RSS
 

BOOK REVIEW of “THE TWILIGHT of ATHEISM” by ALISTER McGRATH

31 Oct

At times you can witness a pianist play a “dissonant note” at the very beginning of the music piece he or she has chosen to play.  This can be stylistic or, in some cases a psychological “device” used to break the tension before starting the actual song.  So, to introduce this book review, I am going to use a “dissonant literary introduction” by actually talking about a different book which I read a few years ago.  The book I am referring to is titled “We Were Soldiers Once, And Young” written by Retired Army Colonel Harold G Moore and Joseph L Galloway.  This book is based on a true story about an early and strategic battle of the Vietnam War that became a “policy baseline” for the future planning of the war.  As for America, the entire social ethos soon became engulfed with the war.  One can still hear the haunting lyrics “Tin Soldiers and Nixon coming, four dead in Ohio” (taken from the song titled “Ohio” by Neil Young).  Then there was “I think it’s time we stop, children, what’s that sound, Everybody look what’s goin down” (lyrics taken from the song titled “For What It’s Worth” by Buffalo Springfield).  And then, we can always contemplate what was the “Gulf of Tonkin Resolution” really about.  The rest is history.  Let’s get back to the book.  After I started reading “We Were Soldiers Once, And Young” I couldn’t put it down.  With each page I actually felt as if I was there, experiencing the same breathtaking peril, desperation and uncertaintity as the soldiers on the battlefield.  After reading “We Were Soldiers Once, And Young” I felt as if I finally understood what really happened in Vietnam.

When one reads the book entitled “The Twilight of Atheism” by Alister McGrath a person gets the sense that they have happened upon a long lost explanation that has been missing from the historical record – a bridge that connects the present with the past.  McGrath masterfully weaves between the inter-relatedness of politics, psychology and Christianity, over the last couple of centuries in Europe and the United States.  McGrath’s book pulsates with a tone and congruence that makes history “come alive” in the mind of the reader as you get a sense that you are finally understanding what happened to the collective soul of America.

There are several key points made in the book and I will briefly discuss a few.  First, on pages 76-77 we see a European society in which there had been a long-standing historical belief in God that had existed through the ages and this belief was now being challenged by atheism.  This challenge to the church was essentially a socio-religious “flip-flopping” of collective, social thought, in that, Christians were now being challenged to “prove that God exits.”  It might be pointed out here, that atheists gave no thought to, and showed no appreciation for the “narrative method” of recording history that was used for scripture.  In other words, it is the “story” and the context within history in which the story was handed down that makes it legitimate.  To say otherwise, is simply to “erase” the story of mankind.  And, if you erase the historical record, then you have to put something else in its place.  Re-writing history was the business of atheists, the same as we see today.

To the atheist who asks for evidence that God exits, we have it.  The complexity of nature itself is proof enough.  With each technological advancement in our ability to “look inside” nature, we see that it becomes more and more complex with crescendoing intricacy.  The Apostle Paul makes reference to this in the Book of Acts when he talks about the seasons and climate that causes the fields to give produce.  On the other hand, if the atheist is going to insist that God doesn’t exist, then how is the atheist going to prove it?  Christians are often sarcastically referred to as “book burners.”  The reality is, if the atheists had their way and burned all the Bibles in the world, it wouldn’t affect the reality of God one bit.   If the atheists ever succeeded in shutting off all Christian radio and TV and put padlocks on the doors of all the churches in the world, it still wouldn’t change the reality of God.

Another point McGrath makes is found on page 164 and it is directed at the church.  McGrath describes how the leaders of the church witnessed the social change taking place during the counter-culture revolution of the 1960’s and tried to emulate the same in the church by attempting to “make God relevant.”  It was as if the leaders of the church were “belatedly jumping on the bandwagon of social change” and in so doing, they bought into a temporal social phenomenon and actually weakened the influence of the church in the process.  It was a strategic blunder on the part of the church leaders as they gave in to the pressure of believing that the influence of the church was limited to, and driven by, social trends of the day rather than by the power of the Holy Spirit.  To some degree, we are witnessing the same thing today, however; the resistance we are beginning to witness coming against the church today is quite a bit more virulent than what we saw in the 1960’s.  If the present persecution against Christianity continues on the progressive curve we are witnessing, a Christian will not be able to maintain his or her faith without the power of the Holy Spirit.   We are beginning to see a systematic marginalization and exclusion of evangelical and spirit-filled Christians from the mainstream of society.

