Oct 03 2009

Knowing truth

Category: church,philosophy,religionharmonicminer @ 10:06 am

I recently read an excellent book, which I’ll be discussing more in a subsequent post, titled Knowing Christ Today: Why we can trust spiritual knowledge, by Dallas Willard.

The book is about the idea that true knowledge is not bounded solely by the scientific method, and that we can know other things as surely as we know things from a scientific perspective.  It’s an excellent work, and it calls us to rethink the abdication by too many in the intelligentsia from claiming to “know” anything that matters with any high degree of confidence.  It is, in a sense, a book about authority.  Who has the right to say that they know a thing?  What does it mean to know a thing, and what responsibilities are incumbent on a person who knows?  Willard situates the idea of what it means to “know Christ” in the larger context of knowledge that is not merely “scientific.”

In some sense, the Protestant Reformation was partly about who has the right to claim to “know” something about God, and to act is if they have true knowledge of Him.  Yet this carried with it some problems of its own, as explained by Fr. Barron in this video.

h/t:  Francis Beckwith

Where does this leave us?  The Roman Catholic church was so certain of its authority to determine Truth that it had little qualm about executing heretics.  Even the Protestant John Calvin participated in such a thing.  It’s difficult to see how the claim to knowledge of God justified the murder of those who merely disagreed.  To extend Fr. Barron’s analogy, referees aren’t allowed to shoot players on whom they call a technical foul.

Roman Catholic abuses of power and improperly made claims of knowledge were part of the fuel for the Protestant Reformation.  However, when they’ve had too much political power, Protestants haven’t always done much better.  The Roman church has occasionally apologized for past excesses done in the name of its knowledge of God, but has perhaps not always grappled with the cognitive dissonance of claiming historical, apostolic authority, while simultaneously denying the rightness of some of its applications.   In the name of knowledge of God, Protestants have too often allowed themselves to be divided over matters that are not central to how we should live, and what the nature of our relationships to others should be.  Even larger issues like free will and predestination have little discernible impact on the day to day life of believers, who all live as if they have free will, but hope God has plans for them.

This history is part of what’s behind the fear of claims of spiritual knowledge.  People are, with some justification, a touch nervous about anyone who claims to really know God.   In the past, such people have sometimes been those who were willing to kill to enforce their perspective.  But, in modern times, other than the case of Islam, such fear is almost totally a smokescreen.

These days, most resistance to the idea that we can have true knowledge of God is from people who are afraid of the claims such knowledge will make on their lives.

If some things really are true, then we must live differently.


Sep 27 2009

Under Obamacare, we’ll all pay for abortion-on-demand, won’t we?

Category: abortion,religionharmonicminer @ 8:59 am

Some on the Christian Left would like to pretend that they are pro-life while essentially supporting politicians and policies that are pro-abortion. (More on that general topic here.)   In this interesting article, Michael New discusses this, and sums up this way:

It seems that any concerns about abortion raised by Catholic Left groups like Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics United are nothing more than rhetorical arm-waving. Technically both groups are nominally pro-life, but neither group has once criticized the Obama administration for pursuing policies which undermine the sanctity of human life, such as rescinding the Mexico City policy, repealing the Dornan Amendment, and ending the federal ban on funding on embryonic-stem-cell research.

However, health-care reform is more visible than some of these other initiatives. Furthermore, there is a good chance that if health-care reform is passed, the Department of Health and Human Services will be issuing reimbursements for abortions. To fend off future criticism, the Catholic Left probably saw a need to issue some statements to purchase itself some political cover.

Yep.


Sep 25 2009

More archaeological corroboration of the Old Testament

Category: history,Israel,religionharmonicminer @ 8:32 am

Here’s a very interesting article discussing a find of Coins with Joseph’s name found in Egypt

Archeologists have discovered ancient Egyptian coins bearing the name and image of the biblical Joseph, Cairo’s Al Ahram newspaper recently reported. Excerpts provided by MEMRI show that the coins were discovered among a multitude of unsorted artifacts stored at the Museum of Egypt.

According to the report, the significance of the find is that archeologists have found scientific evidence countering the claim held by some historians that coins were not used for trade in ancient Egypt, and that this was done through barter instead.

The period in which Joseph was regarded to have lived in Egypt matches the minting of the coins in the cache, researchers said.

