Sunspots 770

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Christianity: Christianity Today has posted an annotated list of important African-American theologians.


And a Christianity Today writer discusses her same-sex attraction.


Relevant reports that church membership is related to age -- older people are more likely to be members, and that a substantial minority of Christians are going to more than one church.


Computing: Gizmo's Freeware points us to thousands of sounds that can be used freely.
 
Environment: (And Christianity) A good article in Relevant on why Christians care for the environment.Health: Joel Duff has been thinking about the so-called Corona virus, and doubts that the US response is sufficient.

Politics: Relevant reports on a study that shows President Trump's popularity is significantly less among women.

Science: There's an article in New Scientist, stating that earth has acquired another moon, which is about the size of a car.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, it is free to use like this.

Thanks for looking!

Sunspots 691

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

The Arts: (And Science) Gizmodo reports that scientists have sketched the Mona Lisa using bacteria. Really.

Christianity: A theologian discusses "God and Creation." The essay is a readable summary of theology, and inspiring.


Education: A Scientific American writer tells us why STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) students also need the humanities. And it isn't "to make you more well-rounded."

History: The BBC reports that the recent weather in the UK  has made it possible to discover important historical, or pre-historical, sites from the air. There are photos. I thank one of my brothers for this link.

Politics: Gizmodo reports that the US Defense Department is preparing for climate change. The report also notes that "climate change" was not a phrase found in the Defense Authorization bill. "Environmental Condition Projections" was used.

World Magazine reports on how the administration of Liberty University suppressed articles in the student-run campus newspaper.

Scientific American has an essay on the types of work that immigrants do (and don't do).

ListVerse reports on 10 border walls no one talks about. (At least they don't make US news reporting.)

Michael Gerson comments on the current President, who is a celebrity, not famous -- there's a difference, he says.

Science: Christianity Today reports on a Pew Research study, which found that Christians aren't much different than other US citizens, in their views on the applications of genetic technology. (Mostly negative) The respondents were mostly in favor of using genetic engineering to wipe out dangerous mosquitoes.

Thanks for looking!

Image source (public domain)

Sunspots 658

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Christianity: A Relevant write says that we shouldn't always say "it's OK," w

hen someone tells us that they are sorry for something they have done to us.

Tim Keller has written "Can Evangelicalism Survive Donald Trump and Roy Moore," for The New Yorker. Among other things, Keller offers a short list of characteristics of evangelicals, and points out that "'Evangelical' used to denote people who claimed the high moral ground; now, in popular usage, the word is nearly synonymous with 'hypocrite.'"

A Relevant writer writes about the dumbing down (knowing little theology, and even exalting those who don't know much of it) of Christianity,  and how this hurts the cause of Christ.


Relevant reports that Chick-Fil-A, which normally does not open on Sundays, opened, in the Atlanta airport, during a massive flight cancellation problem, so that people could get food. 



Computing: Gizmo's Freeware reports on a free application that takes screenshots of your computer automatically, every 5 seconds, or at longer intervals. This may help you to remember what you did, or it may help you see if someone unauthorized is using your computer, and what they are doing on it.

Politics: (or something) Listverse gives the terrible stories of people who managed to survive North Korea's prison camps, and escape the country.

National Public Radio reports on how Russian operatives sowed discord in the US, and other countries, through web attacks of various kinds.

David Brooks, of the New York Times, writes a good piece on how to get us back together.

Science: (or photography) The BBC has posted some photos of amazing cloud formations, plus one of a moonbow. Flickr has a Gallery, currently with six photos of moonbows.

Wired compares LED and incandescent Christmas tree lights. (The kind that makes a string of 50 or more lights.)

Sports: Listverse discusses the history of balls used in several sports.

I thank one of my brothers for suggesting some of these items.

Thanks for looking!

