Baptists

I know I have several Baptists reading this, so perhaps one of you could straighten me out on an issue that is confusing me. How exactly are the Primitive Baptists and Free Will Baptists of the nineteenth century connected to the modern day ABC and SBC? At first, I thought perhaps the two present conventions descended from one or both of those groups, but I almost get the feeling that the precursor to the present mainline Baptists actually had the Primitive Baptists and Free Will Baptists split off from it.

Any light that can be provided would be appreciated.

Revelations: Omnium Finis Imminet

Joshua Claybourn recommends NBC's mini-series Revelations, and I'd have to agree with that assessment based on tonight's premier. This is the first prime-time, major network show I have watched in ages and it was really good.

So far, I cannot figure out the exact eschatological interpretation being employed, but there was nothing objectionable. Certainly, I am not expecting to watch this to improve my understanding of the books of Daniel and Revelation, but I think it has the makings of a good series that, as Joshua notes, puts a positive spin on Christianity for once. On the other hand, there were a very good number of quotes from apocalyptic Biblical passages throughout the program, both quoted by the protagonist nun and shown on-screen before or after commercial breaks.

As the St. Louis Post-Dispatch said yesterday and I have marked elsewhere, it does have a certain X-Files-like feel to it (especially the cinematography). It also has some elements that remind me of the plot structure of the Da Vinci Code, which is probably no coincidence given that NBC did a special Dateline look at the Code immediately preceding Revelations.

It looks like the first part is going to re-air multiple times over the next week on various NBC-owned stations, such as USA Network and Sci-Fi, so if you missed the premier tonight, you ought to catch it elsewhere before part two of six is shown next Wednesday at 8 PM CDT.

Rating: ***1/2 (out of ****)
Content: Moderate violence and perhaps some language, although I don't recall for sure on the latter part. I'd follow the suggested age rating given by NBC (14 and above).

A Difference of Opinion: Prewired Knowledge

Part Two in a Three Part Series on C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud

We run into a problem here that Freud simply cannot mount. If the Christian claim is right, and God created us, it is impossible for us to reason ourselves beyond God, and therefore anything that we look at can be argued to be “tainted” by being only the creation looking at the creator. If God has created everything, including our reason, how can we ever presume anything we think is not influenced by God? Freud even noted, in defense of psychoanalysis, that those who disagreed with him would likely use his very own system of psychoanalysis to argue against his points (47), just as I have done above.

Unlike the case with the believer who can assert having experienced God calling at us and nagging at us until we finally come to belief, there can be no experience to validate the Freudian view for a person, much less in a way that everyone can accept. Therefore it might be good to turn back to Pascal’s wager for a moment and reflect on the truth of it. Unless we find ourselves completely unable to believe, why would one accept Freud’s argument of conjecture when Lewis can offer a system whereby we can authenticate his claims with personal experience? I can experience God and I can experience the absence of God, but I can only experience either if God exists for if God does not exist, what is it like for Him to be absent from me? Said another way, I cannot know God is not there unless I know what it is like for God to be there. This is a serious conundrum for a skeptic trying to prove religion an illusion.

Another key point of disagreement between Freud and Lewis is the origin of moral behavior. Freud makes the case that morality originates from evolutionary progress that leads to the need for civilization. To use his example, one might think it would be good to be able to kill off one’s rivals and then, with them out of the way, take their possessions for one’s own use (18). There is an obvious flaw in this idea that appears quite quickly, however: if I could do this, then so could everyone else, and they will likely do the same to me that I did to the person I killed. I would have to be a very strong person indeed to defend myself against this, and even then, I would likely be overpowered eventually (51-52). In a society without the standard trimmings of civilization, Freud notes that only one person can be happy, that person being the “tyrant,” and even he would want people to observe a prohibition on killing. Therefore it is not hard to make a case that people simply must act in specific ways, if only for the selfish reason of hoping others will return the favor. This makes reasonably good sense.