“A thorough examination revealed that the coins bore the year in which they were minted and their value, or effigies of the pharaohs [who ruled] at the time of their minting. Some of the coins are from the time when Joseph lived in Egypt, and bear his name and portrait,” said the report.
…..
“Studies by Dr. Thabet’s team have revealed that what most archeologists took for a kind of charm, and others took for an ornament or adornment, is actually a coin. Several [facts led them to this conclusion]: first, [the fact that] many such coins have been found at various [archeological sites], and also [the fact that] they are round or oval in shape, and have two faces: one with an inscription, called the inscribed face, and one with an image, called the engraved face – just like the coins we use today,” the report added.

One of the comments to the article says that these weren’t “coins” but “protection amulets.”  One can only wonder where the commenter keeps his time machine.

It would make sense that Joseph’s image would have been used for such things sometimes, since he was number two for many years in the Egyptian hierarchy, second only to Pharoah himself, and essentially acted as Pharoah’s surrogate, according to the Biblical record. 

More humorous, in a dark sort of way, was this comment:

But since HAMAS insists that this country was never Jewish, the obvious conclusion is that Joseph went to Egypt from Brooklyn, perhaps from Boro Park. Now it all becomes clear; there is really no quarrel between us at all. Joseph was the first Lubavicher Rebbe.

That really would explain a lot, since I’ve known several people from Brooklyn who would sell their own brother.


Sep 23 2009

The Next Great Awakening, Part 10: Your brain is not a computer, and your mind is not your brain

Category: philosophy,religion,scienceharmonicminer @ 9:48 am

The previous post in this series is here.

In a very interesting interview on the unlikelihood that Sci-Fi style artificial intelligence (AI) is coming soon, or even possible, computer scientist Noel Sharkey says why he thinks that AI is a dangerous dream –

I’m an empirical kind of guy, and there is just no evidence of an artificial toehold in sentience. It is often forgotten that the idea of mind or brain as computational is merely an assumption, not a truth. When I point this out to “believers” in the computational theory of mind, some of their arguments are almost religious. They say, “What else could there be? Do you think mind is supernatural?” But accepting mind as a physical entity does not tell us what kind of physical entity it is. It could be a physical system that cannot be recreated by a computer.

Of course, materialists have a very hard time accepting that anything of non-material nature exists, anything that is not some mere arrangement of matter and energy, space and time.  What the materialist approach fails to explain is that this theory is itself a non-material thing.  What is the materialist nature of an idea?  Calling it a mere brain state, even a brain state that is shared by others, forces us into the notion that a “brain state” is about something.  Yet the materialists have mostly asserted that what we call consciousness is mere “noise in the system.”  How to account for “brain states” that are about other “brain states” which are attempts to account for the existence of other “brain states”?  One is tempted to take seriously the idea that maybe the minds of materialists are just “noise in the system.”

(Editorial comment in 2023:  For our purposes here, don’t confuse large language models like ChatGPT with actual AI in sense discussed above.  ChatGPT is not sentient, and will “tell” you so. No current AI whose existence is public is “sentient”, which begs the question of what is meant by the word “intelligence” in “artificial intelligence.”  This is probably because no one has any real concept of just what consciousness or sentience is, how it works, what produces it, etc.  Large language models, as neural-net systems that have been trained with enormous amounts of linguistic usage as data, boil down to the management of lists of billions of possible verbal formulations, and the assignment of probabilities to them.  Sentience is something quite a bit more mysterious than a large list with assigned probabilities.)

In his book, The Spiritual Brain, neuroscientist Mario Beauregard adduces the evidence for a non-material mind that is related to but independent of the physical brain.

In the book, Beauregard makes short work of claims of a “God gene” or a “God spot” in the brain, something that would provide a false sense of transcendental experience that could be falsely attributed to God by the gullible.   He asks some very interesting questions about the placebo effect, and what that effect suggests about the relationships of mind, brain and body.  His discussion of the small but persistently measurable PSI effect is very interesting, and refreshing to read from a scientist.   Especially interesting is the discussion about the implications of psycho-therapeutic models that involve teaching people to think different ways, essentially using “mind” to affect “brain,” producing measurable physical effects by changing ideas held by a person.   Beauregard’s work in using functional MRI to study the brains of meditating Carmelite nuns is very interesting, and well worth reading.