Image source (public domain)

Excerpts from Orthodoxy, by G. K. Chesterton, 56

Unitarians (a sect never to be mentioned without a special respect for their distinguished intellectual dignity and high intellectual honour) are often reformers by the accident that throws so many small sects into such an attitude. But there is nothing in the least liberal or akin to reform in the substitution of pure monotheism for the Trinity. The complex God of the Athanasian Creed may be an enigma for the intellect; but He is far less likely to gather the mystery and cruelty of a Sultan than the lonely god of Omar or Mahomet. The god who is a mere awful unity is not only a king but an Eastern King. The heart of humanity, especially of European humanity, is certainly much more satisfied by the strange hints and symbols that gather round the Trinitarian idea, the image of a council at which mercy pleads as well as justice, the conception of a sort of liberty and variety existing even in the inmost chamber of the world. For Western religion has always felt keenly the idea “it is not well for man to be alone.” The social instinct asserted itself everywhere as when the Eastern idea of hermits was practically expelled by the Western idea of monks. So even asceticism became brotherly; and the Trappists were sociable even when they were silent. If this love of a living complexity be our test, it is certainly healthier to have the Trinitarian religion than the Unitarian. For to us Trinitarians (if I may say it with reverence)—to us God Himself is a society. It is indeed a fathomless mystery of theology, and even if I were theologian enough to deal with it directly, it would not be relevant to do so here. Suffice it to say here that this triple enigma is as comforting as wine and open as an English fireside; that this thing that bewilders the intellect utterly quiets the heart: but out of the desert, from the dry places and the dreadful suns, come the cruel children of the lonely God; the Unitarians who with scimitar in hand have laid waste the world. For it is not well for God to be alone.

Orthodoxy, first published in 1908, by G. K. Chesterton, is in the public domain, and available from Project Gutenberg. The previous post in this series is here. Thanks for reading! Read Chesterton.

The Shack by William P. Young

Let's put it this way. No less than 1,811 people have written reviews of William P. Young's The Shack: A Novel (Windblown, 1997) for Amazon.com, as of November 13, 2008. It has been a New York Times best-seller, and probably still is. In a sentence, the book is about a hurting man's dialogue with God. The book has its own web site. There is, of course, a Wikipedia article about the book. So, in spite of the topic, or because of it, it's obviously pretty popular. Why? Is the popularity deserved?

The Amazon review page does something helpful, namely it shows the most critical, and the most laudatory reviews at the top, so you can read them, if you wish.

My own take is this: Even though the book is highly theological, for a novel, if you go to a novel for definitive guidance on theology, you will get what you deserve. It's a story! A fictional story. I believe that this particular story contains quite a bit of truth, useful truth, but it is fiction. For guidance in theology, go to the Bible, and the historic teachings of the church.

The theological topic that I found most often in the book is the doctrine of the Trinity. God is one being, but also three beings. I don't understand this. I doubt if William P. Young understands it completely. I doubt if humans can understand this doctrine more than superficially. I believe it, because the Bible teaches it, and because it is certainly one of the most fundamental and historic Christian doctrines. See here for my post on "What Christians Believe," which includes the text of the Nicene Creed. That Creed sets forth a belief in the Trinity, without exactly clarifying it.

Even if Young doesn't set forth a clear, explicit theology of the Trinity, I did find the book helpful. How? The Shack portrays the three persons of the Godhead as individual, yet in unselfish love with each other, and in agreement with each other. In other words, they have a relationship. They love each other, they communicate, they share. The book implies that this relationship between the persons of the Godhead is meant to show us what relationships should be like, and give us guidance about what our relationship with God should be:
"The Bible doesn't teach you to follow rules. It is a picture of Jesus. While words may tell you what God is like and even what he may want from you, you cannot do any of it on your own. Life and living is in him and in no other. My goodness, you didn't think you could live the righteousness of God on your own, did you?
. . . "It is true that relationships are a lot messier than rules, but rules will never give you answers to the deep questions of the heart and they will never love you."
. . . "Mackenzie, religion is about having the right answers, and some of the answers are right. But I am about the process that takes you to the living answer and once you get to him, he will change you from inside." (197-8)

There is more in the book, and, of course, there are things that aren't in it. My wife asked me (She is in the process of reading it) if it mentions the Bible at all. No, it doesn't.