On page 230 of the book, McGrath makes an astute observation as he points out the reality that a paradox has been put forth in that “the greatest intolerance and violence” of the 20th Century was, in fact, practiced and conducted by those who were at the same time, claiming that religion caused intolerance and violence.  To put it in street vernacular it was like “The Christians are all intolerant and have been reported to be violent at times, therefore; let’s kill all the Christians because they are intolerant and violent.”  Truly, a paradox.

But today, it seems that we are witnessing something far more ominous on the horizon.  It seems that there is a strata within society that has settled into a mindset that says it is OK to persecute, marginalize and even kill those who don’t agree with them, so long as you persecute, marginalize and kill the others in a systematic and “sanitized” way that keeps it all at a safe and deniable distance.   There is a form of ecumenical world religion that is becoming very pervasive and extremely exclusive toward any who dare to challenge it, especially conservative minded, spirit-filled Christians.  The world is telling the church “It is OK to claim to be a Christian, and to believe in God, Jesus and Christianity, so long as you don’t practice it.”  It’s kind of like what we have seen develop over the last few years toward the Christmas season which is “Please celebrate Christmas, buy lots of gifts, spend lots of money, but, just don’t really be Christian and what ever you do, don’t say anything about Jesus coming into the world to save sinners.”  In other words, please celebrate Christmas because you are Christians, but just don’t practice your Christianity.

In the process of the above, we are seeing a slow but sure drift of our society toward a world system of government and religion.  Let us all be clear on one point.  I will use a quote that is attributed to Nietzsche in which he is recorded to have said, “When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one’s feet.”  This is a true statement, in that, if you are going to say that God doesn’t exist, then, at the same time you are saying that the morality and behavioral standards attributed to God do not exist either.  So, then, you are left with either a free for all, and a king of the hill approach to man’s existence in which the most powerful, brutal, evil men will gain control, or, at best, the most you could hope for is that mankind can get organized enough to develop some sort of behavioral code and hope that you and your kind somehow find favor with those who are making the decisions.

If you found this particular book review interesting, then you might also enjoy reading “Rage Against God” by Peter Hitchens.

 
No Comments

Posted in Authority In The Church, Church and State, Current Events, Discovering Truth, For Christian Leaders, Modern Christian Thought

 

THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE

28 Oct

The history of man as we find in the Bible has been communicated and handed down in the form of what is referred to as “narrative.”  In essence, the history as we read it in the Bible has been presented in the form of story which was handed down through the generations.  Such reality can make it difficult for moderns to interpret and appreciate what the Bible has to say.  Let me explain further.

The scriptures we read in the Bible were communicated down through the generations and written down long before there was the Internet, cell phones, RAM, ROM, bandwidth, megabytes and terabytes.  The stories in the Bible were told centuries before there was even electricity.  This being the case, it is totally unreasonable and extremely non-intellectual to attempt to “apply” the same standards of historical interpretation that we have at our disposal in the modern age.  To be sure, it cannot be done as to try to do so would be like “trying to put a square peg into a round hole.”

To further make the point about attempting to apply modern standards of interpretation to the Bible, let me ask, “When was the last time you saw an 8-Track tape player in the store?”  Or, “Have you recently played any of those old cassette tapes you saved from the early 80’s, and if you did, you might now notice that the music quality is horrible and the recording actually seems to be fading – it is!”  My point is that even the more recent technology is now vastly outdated.

Next, consider the plethora of news services we have today and the frenzy to be the first to “get the big story.”  We have MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, BBC, NPR, Yahoo News, and the list is endless.  With all of these various news services reporting on the same story, it is inevitable that we see different people reporting on the same story and more often than not, interpreting the story very differently from their perspective and “how they saw it.”  It is this reality in news coverage and telling of events that points to the shortcoming of applying our modern “historical-method” to the interpretation of the Bible.  It simply is a misapplication to use such a modern method on a transcript that was recorded in a vastly different method ages ago.   Furthermore, the historical-critical method isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be as you can experiment and watch the same news story on MSNBC, FOX News and CNN and find yourself scratching your head and asking “Are these guys talking about the same story.”  The point of this, is that those who use the historical-critical method have the tendency to say “Well, if everyone is telling the story in a different way, and saying that they all saw different things, then perhaps there is a chance, that it didn’t happen at all.”  This is the problem with the historical-critical method of scripture interpretation.

When it comes to interpreting the Bible, one must go back and re-gear their thinking to a time when telling the story was the primary method of keeping a historical record and elders handed down these stories through the ages.  Before you are too quick to think that such story telling could not be trusted for factual accuracy, try to remember that this was the “only” way it was done for most people; therefore, one has to understand that great time and energy was given to keeping the stories accurate and true to the actual event.  Such a thing is virtually lost in our modern society and thus the difficulty in trying to appreciate it.