You may have the impression that someday science will explain the mind in physical terms.  This is certainly the notion that materialist neuroscientists would like to create in the public mind, yet another form of promissory materialism.

The problem, of course, is that a promise of future theoretical success is a non-material idea flowing from a non-material motivation to defend a non-material perspective about the nature of things.  It seems an impossible task.

Think of it as analogous to trying to write an essay on the topic, “Why there is no such thing as an essay.”  (Coming up next:  “Why there is no such thing as a question….  or an answer.”)

The amazing thing about the human mind is not that it has a non-material aspect.   It is that it has a physical aspect.   After all, the human mind is an echo or image of the non-material Mind behind everything.   Of course it has a non-material aspect.  The amazing thing is that the Creator made a unique integration of mind, brain and body, one that seems to have been designed specifically to allow free moral choice in a physical universe that is of non-physical origin, one characterized as much by quantum uncertainty, which makes free will possible, as by obvious cause and effect relationships.

The next post in this series is here.


Sep 22 2009

Evangelical Catholics?

Category: religion,theologyharmonicminer @ 9:24 am

If you have a short attention span, or are easily bored, don’t bother to click the link below, but if you’re interested in hearing two brilliant people discuss the “state of play” between evangelicals and Catholics, you will find this discussion between Francis Beckwith and Timothy George to be completely fascinating.


Sep 16 2009

Genes are destiny

Category: philosophy,religion,scienceharmonicminer @ 8:58 am


Sep 09 2009

Black Christians and political leaders

Category: politics,race,religionharmonicminer @ 9:07 am

When color trumps Christianity

How can black Christians allow race and color to trump Christian principles in driving their support for a leader?

Read it all.


Sep 05 2009

What slogan would Jesus use?

Category: religion,societyharmonicminer @ 2:24 pm

Having become recently weary with claims made by various folks about how Jesus would do this, or wouldn’t do that, or just the very silly WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) line that some people seem to think is the all-time discussion ender, I have a few to propose myself.

What baby would Jesus abort?
What mother would Jesus tell, “It’s your body and no one should tell you what to do”?
What person would Jesus rob to provide for someone else?
What child would Jesus fail to protect?
What person would Jesus make helpless by stealing her only weapon?
What person would Jesus send federal marshals to, in order to collect unpaid taxes to be used to support other people?
What school system would Jesus sue, for allowing prayer to Him?

Some will say these are unreasonable questions, and that others are just as fair.  I’ve heard a few.  Here goes:

What person would Jesus allow to starve? Answer:  many hundreds of thousands during His lifetime and ministry, based on likely world population at the time and known economic conditions.  “You will always have the poor with you.”  It is simply impossible to make the case that Jesus’ life and death were mostly about “taking care of the poor” in an absolutist, goal oriented sense, where that goal is understood as transcending almost all others, because He did not Himself live that way, nor did he demand that others do so.  He spoke against “injustice” in relation to the poor.   You may argue about what that means, but only in the light of the fact that He did not Himself attempt, even with his human abilities, to spend every moment and every resource in taking care of the poor, let alone His divine power, which could have been used subtly in very many ways to essentially end poverty in Palestine…  and elsewhere.  We have no reason to think there were not still plenty of hungry people when he left one town for the next, and scripture gives us no reason to think otherwise.

What person would Jesus arm?
Answer:  Shepherds.  “Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.”  Who is responsible to protect sheep, and themselves, so they can protect the sheep?   Who ARE the sheep?  You decide.

What would Jesus drive?
Answer:  Whatever would get him where he needed to go, within reason.  I don’t suppose he’d have driven a semi-truck.  Maybe on food deliveries.  Probably not.

Who would Jesus bomb? Answer:  See above about arms and shepherds.  Sometimes, life is hard.  But Jesus would surely not have suggested that Britain allow itself to be bombed without self-defense, which, sadly, often means “bombing back.”  Response question:  Which British child would Jesus have selected to be killed because British forces didn’t return fire on German factories and infrastructure, even admitting the limited accuracy of then-current technology, and knowing innocents would be killed?  Secondary question:  Which Polish Jewish child would Jesus select to be gassed because the Allies were stupid in their prosecution of the war, starting with when Hitler occupied the Rhineland with military forces?  It is safe to say that all of Europe could have done with better “shepherds” than Chamberlain and Daladier.

