on the new atheism

Have you heard of the new atheism?
There is nothing new about atheism; people have been denying the existence of God for a long time. What is new about the new atheism is that it is anti-theism. The new atheism is not just disbelief in or denial of a supreme being who created us and to whom we are accountable, it purports that belief in a supreme creator to whom we are accountable is evil.
R. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, author, and keeper of Dr. Mohler’s blog, writes about this in his book Atheism Remix.
The new atheism is different in its position and, perhaps more importantly, is different in its proponents. Historically, atheism’s proponents have been on the fringe and no one paid much attention. Our world was decidedly theistic. While not all believed in the true and living God, the majority had a theistic worldview and atheism didn’t get much of a hearing.
Philosophers tried and failed to run God out of our thinking, but naturalism has been more successful. What philosophy could not do, science has done. After all, empirical evidence that disputes the biblical account of our origins must cause us to reevaluate. If the naturalists are right and there is no creation, then the next step becomes a very small one.
(It is not my purpose here to argue the methodology or conclusions of naturalistic scientists, but I will say that all too often their conclusions have preceded their evaluation of the evidence, and much of their methodology has been built around their conclusions.)
Atheism is not on the fringe anymore. The new atheism has rock stars, guys who are selling books and have a place in the media. Four men in particular, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens, who Dr. Mohler poetically calls “The Four Horsemen of the New Atheist Apocalypse,” are writing books popular enough to be stocked at your local Borders.
This Christmas I received a book entitled Is Christianity Good for the World? It is a debate between Christopher Hitchens, anti-theist, author and one of the new atheism’s stars, and Douglas Wilson, Christian theist, pastor, and author. I read this slim volume on Christmas day. I also received and watched the companion video, entitled Collision, that documents a series of oral debates between Hitchens and Wilson. I admit I read and watched from my own Christian theist worldview, owning a conclusion before opening the book or putting the disc in the machine.
So, why read and watch when my mind is already made up? So that I might be informed; and I was informed and encouraged.
Wilson made the point well that knowledge of truth is not limited to the empirical, but that there is revealed truth. We know the truth of the existence and character of God because He has revealed himself to us. The apostle Paul wrote: “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” Romans 1:18-21
Sounds like Paul had a pretty good grasp of the new atheism.

the wonder of the incarnation

Consider the wonder of the incarnation, that God the Son would become flesh taking the form of mankind, born as Jesus of Nazareth, the righteous, eternal, king of the universe born to humble parents in the most humble of circumstances. Consider that He did this to come and die for our sin.
This was not plan B, God did not devise His plan of redemption in response to our sin, He created us knowing that we would betray Him and knowing the price of redeeming us from our sin and reconciling us to himself would be the perfect life and the perfect death of Jesus.
Paul wrote; “For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person – though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die – but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.” Romans 5:6-11
As you celebrate this year, remember that the birth of Jesus was the prelude to the death of Jesus. Know that in His life and in His death and in His resurrection, Jesus defeated sin and death. We who have been born of the Spirit live in the tension of the now and not yet of redemption. Our redemption is complete in the finished work of Christ, yet at the same time we do not experience the fullness of our redemption while we live in corrupted bodies in a corrupted world. Sin and death have been defeated, yet at the same time we experience sin and death.
Celebrate the birth of the baby born in the barn in Bethlehem so long ago, the Christ, the One who came to save us from our sin.

On Reading and Writing and Preaching

I read for entirely selfish reasons. I read because I love to read. In this activity of undisciplined self-gratification, I attempt to benefit from the discipline of reading by having direction in what I read.
I read books on preaching because I love to preach, and reading about preaching pleases me, much like one who loves to play golf is pleased by reading about golf and one who loves to race motorcycles is pleased by reading about racing motorcycles. I read about preaching in the hope that I might learn something and perhaps be a better preacher, again much like one would read about golf technique to learn something about being a better golfer and one would read about motorcycle racing technique to learn something about being a better motorcycle racer.
I’m not denying the work of the Holy Spirit in the preacher in preparing to preach and in preaching, that is a given; if the Holy Spirit doesn’t show up the preacher shouldn’t either. At the same time, we need to invest in our preaching and work to improve our craft. One way we do this is by reading about preaching as well as theology, doctrine, history, biography, culture, literature, etc.
Recently, I read a book about preaching by T. David Gordon entitled Why Johnny Can’t Preach. His premise is that we can’t preach because we don’t read and can’t write. We can read, but we don’t read texts. We read like we use the phone book, mining the fact or quote we need without engaging the text as a whole. We don’t engage the train of thought of the writer because we don’t read it. Because we do not read in this way we cannot write, and because we do not read and cannot write, we cannot put our thoughts together in a way that our people can follow as we preach.
When a young man comes to Dr. Gordon with a desire to pursue the preaching ministry, he recommends that they major in English literature before they study to be preachers. For those of us who are years past the university and the seminary, Dr. Gordon tells us that we can benefit by learning to read poetry and other classic literature on our own.
This book has certainly broadened my reading, and I believe that it will be of benefit to you who preach. It will also be of benefit to you who listen to preachers and to you who communicate belief and ideas, and all of us are in the latter category.

Of the Making of Blogs There is No End (With apologies to Solomon the Preacher.)

The obvious question is why? Why another blog? The second obvious question is do I have anything to say, or the ability to say it?
The answers may not be as obvious as the questions, but the short answer to the first is that I write. A friend suggested this as an outlet for that. Not as therapy, but as a way to connect with an audience. That audience is you, dear reader.
Writing is a solitary occupation. The work of writing is crafting words. In the space, on the paper or the screen, words are arranged just so. They are arranged so the reader can see into the writer’s heart. What is in the heart is filtered through the brain and is given to the reader in words and sentences and paragraphs. Beyond the self-editing process, others are needed to see what is written from other perspectives; this completes the writer’s vision. That’s why there is a team of people involved in the publishing process of all good writing, but the work of writing is solitary because it comes from one heart.
Primarily, reading is a solitary endeavor as well. We do read aloud (apart from the formal reading aloud to children and in teaching), sharing those bits of a book or article that speak to us with our spouse or older children, but the connection from the printed word to the eye, to the brain, and to the heart happens most often in a one text, one reader relationship.
This connection of the heart and brain of the writer to the brain and heart of the reader is made with written words, words received by the eye instead of the ear. In my opinion, there is nothing like engaging the heart of a writer in this way.
So, dear reader, there is the why. I want to share my writing with you which is to say I want to share my heart with you. Whether I have anything to say or any ability to say it I leave to you.