Lewis disagrees with this, not surprisingly, and suggests that we instead have an innate Moral Natural Law inside of us (4). Now, so far we are no further than we were before, since we have two authors presenting two polar viewpoints concerning the subject of morality. Lewis anticipates the critique from Freudian thinkers and answers it in its very own chapter. According to Lewis, it makes sense to assert that humans might have a type of herd instinct or other natural reasons linked to self-preservation to follow basic social conventions, but he then demonstrates a situation wherein this does not seem to apply all that well (9). According to Lewis, if I hear a person in danger cry for help, I will have two instincts come into play, a herd instinct and a self-preservation instinct. I want to help the fellow in trouble, but I do not want to die doing so. Despite this, I will likely feel that following the former instinct’s advice is the right thing to do, and may disregard the latter instinct’s warning.

Logically, if I have judged the two instincts and found one to be good and moral in contrast to the selfish and immoral behavior of the other, then I must have judged them both according to a higher standard (10). This, he asserts, is moral law; moral law, he explains, serves as the sheet music for the piano keys that are the instincts.

Moreover, Lewis brings in the example of judging Nazi morality against Allied morality (14). Perhaps a less well known example might be more suitable, since Nazi comparisons in present times often do little more than serve a technique for poisoning the well, but it does fit this example well. From purely a survival standpoint of the majority, we must question how we can prove that the Nazi’s morality was inherently bad compared to “Christian morality” (13). Yet we do want to assert that Nazi morality is indeed bad and the morality of the opposing forces was inherently better (regardless of the Allied nations’ goals of fighting the Nazi’s, at the very least, it can be said that we stopped the Nazis). Would it not have been easier for many to simply join the Nazis and not risk their lives fighting them?

Now, if things that go against my own self-preservation can be judged to be better, how can it be mere desire for a good society that leads me to act against my own interests? While we can explain away why I might agree not to steal, how do we deal with things that might end my own life for the benefit of others? Clearly, if I am going to be just plain dead, and not in an afterlife, I should have no reason to risk my life for others, since any benefits reaped will never be witnessed by me, should I die. It would therefore follow that I should be best off if I followed the example of Shakespeare’s Falstaff and “counterfeited” my death whenever danger arose, taking due note of the fact that honor is “insensible […] to the dead” (5.1.137-138).

In the third and final part of this series, we will look at one topic both men seem to use as a foundational core to projections on the future of humanity, albeit to extremely different ends: evolution. Finally, I shall conclude with a few final thoughts on issue of choosing sides.

Note: Works cited information will appear in the third part of this series.

Song Du Jour: Every Time it Rains

This song caught my attention the other day when I first heard it. The words are pretty good, although you really need to hear it to appreciate it. It is available via iTunes Music Store if anyone interested.

Every time it rains I listen to the sky
And wonder what's so great about sunshine
Everybody lives and everybody dies
And no one's gonna love you like I do

When it was getting dark
I didn't need a match
I never needed light to see you
You thought I disappeared
But I was always here
I could never get that far from you

Though I misunderstand
And been misunderstood
So love me 'cause you can
And not because you should

Every time it rains
I know it's good to be alive
Every time it rains
I know I'm trying to survive

—Charlotte Martin, Every Time it Rains

So what are you listening to right now?

The Second Questioning

A fellow Timothy who also happens to live in my neck of the woods gave me the following excellent questions to answer as part of the Interview Game. I now “owe” interviews to seven people. Would you like to be interviewed and receive your own question set of five questions? If so, please say so in the comments. You can see my answers to the last round of the game, here. Without further ado…

1) When and how did you become a Christian?
I became a Christian when I was 14. I grew up in a Christian family, although I had adopted a Pluralist viewpoint and really didn't “get” the Gospel. I equated good deeds with admission to heaven and therefore doubted my own eternal destination at times (the realization that I wasn't “mostly good” was probably one of the few orthodox ideas I had at the time).

I did not want to go to Confirmation, but my mother insisted, and that is where I first really came to an understanding of the Gospel. Within the first few weeks of the program, the students were asked if they had been “born again.” I didn't understand what they were talking about. But, I did soon learn what this meant, and shortly thereafter I prayed to ask Jesus into my heart. Over the years, there have been times that I felt like I've slipped away a bit from that initial plunge, and at those times I've prayed to recommit myself to Christ, but that time during confirmation is definitely when I would pick out as when I was “saved.” (Note: I do affirm the believe in the perseverance of the saints, so I do not believe I ever backslid out of my faith, but I still do see the value in renewing my commitment to Christ at times.)