The point: very few slogans are up to the job of telling the truth.  And particularly, I am very suspicious of slogans involving the name of our Lord.


Aug 25 2009

Consoling the inconsolable

Category: church,ministry,religion,theologyharmonicminer @ 12:38 pm

I have a friend who is a chaplain for the local sheriff’s department.    We’ll call him Fred (not his real name).  He is a former Navy man, and he also served many years as police officer, I think mostly as a Deputy Sheriff, though I’m not entirely certain.  He’s a middle aged guy now, retired after some hard years of service, but on call when there is a need.  As you may expect, these things come in waves.  He may go a few weeks without a particular issue that requires his services..  and then an officer may be severely injured or killed on the job, or some young man commits suicide and the department calls my friend to be with the family, or a toddler falls in a pool and is in a permanent coma, or simply dies, or…..  you get the idea.

There are several aspects of this that come to mind.

It’s fairly common for a certain segment of Christendom to portray Jesus as being sort of an extra-spiritual community organizer who took care of the poor while sharing profound narratives with subtle meanings about the responsibilities of the rich and privileged.  People who are so inclined tend to downplay the aspects of His teaching that involved life after death, salvation of the soul, eternal destination, and so on.  But whether or not Jesus was an ancient socialist just doesn’t enter into the picture when you’re trying to minister to people in extremis.  They are struggling with the single most important issue of life, namely the certain death we all face.

What do you say to someone who is suddenly, shockingly bereaved, or so injured that life will never be the same?  Pastors deal with people dying all the time…  but, thankfully, there is usually some warning, some opportunity, however inadequate, to prepare for the inevitable.  But Fred has to walk into a context where the entire family is stunned, in shock, perhaps blaming God for the entire situation, and somehow he has to bring the peace and love of God with him.  I’m sure that sometimes all he can do is just be there with them, and share in their suffering.  Jesus wept.

And I expect that, sometimes, when people in great pain are asking where God is right now, it may only be later that they realize that He sent an emissary to them, in the form of a chaplain who didn’t have to be there, but felt sent by God.

Consider the task.  Some people in these situations will be believers, and the job is to comfort them, and reinforce their faith that God is God.  Others will be complete agnostics, perhaps only now confronting the bedrock issues of life and death, and this can be an opportunity to show, without preaching directly at them, that there is another reality worthy of their attention.  There may be people who are “nominally” Christian, but haven’t taken it at all seriously…. and oddly, these may be inclined to blame themselves, thinking if they’d been “better Christians” maybe it all wouldn’t have happened.  And on the other side of it, these “nominally Christian” folks may be the ones most likely to blame God for it all.

So what kind of person can DO this work?  To start with, you must be steady as a rock.  You have to be able to confront great pain, and not melt away, which means this work can mostly only be done by those who have suffered plenty already.  You have to be enormously grounded yourself.  And you have to know that no one is really prepared for this work, and so your only recourse is to trust God to speak and show His love through you.

It takes a lot of courage.  I have the feeling that, tough guy that I know him to be, Fred sometimes goes home and simply mourns for the loss and pain that people must endure.

And God prepares him for the next call.

UPDATE:  I happen to be in the hospital at this update, for what will probably not be a major matter, though it has caused some discomfort.   My friend “Fred” just came to visit with another friend from church.  After he left, another friend from church called, and asked how Fred was doing.  I asked what she meant, and she told me that Fred had just spent 30 minutes doing CPR on an accident victim he’d come across on the highway, in a remote area where services were slow to arrive.  The man had probably been dead before Fred started…  but Fred just did what needed to be done until emergency services arrived.  Typically, he didn’t mention it to me when he visited me.


Aug 20 2009

The post-Christian society?

Category: church,religionharmonicminer @ 9:09 am

Archbishop Chaput, author of “Render Unto Ceasar,” has some observations on the post-Christian society.

Let’s imagine a society. And let’s imagine that it’s advanced in the arts and sciences. It has a complex economy. It has a strong military. It also includes many different religions, although religion tends to be a private affair or a matter of civic ceremony.

It also has big problems, like a fertility rate stuck below replacement levels. Not enough children are born to replenish the adult population or do the work to keep society going. The state offers money for people to have more babies. But little seems to work.

