Is science God's undertaker? pt 3

Christianity doesn't kill scientific discovery or enquiring minds John Lennox reminded us, in fact it is the opposites, it was in the Christian west that science developed and this was no accident. C . S Lewis said "men became scientists when they came to believe in a law-giver." I recall hearing Vishal Manawaldi on the same subject a number of years ago, he pointed that in India men studied Hinduism and astrology and allowed nature to dominate their lives. In the west they studied the Bible which told them that God created the universe, therefore they studied astronomy and sought to use creation to their own advantages. Mangawaldi went on to say that is why Europeans set out to the sea, whilst his own people sat in the mud.

Lennox reminded us of Isaac Newton who didn't abandon the idea of God when he discovered gravity instead he delighted himself in the genius of the creator who was the designer of the mechanism not himself the mechanism.

Lennox went on to talk about the Genome project, the first director was an Atheist, the second and current director is Francis Collins, a Christian, this isn't about science versus religion its about worldviews and which worldview best fits the evidence.

The evidence is on the side of theism, for instance the rationality of the universe.

Alvin Plantinga argues that Dawkins believe in random chance does away with human rationality and so cuts off the three the branch that he is sat upon.

Dawkins argues that religion is violent, but is it fair to lump Islamic terrorists together with members of the women's institute (for example)? Lennox says we can play the same game and point to Hitler and Stalin. It is much better however to point to Jesus who turned the other cheek and gave his life the just for the unjust.

Shalom

Stephen

Palestine Christianity

Yesterday morning we attended a Tearcraft sale at the local Free church, whilst drinking tea I found myself sat next to a retired nurse called Joy. Joy had lived for several years in Nazareth working in a hospital working amongst and with Arabs there. I asked her if it was difficult working in a predominantly Muslim area, she said it was but what Western Evangelicals had forgotten was that Palestine was home to a large and ancient Christian community. These Christians suffer persecution from their Muslim neighbours, are shot at and killed by Israeli snipers and are ignored by the Christian churches in the west who think "Israel= good Palestine= bad." It was a golden opportunity because I was unaware of this and knew that I had to prepare Saturday afternoon for a short talk on the suffering church.

There is plently of material on the situation in Palestine for believers and I would encourage you to read it and to pray for Christians there.

God Bless

Stephen <><

Is Science God's undertaker part 2

John Lennox told us that he challenged Dawkins last week with regard to God being an object open to scientific probing rather than a subject. He pointed out that the universe is complex but its designer must also be outside the universe and more complex. In the same way that the author of the God Delusion must be more complex than the book itself. We couldn't get to know Richard Dawkins by studying the book because Richard Dawkins exists outside of his creation, he is a real person with a personality separate to his writings. We could study any Ford car by taking it apart and understand its complexity but it would tell us nothing about the man Henry Ford except it might point to his genius. What we need then is not a minute study of the universe alone to tell us about God but God's own self-revelation, we find this in the scriptures and ultimately in Christ Jesus who is the image of the invisible God.

Lennox questioned Dawkins scholarship, he pointed out that in the God Delusion Dawkins says that in historical scholarship the belief in Jesus' historical existence is very much disputed. Dawkins then adds weight to this by quoting a German scholar, however Dawkins fails to tell us that it is a literary scholar and not a historical scholar that he quotes. Lennox says that Dawkins has a cavalier attitude to history and by not taking his opponents best arguments he shows a real lack of desire to prove his case. I myself this week have begun reading The beginnings of Christianity by Dr Michael Bird and James G. Crossley. Crossley is a historian and a passionate non-believer, he presents his best case for an alternative origin to Christianity to the one presented in the Gospels, yet Crossley presumes that Jesus was a real historical figure. Lennox points out that history according to Dawkins is not to be taken seriously.

part 3 coming soon.

Shalom

Stephen

John Lennox, is science God's undertaker part 1

HTC is part of a collegiate system called UHI earlier this year UHI organised a series of public lectues on the relationship of science to theology. It started with Richard Dawkins, followed by HTC principal Professor Andrew McGowan and was completed this week by John Lennox. Sadly I was out of town when Dawkins gave his lecture but I know there were many Christians as well as Atheist there for that occasion. On Monday night from the questions that followed Professor Lennox's address I assume there were no or few view atheists in attendance this was a great pity as I would have loved to hear their questions.

John Lennox like Dawkins is an Oxford Professor, his area is maths and science so I expected it to be informative but dull. Yet Lennox is a very gifted communicator. He attended Oxford University in the time of C.S Lewis and attended many of his last apologetics lectures. Lennox has a real gift for apologetics and a passionate Christian faith. A Couple of weeks ago he and Professor Dawkins debated in the natural history museum and Dawkins referred to Lennox as 'a Oxford professor of maths and science, who also believes in the resurrection of Jesus." Lennox is guilty as charged is talk was why that is not only plausible but the most likely response in a universe that points to a intelligent creator.

He likened himself to Dawkins in several key areas:

1) They are both passionate about science

2) they are both interested in evidence

3)passionate abut truth

4)They both have a horror of religion that leads to war, and terrorism.

Lennox said the new atheism differs from the old Atheism not in its core philosophy but with regard to its relationship to religion. The old atheism was content to ignore it, the new atheism is seeking to destroy religion. He said in a post modern world the new atheism can be very attractive, some of its points are correct and it offers a worldview with some answers.

However it is misleading. Lennox pointed out that Dawkins' dedication in the God Delusion says "isn't it enough to believe that the garden is beautiful without believing in fairies?" Dawkins is very sly hear, it is not the question of fairies at the bottom of the garden but more how is there a garden instead of a wilderness. Doesn't the garden point to a owner and a gardener?

