It started with philosophy. Man’s determination to explain everything. Philosophy attempted to diminish religion with rationalization and logic. Philosophy still exists, but so does religion, it was a failed attempt. When I speak of religion I am usually referring to Christianity. With the Enlightenment came science and that became the authority for truth.

Science is the authority for truth in the secular world and more specifically the academia. People seem to think that it is the be all end all of answers, yet it is constantly changing. In addition, there is as much faith put into science as Christianity. There is a reason evolution is called a theory, because it cannot be proven.

Some Christians want to merge their faith with science. There are numerous ones I am sure you have heard of some. While claims in the Bible have not been proven incorrect by science thus far, I would caution people to not conform to this practice. There are a few reasons why I believe this: (1) If you are matching claims of the Bible to science, you are giving science the authority and ultimately questioning the Biblical claim. (2) As I said before, science is changing. Some things that were thought before are not viewed the same way. If we give into comparing science they might claim to discredit the Biblical claim and that scientific claim could be changed years later. (3) This could also be reversed. A Christian might think they have a scientific reason for a Biblical claim. We do not know if it was simply divine intervention. That answer could be disproved and bring discredit to the Bible. (4) Evidence is not required for belief in God and anyone who focuses on evidence shows lack of faith.

I am not against science. I hold the Bible as the ultimate authority. I am not going to subject God’s infinite wisdom with our finite knowledge. My suggestion is that if science is making a claim against the Bible, use science against science. For example, the big bang theory goes against the law of circular momentum. All the planets rotate the same way except for one. Things like this help remind people that science requires just as much faith as Christianity. There are extremists on both sides. Some that say there is a logical scientific reason for all events and then there are others that will say natural disasters are a result of God’s anger. We should all continue to be educated, but realize that we will never in this lifetime understand everything.

The following was posted by my friend Kyle on his blog Spartan Spectator. I found it interesting because I have attended some Libertarian events recently and found myself disagreeing with them on most issues. I am not sure if I agree 100%, but he did bring up some interesting points. One in particular is something I noticed when I visited the Libertarian website. It is their view on religion. Before I say too much I will let you read it and post your own opinions.

"Many Republicans argue that libertarians and conservatives should join forces so that they can defeat the collectivist liberals of the Democratic Party. This should be highly discouraged; libertarianism is contradictory to conservatism.

A fallacy that is believed by people on both the Left and the Right is that the political spectrum is divided by totalitarianism on the Left (communists, Nazis, collectivists, socialists, and statists) and liberty on the Right. This is not the case. I firmly believe that on one end of the political spectrum is the philosophy of believing in a moral order established by experience, and on the other side is the belief that the nature of humans is devoted to work. While conservatives believe in traditionalism and an ordered society based on history, libertarians and Marxists believe in atheistic materialism. In this example, libertarians have more in common with Marxists than they do with conservatives.

Conservatives believe that order is needed in society. If liberty and justice are permitted to exist in a country, order must be maintained. As economist Wilhelm Röpke argued, liberty is only permissible within the constraints of societal order. While libertarians believe in freedom (liberty without constraints, which is referred to as anarchy), conservatives believe in true freedom (liberty within societal constraints). Both Marxists and libertarian ideologies are similar in that they both share a hatred of true freedom.

Conservatives understand that societal order is needed to achieve maximum liberty. A common culture, common history, common language, understanding of right verses wrong (which is not relative, it is absolute, but in today’s world, cultures are dissimilar, because they have different taboos) and sense of community are needed to forge society. Libertarians have distaste for society; they feel that societal limits absolute liberty. Instead of trying to preserve society, libertarians seek to destroy it by advocating for the elimination of community. To the libertarian, the individual is supreme; Man should be worshipped instead of God. Again, materialism is at the root of this. Libertarians and Marxists are similar in this example as well.

Libertarians are ideologues who have set out to create Utopia on earth (a different form of Utopia than what the Marxists advocate for, but Utopia nevertheless) while conservatives understand that all human beings are imperfect and that Utopia is impossible.

Libertarians hate government, because they feel that government restrains their liberties; conservatives want limited government, because they understand that liberties need to be restrained. It has been said that if all men were angles that government would not be needed. That is untrue, because even angles would need laws to maintain societal order (how would one drive to a store of there were no stoplights maintained by the government to prevent car accidents?). In order for true freedom to exist, societal constraints are needed.

A very good reason as to why libertarianism is a failed doctrine is because it cannot work, because it does not take into account human nature. Humans try to best one another; societal order is needed to prevent this vulgar Machiavellianism from destroying civilization (and true freedom).

Libertarians do not understand the difference between liberty and rights. A liberty is when one is granted permission to do something; a right is when one does not need permission to do something. For example, I have a right to my property. I do not need to ask permission to walk across it. If I wanted to walk across my neighbor’s lawn, I would need to ask permission to do so. Because libertarians believe that they have a right to liberty, they do not understand how this would compromise society as we know it.

Something the atheistic libertarians should reflect upon is that if God does not exist, then God-given rights do not exist. If that is the case, then rights were created by Man and therefore, can be taken away by Man. Marxists and Libertarians both ignore God’s Law, which is exactly what rights are and what rights are not. Libertarians, trying to remove God from society, tend to refer to God’s Law as “natural law,” but the libertarians neglect to explain what nature exactly is or how it came into existence. The libertarian who has blind devotion to atheism is not unlike the Marxist who has blind devotion to the state.

Instead of worshipping the state like Marxists, libertarians worship Man and Ayn Rand. Instead of joining forces with libertarians to oppose the collectivist state, conservatives should distance themselves from them. Libertarians are no more conservative than Marxists."