Like many people I've talked to who grew up in a church but were theologically off-base, I did not have a dramatic conversion experience that makes for a “great testimony.” Much of the process was a gradual change rather than one experience I can point to. I'm not sure one could really have discerned a difference in me on the day before I prayed the sinners prayer and the day after, but God has slowly molded me into a much different person than I was before.

2) What tools do you use for blogging and why do you think they are better than other tools available to do the job?

I use my own blogging tool, known as SAFARI 2, which I hope to release under a Free Software license at some point. It does not have a lot of distinct advantages for blogging, but I have spent a lot of time trying to shoot for efficiency concerning database querying with an eye to making this a tool that can hold up to Slashdotting-like loads of traffic (and therefore, be usable for my company's online publication, OfB). I've also tried to avoid some of the mistakes in WordPress that makes it easy for spammers to post spam, added a “forum-like” view of comment activity and I am working on a new system of categorizing posts that I think will be advantageous for proper archiving of old content.

3) What hobbies do you have that have not yet made an appearance in your blog?

Hobbies that haven't appeared on my blog? I think now that I'm entering into my fourth year of blogging, I've pretty much touched on all of my hobbies at one point or another. Let's just go over a quick list of my hobbies, eh?

• Theology and Philosophy — primarily theology, but that's only because I've lacked the time to immerse myself in both to the same extent. I love these two fields perhaps too much though — they both should be the means, the windows, to the truth of God, not the end itself. Right now, I'm on a Karl Barth kick (who was repeatedly recommended to me by my professor Dr. Meyers over the past few years). Next up is a book on the “historical Jesus,” pitting evangelical N.T. Wright against Jesus Seminar scholar Marcus Borg.
• Politics — I enjoy political theory almost as much as the above mentioned subjects of philosophy and theology. Yes, I like abstract subjects that aren't suppose to be discussed in polite company. So sue me.
• Other readings — I do a lot of reading on the topics above, but I also enjoy good fiction, be it literature (Go Aeschylus!) or a modern novel, such as the Da Vinci Code.
• Creative writing — I'm the better part of 20 sonnets into my first sonnet sequence. I've written a bunch of haiku and one tanka, one villanelle, and various other poetry, some of which is posted here. I also have a novel and a play in progress at the moment.
• Photography — I love playing around with my camera, and it shows. I have over 10,000 digital photos in my iPhoto album.

Notice the conspicuous absence of computer related hobbies. I'm burnt out on computers at the moment, so they've been banned from the list. In reality, this really is the case: these days computers the things I work on as a job and I simply don't find it all that amusing fighting with them “after hours” anymore.

4) What one blog do you read on a regular basis that people who read your blog might be surprised about?

I may be proving rather unexciting now. There are only a handful of blogs I read that are not presently in my blogroll. Yours, Sparkle, Mysterium Tremendum (to which I add: et fascinans!), Celerate, the Book of Confusion…

5) If I had responded last time you did the Interview meme, what would have been one of your five questions?

“What would you say are the most surprising similarities and differences of living in the U.K. and St. Charles County, Missouri?”

Back Tomorrow

I didn't get any of my in-process entries finished for tonight.

Sola Two: Sola Gratia

This is part two in a series considering “the five solas,” the key cries of the Reformation. You can find part one here. Please feel free to discuss, disagree and posit your own thoughts in the comments.

The solas are a series of stepping-stones. Imagine I want to get to point B from point A and a rushing stream runs between those points. Now, I could try to swim across, but the current would likely move me down the river so I'd land at point C rather than B. Let's say point A is the new Christian who wants to come to understand the key doctrines of the Church so as to be able to reach B, a point where one is giving everything that is God's to God (Matt. 22.21). The first stepping-stone to get across the stream is to understand where we ought to get our idea of God from, and we answer that Sola Scriptura, from Scripture alone.

So, we read the Bible and we are told that one must be “born anew” (John 3.3), that is, we must be “saved.” So then, how are we saved? Certainly, this is a key stepping-stone to recognizing what God is really doing, a stepping stone upon which everything afterward hinges. The answer is Sola Gratia, by grace alone.