Dawkins believes that all faith is blind faith. yet the Christian gospel is the opposite to blind faith. john in his gospel argues that presents his evidence John 20: 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

More tomorrow God willing !

Shalom <><

Stephen

The place of Theology in.. the local church

A few months ago professor Andrew McGowan gave a public lecture on the place of Theology in the university. He argued that theology even reformed evangelical theology had a place in the university and that in fact universities came into existence as training centres for the clergy. Theology is the queen of the sciences and philosophy is her handmaid. It was a well argued lecture that I am surprised I never blogged on.

However a few conversations over the years have caused me deep anxiety and the direction of much of evangelical Christianity at a grass roots level.

1. A friend of mine who is a very godly man was concerned that I thought I needed to study theology at all. if that wasn't bad enough he is also a gospel minister.

2. An undergraduate Theology student who has been accepted for the ministry within the church of Scotland said "I don't do theology."

3. An evangelical church a friend attends said "we don't do theology."

4. The manager of a good Christian book store told me that Christians don't buy good books and the church just isn't reading.

Now before I sound completely alarmist I do think that both my pastor friend and the undergrad do theology. I also realise that a dry theological student is open to the danger of being a hearer of the word rather than a doer of the word, we need to be confessional, mission centred, and completely God saturated. Paul told Timothy to study to find himself approved, the proper study of theology should lead us to be changed and drive us to our needs in adoring worship of the God we know about who is the God we also know.

Certainly the study of theology, systematic, biblical, practical needs to be at the heart of the shepherd's role so that he can feed the sheep. If the minister is going to guard the flock against wolves he needs to be sure of the truth he is proclaiming. God has given us minds to understand and hearts that are made to worship Him.

God Bless

Stephen <><

Goligher at the Northern Convention pt 3

At the Northern Convention last night I had the privilage of sitting next to William and Carine MacKenzie who founded and run Christian Focus, a reformed evangelical publishing house in the Highlands. They are an amazing couple and one of these days I shall have to write a blog about them.

Isaiah 49

The problem of sin

Goligher started with an illustration from an interview with Donald Trump. Trump had stated that the banks and bankers had made huge mistakes to cause the global credit crunch. He stopped himself at the end though and said that is the presenting problem the real problem is human greed. Goligher believes something similar is occurring in Isaiah the presenting problem is Assyria and then Babylon. Assyria would be checked and wasn't a real problem but Babylon would be a big problem and cause more trouble to the Jewish Psyche than the Holocaust because they would destroy the Temple. The real problem for Israel in Isaiah's day was not the Assyrians or the Babylonians the real problem was idolatry. Isaiah's writing offered a solution with its short, middle and long term prophecies ensuring that idolatry was never again a problem for the returning exiles.

A Political Messiah

In this section of Isaiah we are given a picture of the LORD's chosen one, the anointed one/messiah. All these terms are used of the political and pagan Cyrus who would come and deliver the people of Israel from exile in Babylon back to their home land of Israel.

However the underlying problem of sin meant that Israel needed a salvation bigger than the return from exile.

The Servant Speaks

In v.1 of Isaiah 49 the servant speaks and he speaks with authority sounding exactly like YHWH. 'Listen to my voice you people' even though he speaks with divine authority and is clearly divine he speaks with a human voice. ' The LORD called me from my mothers womb' giving him a name. This is the seed of eve, the promised redeemer, the child of the virgin from chapter 9. His name is Immanuel.

He is also a prophet he speaks with a ready sword, the word of God.

v.3 He is called Israel but he is called to save Israel, he is not cooperate Israel but the new Israel. Where national Israel fails he succeeds because he is righteous and obeys his call. in V.5 the servant gathers Israel back to God. V.6 however even this is to light a thing for someone as worthy as the servant so he is given the nations. V.7 points us to the cross for one deeply despised , one of the worlds outcasts vindication shall come. Kings will rise in your presence, princes will bow down to you. Even the cursed heaven and earth shall finally be jubilant and rejoice at the work of the servant.

Sadly the convention didn't follow its usual practise of both speakers giving a sermon on the final night so I never got to hear Martin Allan.

Shalom

Stephen

Goligher Northern Convention pt 2

Last night Liam Goligher preached on Isaiah 44:6-11 and 45:20-25.

God

Liam pointed out that many in the wider evangelical scene believe that sincere people of other faiths might make it to heaven. We have all heard the phrase "saved according to the light they recieved. He pointed out that this isn't the biblical position God tells us in Isaiah there are no other gods. Goligher reminds us that Isaiah lived in a plural society because Israel since its inception had always worshipped gods alongside YHWH.

God reminds the people of Israel "who amongst the God's is like me" he challenges is to show them a god from the nations who can tell the future in advance.

God and his rivals

The gods of the nations are unlike the god of Israel because they are man made, therefore they are like man. They are not jealous and so there is a pantheon and when a nation conquered another nation it would add its gods to the pantheon, just in case. Goligher points out that as Isaiah moves away from talking about God to idols he moves from Poetry to prose, this is because idols are prosaic, there is nothing poetic about them. Those who delight in them become like them. Gollum from the Lord of the rings reflects this, he holds a ring as more precious than life itself and we are horrified to find that Gollum the pathetic creature was once a hobbit but now he is a mere shadow addicted and controlled by his "precious." As Keller says we can turn a good thing into an ultimate thing making it an idol.

God and his claim.

Isaiah 40:20

Turn to me and be saved. God offers to Israel and to the nations his open arms. Turn to me and be saved. There is a promise of hope that the nations will one day call upon the Lord as saviour.