After reading and replying to many posts dealing with predestination and losing salvation, I have thought more and more on the topic of lordship salvation. Do not be confused, this is not saying works is apart of salvation. Submitting Christ as Lord of you life is in connection to trusting Him to be saved. “and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again”. 2 Corinthians 5:15

Jesus’ earthly ministry did not have people make a decision or say a prayer. His message was one of discipleship. Jesus described two ways, narrow and broad (Matthew 7:13-14). The narrow will have few and the broad will have many. Mathew 7:21-23 is a verse that should make every evangelical make sure they are spreading the gospel message correctly. Jesus said that many will call upon his name and he will say “I never knew you”. Those are frightening words to me.

We do not know what is in everyone’s heart, but the Bible does tell us what happens after salvation. For one, there is a change. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new” 2 Corinthians 5:17. Furthermore, when Jesus was answering the disciples question about prayer He said “Your will be done” not the individual (Mathew 6:10).

In addition, the book of James mentions works numerous times. Like I said before, I do not believe this is saying salvation is by works. What I think James is talking about when he talks about works in James 2:14-26 is that salvation will bring forth fruit of good works (Mathew 7:18-20)

Unlike predestination and losing salvation this topic does depend on one’s salvation. I think that easy believism is dangerous and giving many false hope.

With this cold rainy weather we have it is feeling more and more like football season. Not to mention my recent activities of fantasy football drafts and purchasing my season tickets for MSU football. I got season tickets last year and while the team was disappointing, it was still a fun time. I love the atmosphere, especially in the student section because there is nothing worse than having some uptight people around you wanting it quiet or don’t cheer; it’s a FOOTBALL game!

I am excited about coach Dantonio’s new era. I do not think he is an instant savior for the football program, but from what I have read it seems he is pushing the program in the right direction. I am not expecting too much, but its all worthwhile when you are not a bandwagon fan and those few big wins happen it means more when you have been there at the bottom.

Many predictions I have read have them going 4-8, I predict they will go 5-7. What are your thoughts about coach Dantonio or the upcoming season in general? In anticipation I have added a countdown in the upper right corner.

Well my blog got a facelift. It will probably change some more. Feel free to comment what you think of the change.

I am not sure if anyone has heard this story before, but it is worth repeating. The words to this hymn were written after two major traumas in Spafford's life. The first was the Great Chicago Fire of October 1871, which ruined him financially. Shortly after, while crossing the Atlantic, all four of Spafford's daughters died in a collision with another ship. Spafford's wife Anna survived and sent him the now famous telegram: "SAVED ALONE." Several weeks later, as Spafford's own ship passed near the spot where his daughters died, he was inspired to write these words.

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll;
Whatever my lot, Thou has taught me to say,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

Though Satan should buffet, though trials should come,
Let this blessed assurance control,
That Christ has regarded my helpless estate,
And hath shed His own blood for my soul.
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

My sin, oh, the bliss of this glorious thought!
My sin, not in part but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross, and I bear it no more,
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul!
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

And Lord, haste the day when my faith shall be sight,
The clouds be rolled back as a scroll;
The trump shall resound, and the Lord shall descend,
Even so, it is well with my soul.
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

Romans 8: 28

“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.”

I am sure most people are familiar with this verse. I refer to it often and use it often, usually in times of trial, struggle or confusion. As I was reading a book on Romans it pointed out something that I never noticed. “To those” is used twice in this verse and they are different expressions.

One is from God to man and the other is from man to God. This is a two way street. It is also something that I have trouble explaining, which is the balance of election and freewill. The amazing part is that it is in the same verse.

Examples

(1) God’s promise to Abram (Abraham) in Genesis 12:
God’s side was to tell Abram to go and Abram’s side was going.

(2) God tells Moses to go to Egypt in Exodus 3:11-12:
God tells Moses to go to Pharaoh and says He will be there with him and Moses goes.

(3) Saul’s conversion Acts 9:15:
God selects Paul to stand before gentiles and kings and Saul (Paul) excepts.


There are many more examples. This is not a topic to start debating predestination. I believe in sovereign election, but there are responsibilities also with man, for example, repentance and trusting Christ as Lord and Savior. These three examples showed trust in God.

How do you define success? Obviously it depends on a specified area. For your career, is it a dollar figure, something you like, or something that is above a certain level of stature? This is more difficult to say for a church or a believer. What is a successful church? Do you measure success by growth by numbers, individual growth, or works?

I don’t think you can measure success by growth in numbers alone. To measure success of a church, it is necessary to know the purpose of the church. I believe the purpose of the church is to (1) Glorify God (Ephesians 3:21), (2) Build itself up in faith by instruction of the word and using spiritual gifts (2 Timothy 2:2,15), (3) Fellowship and keeping the ordinances (1 John 1:3; Acts 2:41-42), (4) To spread the gospel (Mathew 28:19).

I think success is measured with a combination of these. Most churches will emphasize one of these as more important. Usually it is evangelizing. They are so consumed by growth in numbers that they don’t build the congregation up. On the other hand, the church does have to grow. I prefer not to measure by numbers because other means other than the word of God can be the reason for attendance.

As for the individual, these same principles apply. A believer is to glorify God, study the word, use their spiritual gifts, fellowship and evangelize. Now if a believer measures their success by how many people accepted Christ when they witness it might not be that good. Does that mean that they are unsuccessful or presenting it wrong? Absolutely not. I found out three years after witnessing to someone who was an atheist that they now have accepted Christ. Results are not always immediate. I think the humanistic version of success has flooded over to the Christians’ view.