“And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. “

—Romans 11.6 (WEB)

This is a difficult idea. We do not tend to like it. Salvation by grace alone. Here's the bad news: I cannot save myself! Instead, I must receive the grace provided only by Christ in order to be saved.

We don't like to be told that we cannot do something ourselves, and the idea of being told that one is only going to succeed because an authority is going to extend an exception to us would generally make us feel upset. “I'll just do it myself, thankyouverymuch.” Sure, I do not mind if a few violations are overlooked for me, but the idea that I'm dependent on someone doing me a favor to proceed at all is uncomfortable.

But here we are requiring just that kind of exception, that kind of, well, grace:

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

—Romans 6.23 (WEB)

Now that is exactly what I did not want to hear! But since we are told that no one is sinless (Romans 3.10) and the cost for my sin — even just one teeny tiny one — is death, suddenly maybe an exception sounds pretty good. I may be proud, but when I am being led to the electric chair, am I really going to refuse a pardon just so that I can say I did not need to depend on anyone's help? Clearly, I will accept it, unless I just have some kind of perverted death wish.

And so it is with Grace. “Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me!”

Next time in my sola series, I shall consider the third motto, which is essential to understanding Sola Gratia: Sola Fide.

Taxes and Economic Profits

Well, everyone knows it is tax time right now. Normally that doesn't bother me much, but this year it was a bit depressing since it forced me to revisit how my business performed last year. Due to some “capital investments” and changes in the services Universal Networks provides, the business was barely in the black in the services segment. Ad revenues helped out, but if I was speaking as an economist, I'd probably say I had an “economic loss” last year (i.e. when I add in non-monetary costs, such as my time, on top of the monetary ones). Note that I am not complaining, I'm not hurting from this, just observing how things went and thinking about how to improve this year.

The past few years have been pretty good, even during the dot-bomb times, so having one bad year isn't all that bad in the big scheme of things. Essentially what I need to do is use this revisiting of the year 2004 to remind me of where I need to focus my energy, where I need to improve and what parts of the business really aren't worth messing around with.

On the other hand, it reinforces my general feeling that unless I want to spend my days cleaning off adware and similar maintenance tasks, my eventual transition out of the computer services industry is probably a good idea from a business standpoint as well as from a personal one.

Mostly Here

Pastor: Are you still alive?

Me: I think so…

That was at 9:00 tonight after a very intense day… the Great Big Move™ of the church office across the street. I got all of the computers running, although our new WAP isn't working quite as well as I hoped. I need to work on that (the high powered antenna I bought seems to decrease the signal).

Anyway, more tomorrow. I'm glad yesterday turned out to be such a nice day to get me prepared for today…

An Unplanned Day

Life comes in moments,
As the bold lightening flashes.
Enjoy the moment,
Savoring the occurrence,
Refreshing as post storm air.

Some days just work out much better than expected. Today was one of those days. I was walking out of my Shakespeare class, planning on doing some network (as in ethernet) planning, when I happened to run into my cousin. She's a high school senior who is planning to come to LU for a BA in Education next year, and today was the day she was suppose to register. I knew that; in fact, I helped her plan her schedule last week, but I did not expect to run into her. She wanted a tour of the campus, which I provided; what a week to do so — the various flowering trees were all in bloom and a warm breeze flowed through the air. Talking a stroll on a spring day like today just makes one feel better. I'm now wishing I had worn my “good” sandals (standard Birkenstocks' with the cork footbed) instead of my less supportive ones (rubber, washable Birkenstocks) today, for my legs are a bit sore, but it was nice.

Then this afternoon, I had an appointment to which the professor I was meeting was about a half hour late. No, this was not a bad thing. A friend of mine works in an office just down the hall, and happened to come in while I was waiting for my appointment. It turned out to be a nice opportunity to chat with her for awhile, something that would not have happened if the meeting had occurred on schedule. She's the type of person that always has something interesting to say, and today was no exception.

At the end of the day, I have not accomplished what I was hoping to (I was hoping to get some web design work done for clients and I needed to return some phone calls), but it worked out as a sort of “accidental vacation day,” which was just what I needed. It wasn't what I planned, but I couldn't have planned it to work out as well as it did had I aimed to.