Today we have those who claim to be biblical scholars who apply the historical-critical method to the Bible and in doing so, end up telling us that most, if not all of the stories in the Bible didn’t happen.  How can anyone call himself a “scholar” of the Bible if he doesn’t believe in the Bible?  Just a thought.  These same folks write books (and make money) about how the Bible is contradictory and contains errors and therefore cannot be taken as historical fact.  This sort of interpretation of the scriptures contained in the Bible shows virtually no value of, or appreciation for the historical context in which the Bible was written.  How is this scholarly?

Let’s look at a couple of verses that will present much difficulty for the person who chooses to ignore the narrative of the Bible.  In Luke 1:1-2 we see Luke use the very word “narrative” as he is describing to his friend Theophilus how the story of Jesus and His ministry has been handed down.   And, of very great significance also note in verse 2 that Luke discusses the “eyewitnesses” who delivered the narrative stories to those who were living at that time.  This is crucial in interpreting the Book of Luke and any scholar who ignores these two towering elements of the historical context, is a scholar in name only.  It is on this point that the “historical-critical camp” wants to put forth the modern standard of interpretation and suggest that if the stories of Jesus and His ministry were not “recorded” at the time they happened, in some reliable method, then they must not have happened at all.  So, what is the method that they could have been recorded with?  A TV camera perhaps, or, maybe a cell phone?  Anyway, you get the point.  It was only by the spoken word and a portrayal of such stories by telling them with words that they could be recorded.

Another knock against the narrative method of interpretation is that some suggest that we see supposed contradictions of fact between the four Gospels.  Let’s look at the problem using two more recent and dramatic news events of our modern time.  First, there was the Kennedy assassination and secondly, there was the Princess Diana auto accident.  Books have been written about the controversies and variations about what different “eyewitnesses” saw during these two events.  With so many people telling their “stories” in varying and different ways and, giving seemingly conflicting reports of what actually happened, it gets to the point that in some areas of the story, they don’t agree.  We even see that there were government investigations that ended up creating more controversy than they solved.  The point here is that if the historical-critical method of event interpretation is applied, in the strictest terms, to these two events, you might find yourself hearing some say, “Well maybe it didn’t happen at all.”  Absurd, you say?  This is exactly what some are doing with the Bible.

When reading the Bible, one must first understand and appreciate the way in which the scripture was handed down.  Once the reader begins to allow his or her mind to give the scripture a fair and honest assessment in its interpretation, there will begin the process of insight and revelation given by the Holy Spirit.  But, on the other hand, if one who is reading the Bible does so with a predisposed and skeptical mind, then the reality will be that such a person won’t ever receive anything and remain in spiritual darkness.

If you are interested in a book that addresses the theological perspective of the biblical narrative, the book titled “Four Gospels, One Jesus?” by Richard A. Burridge discusses this issue very nicely.

 
No Comments

Posted in Cutting Edge Christian Life, Discovering Truth, For Christian Leaders

 

The Deconstruction of Christianity In America: We Are On The Eve of A Christless Christianity

19 Oct

wrecking-ball3We are seeing a deconstruction of Christianity in America.  By deconstruction I mean the redefining of, and re-characterization of what it means to be Christian, all of which is leading our society headlong into an era of Christless Christianity.

We see an all-out assault on Christianity from the written media in the form of books such as “Jesus Interrupted” by Bart D Ehrman (who could be considered a modern-day “George Eliot” – aka Mary Ann Evans) who once having been an evangelical Christian himself, now tries to tell us that we can still be a “Christian” without believing that Jesus is the Son of God or believing that the Bible is the Word of God.

Next, we have recently seen efforts to deconstruct Christianity in the form of posting a huge highway billboard suggesting that Christians are “Jerks.”  The alarming thing is that the billboard was put up by a Christian church no less!  The truth be known, most often when you hear a Christian say that they are tired of the way Christians view the world, and make the suggestion that somehow Christianity needs to be redefined, such a Christian will invariably be walking down the path of compromising the truth.  Such a Christian is quite simply, in the words of the Apostle Paul, “ashamed of the gospel of Christ.”

Next, we see various groups within the Christian church who, instead of placing emphasis on sound biblical doctrine,  are placing an inordinate emphasis on empiricism in the forms of countless  (practically daily) angelic visitations by angels which are leaving behind “feathers”,  manifestations of brilliant and large “gemstones” that, if real, would be worth millions and millions of dollars, and let’s not overlook what I consider the most serious theological issue of all and that is the frequent trips to heaven during which certain Christians are claiming to have private audiences with the likes of Abraham, King David, the Apostle Paul and other biblical characters.  The Christians who are claiming to have such trips/meetings are even saying that these patriarchs are divulging personal information about how they wish they had communicated their messages in differing forms and texts than what we have in the Bible.