I don't intend to give away the plot, other than to say (which is obvious pretty early on) that most of it is a dream, or a vision. But I will say that another matter which may give some readers pause is that two of the three persons of the Trinity (not Christ) are presented as females. Well, why not? God has, indeed, historically and Biblically been presented as male. That means something, for sure. But I don't see any problem with presenting God as female in fiction. I would guess (many others have also done so) that God is not exactly sexual. He transcends sexuality in ways we cannot understand. The question of God's appearance as female, in part, is discussed in the book.

There are other topics, such as a discussion of God's creation, and science as the way of learning about that, and a discussion of free will, which I found interesting. I may post a bit on those topics later. There is a lot implied about faith and trust in God.

Much of the book is conversation. If that turns you off, you'd better not read this one.

I found the book to be well-written, and well worth reading, and thank the individual who asked me my opinion of it, which led to that reading.

Thank you for reading this.

P. S. As of March 6, 2017, I have not seen the movie which is based on this book, and do not plan to. The rest of this post has not been changed from November 15, 2008.

Carl Zimmer muses on parasitism

Spontaneous generation was the best explanation for parasites, given the evidence at hand. But, it was also a profound heresy. The Bible taught that life was created by God in the first week of creation, and every creature was a reflection of His design and His beneficence. Everything that lived today must descend from those primordial creatures, in an unbroken chain of parents and children -- nothing could later come squirting into existence thanks to some vital, untamed force. If our own blood could spontaneously generate life, what help did it need from God back in the days of Genesis?
The mysterious nature of parasites created a strange, disturbing catechism of its own. Why did God create parasites? To keep us from being too proud, by reminding us that we were merely dust. How did parasites get into us? They must have been put there by God, since there was no apparent way for them to get in by themselves. Perhaps they were passed down through generations within our bodies to the bodies of our children. Did that mean that Adam, who was created in purest innocence, came into being already loaded with parasites? Maybe the parasites were created in him after his fall. But wouldn't this be a second creation, an eighth day added on to the first week. . . Well, then, maybe Adam was created with parasites after all, but in Eden parasites were his helpmates. They ate the food he couldn't fully digest and licked his wounds clean from within. But why should Adam, created not only in innocence but in perfection, need any help at all? Here the catechism seems to have finally fallen apart. Carl Zimmer, Parasite Rex: Inside the Bizarre World of Nature's Most Dangerous Creatures (New York: Free Press, 2000, p. 5)

See here for Zimmer's blog.

Thanks for reading.

On the roles of science and theology, by John F. Haught

I have read John F. Haught's Is Nature Enough: Meaning and Truth in the Age of Science. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006) I highly recommend the book. It is well written, by a knowledgeable scholar who is unquestionably a believer in a transcendent and omnipotent God, understandable, and only 215 pages long. Here's a key quote:

Theological explanation can coexist quite comfortably and noncompetitively with scientific explanation. How so? To begin with, theology does not emulate the kind of explanation that science gives with respect to natural causes. Although theology must be conversant with the methods and fruits of scientific discovery, it cannot imitate the scientific way of explaining things without losing its own identity. Discourse about divine action, moreover, must begin with metaphor or analogy,or else it is likely to appear as though the notion of divine creativity is competing with scientific accounts of natural causes. A major reason why "Intelligent Design Theory" draws so much justified animosity from both scientists and theologians today is that it attempts to situate divine action, barely disguised as "Intelligent Design," in an explanatory slot that is customarily reserved for science. Theology has a legitimate explanatory role in an extended hierarchy of explanations, but it is not an alternative to scientific understanding. (p. 60)

Thanks for reading. Read Haught! (Here's a later post on the same book, covering more issues.)