's happening in many of our churches becuase this is a larger cultural problem. The problem is that what is good and true and beautiful is not always what feels good or feels right. I'm sure there were many who didn't feel great about fighting in WWII. Reagan didn't feel good about having an execution done while he was governor. But these men were convinced that their feelings were irrelevant; they were convinced that what they were doing what actually the right thing to do. God grant us the courage, boldness, and wisdom to stand for the good, the truth, and the beautiful even when we lack the emotional motivation to do so.
Hat tip: Melinda Penner
Posted in Culture, Ethics, Main Page, Religion (General), Roger's Posts
No Comments »
Recent Comments