Promiscuity is common. So are bisexuality and homosexuality. Birth control and abortion are legal, widely practiced and justified by leading intellectuals.

Sometimes a lawmaker will offer a measure to promote marriage, arguing that the future depends on stable families. These ideas usually go nowhere.

What society am I talking about? Most of the Western world would broadly fit this description. But actually I’m not talking about us.

I just outlined the state of the Mediterranean world at the time of Jesus Christ. We tend to look back on Greece and Rome as an age of extraordinary achievements. And of course, it was. But it had another side as well.

We don’t usually think of Plato and Aristotle endorsing infanticide as state policy. But they did. Hippocrates, the great medical pioneer, created an abortion kit that included sharp blades for cutting up the fetus and a hook for ripping it from the womb. Some years ago, archeologists discovered the probable remains of a Roman-era abortion and infanticide “clinic.” It was a sewer filled with the bones of more than 100 infants.

You can find all of this, and a lot more, in a little book from about 12 years ago, The Rise of Christianity by the Baylor University scholar Rodney Stark.

Why is any of this important?

People often say we’re living at a “post-Christian” moment. That’s supposed to describe the fact that Western nations have abandoned or greatly downplayed their Christian heritage in recent decades. But our “post-Christian” moment actually looks a lot like the pre-Christian moment. The signs of our times in the developed world-morally, intellectually, spiritually and even demographically-are very similar to the world at the time of the Incarnation.

The truth is, the challenges we face as European and American Catholics today are very much like those facing the first Christians. And it might help to have a little perspective on how they went about evangelizing their culture. They did such a good job that within 400 years Christianity was the world’s dominant religion and the foundation of Western civilization – and of course, the great Irish monastic tradition was one of its many fruits.

Rodney Stark, by the way, is an agnostic. He’s not a Christian believer. But he was intrigued by a couple of key questions. How did Christianity succeed? How was it able to accomplish so much so fast? As a social scientist, he focuses only on the facts he can verify. And he concludes that Christian success flowed from two things: first, Christian doctrine, and second, people being faithful to that doctrine. Stark writes that: “An essential factor in the [Christian] religion’s success was what Christians believed . . . And it was the way those doctrines took on actual flesh, the way they directed organizational actions and individual behavior, that led to the rise of Christianity.”

Or we can put it another way: The Church, through the Apostles and their successors, preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ. People believed in that Gospel. But the early Christians didn’t just agree to a set of ideas. Believing in the Gospel meant changing their whole way of thinking and living. It was a radical transformation — so radical they couldn’t go on living like the people around them anymore.

Stark says that one of the key areas in which Christians rejected the pagan culture around them was marriage and the family. From the start, to be a Christian meant believing that sexuality and marriage were sacred. From the start, to be a Christian meant turning away from abortion, infanticide, birth control, divorce, homosexual activity and marital infidelity — all those things widely practiced by their Roman neighbors.

The early Christians understood that they were members of a new worldwide family of God more important than any language or national borders. They saw the culture around them, despite all of its greatness and power, as a culture of despair, a society that was slowly killing itself. In fact, when you read early Christian literature, things like adultery and abortion are often described as “the way of death” or the “way of the [devil].”

Here’s the point I want to leave you with: If the world of pagan Rome and its Caesars could be won for Jesus Christ, we can do the same in our own day. But what it takes is the zeal and courage to live what we claim to believe.

While I’m not certain that historical sources support the claim that “from the start,” “to be a Christian meant turning away from….. birth control…,” the other items on that list are abundantly clear in the record.   I suppose I’m willing to be educated on the point, if clear references without significant counterfactuals can be presented.

The broader point of Archbishop Chaput, that ancient Roman times have a lot in common with the 21st century, is hard to debate.  His hope is very attractive that we can do much more to win the world for Christ.  Based on current trends, however, it’s becoming more and more likely that the world that is won for Christ will be the third world and Asia.

No doubt, as the center of world Christianity continues its move away from the USA and Europe, and more and more Korean and African missionaries are sent to the USA and Europe to try to win back an increasingly secularized culture (if current trends continue), some enterprising post-modern Korean or African academics will accuse their missionaries of colonial ambitions.


« Previous PageNext Page »