What makes these “trip to Heaven encounters” with the Saints of Old, so very serious is that, if true, then the Christian experiencing such meetings would be “bringing back” revelation and information that would supersede the authority of the Bible, if not outright relegate the Bible to meaninglessness.  This attack on the Word of God is wreaking havoc in the church and leading many astray as it essentially opens the door for all and various sorts of demonic doctrine.  To put it in street vernacular, if someone is going to say that they had lunch with the Apostle Paul, and during the course of this luncheon, Paul tells this person that he wishes he had said “this instead of that” and then that Christian comes “back to Earth”, who then can question anything they might say, as that Christian has had a personal and exclusive audience with Paul. Thus, that person’s experience becomes of greater importance than, and more authoritative than the Bible.  Nothing but trouble will come out of these false and made up stories. What we are witnessing is a form of Christianity that makes little if no mention whatsoever of the redemptive work of Jesus on the Cross.

Unfortunately, we are now seeing ministries that are being built, from the ground up, on these self-aggrandizing, self-focused, fantastic and Christless stories. Thus, having been started on such falsehood, it takes more and greater fantasy to keep such a ministry going.  It is really no telling what craziness we are about to witness in the name of Christianity.

Next, we see an attempt at redefining Christianity in the political realm.  It is becoming increasingly clear, with each election cycle, that any politician who claims to be a Bible believing Christian will now be ridiculed and mocked by the so-called objective media.  We have recently witnessed during the political debate between the two senatorial candidates running for the U.S. Senate seat in the State of Delaware, how the Christian candidate is made to look like a “buffoon” for saying that she believes evolution is a myth.  The media is in a “frenzy” to portray this candidate as literally a “moron” simply for her Christian beliefs, nothing else.  Also, in the political debate, we have candidates who are claiming the label of Christianity but, their values are not Christian.  This leads me to my next point.

We are witnessing in our society what I will call a Christless Christianity, that is, we are seeing and hearing certain individuals who are claiming to be Christians and who are espousing Christian values but, at the same time, these same individuals are denying Jesus.  All of this is heading down a perilous path that will ultimately lead to an amoral society.

You cannot deny Jesus as the Christ without denying His values.  To deny Jesus is to deny Christianity.  To deny Jesus is to deny the written record of the words Jesus spoke.  To deny Jesus is to deny God.  Thus, our society has reached a point of societal schizophrenia in the sense that we see many claiming the values of Christianity but, at the same time denying the Christ of Christianity.  This is leaving us with a Christless Christianity.  We can already see this being played out during the Christmas season.  We are encouraged to “get excited” about Christmas, spend lots of money on gifts but, just don’t mention the Christ of Christmas.  What we have ended up with is a Christless Christmas.

We would do well to take a look at history, as history is repeating itself big time.  Take for example the words of Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 – 1900) as found in his work titled “Twilight of Idols” as he says “When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one’s feet.  This morality is by no means self-evident: this point has to be exhibited again and again, despite the English flatheads.  Christianity is a system, a whole view of things thought out together.  By breaking one main concept out of it, the faith in God, one breaks the whole: nothing necessary remains in one’s hands.  Christianity presupposes that man does not know, cannot know, what is good for him, what evil: he believes in God, who alone knows it.  Christian morality is a command; its origin is transcendent, it is beyond all criticism, all right to criticism; it has truth only if God is the truth – it stands and falls with faith in God.”

From the above quote, we can see that if our society is going to deny Jesus, then our society cannot hold onto nor lay claim to the values of Christ.  For to deny Jesus is to deny God, and, once God is denied, then morality is subject to wholesale redefinition without any moral frame of reference.  This scenario is being played out before our very eyes and it is all going to end up badly.  In his book titled “Twilight of Atheism”, we see the words of Alister McGrath (p149) as he says “To remove God is to eliminate the final restraint on human brutality.”  McGrath makes this statement during a discussion of the early promoters of a godless society such as Fyodor M Dostoyevsky as they were wrestling with the danger of what could happen in a society without God.  And, indeed, history has shown what has happened to the societies that have eliminated any concept of morality from their fiber. To say that one does not believe in God is to automatically open the door for a redefinition of morality, more so, it opens the door for an existence without any concept of right or wrong.

 
1 Comment

Posted in Bad Doctrine, Discovering Truth, Modern Christian Thought

 
« Older Entries