Is there such a thing as objective morality? If there is, does that suggest a moral law giver? Peter Kreeft, distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Boston College, takes on these critical questions and offers some challenging answers.
Showing posts with label Love of God. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Love of God. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Prager University - If Good and Evil Exist, God Exists
Is there such a thing as objective morality? If there is, does that suggest a moral law giver? Peter Kreeft, distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Boston College, takes on these critical questions and offers some challenging answers.
Monday, December 17, 2012
Michael Brown - The Newtown Massacre and the Pain of God
In the aftermath of the Newtown massacre, as family members and friends of the slain and wounded suffer unspeakable agony, people around the world are asking, “Where was God?” But very few are asking, “Is God hurting too?”According to Basilea Schlink (1904-2001), a German Christian leader who stood up to the Nazis, “Anyone who loves as much as God does, cannot help suffering. And anyone who really loves God will sense that He is suffering.” She found support for this view in the writings of the Japanese Lutheran theologian Kazoh Kitamori in his book “Theology of the Pain of God.”
God suffering? God in pain? How can this be?
If he is the Almighty Creator and Ruler, and if he has infinite knowledge of the future, why would he even create a world in which there would be so much suffering and pain on a daily basis? And if the scripture is true that not even a sparrow falls to the ground without the knowledge (or care) of the Heavenly Father (Matthew 10:29), how could he allow 20 innocent children – not to mention the adults – to be cut down in cold blood?
Questions like these are raised in the Bible itself, including cynical observations about the state of the world (see Ecclesiastes 7:15) and even harsh accusations against God uttered in the midst of extreme suffering (see Job 9:22-23). As one Old Testament scholar put it, if you’d like to voice your complaint to God, the Bible provides you with forms with the words already filled in for you.
Of course, as I noted in my Ohio State University debate with Prof. Bart Ehrman, a noted New Testament scholar and agnostic, if you remove God from the picture, there’s really no problem of suffering and evil. A spider kills a fly; a lion kills a zebra; a mugger kills his victim . . . this is what the random products of unguided evolution do! What’s wrong with the survival of the fittest? Why doesn’t might make right?
But if you believe that there is a loving Creator, then you recognize that suffering and evil really do present a problem.
How then do we respond to a mind-numbing tragedy like the Newtown massacre, and how does the concept of God’s pain help us process this tragedy?
First, we affirm that it was right for God to create the world, without which we would not exist, and we affirm that it was right for him to give us free will. But these are gifts with consequences, and the things we cherish most – our existence and our ability to make choices for our lives – are the very things for which we fault God at times like this.
C. S. Lewis sagely observed, “Try to exclude the possibility of suffering which the order of nature and the existence of free-wills involve, and you find that you have excluded life itself. . . . Free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata – of creatures that work like machines – would hardly be worth creating.”
Put another way, love cannot be coerced; it must be freely chosen.
Second, we recognize that God created a world that would also cost him dearly, to the point that he had to send his Son to suffer and die that we might live. That was a consequence of his choice to give us freedom of choice.
In the words of Pastor Timothy Keller, “If we again ask the question: ‘Why does God allow evil and suffering to continue?’ and we look at the cross of Jesus, we still do not know what the answer is. However, we know what the answer isn’t. It can’t be that he doesn’t love us. It can’t be that he is indifferent or detached from our condition. God takes our misery and suffering so seriously that he was willing to take it on himself.”
That’s why Anglican leader John Stott stated, “I could never myself believe in God, if it were not for the cross.”
Third, we understand that God is not a distant bystander but is himself in agony because of his creation’s agony.
The Scriptures teach that he is hurt by tragedy and suffering, and Jesus was even angered by it. In the words of Isaiah, “In all Israel’s affliction, he was afflicted” (Isaiah 63:9). He may not explain to us all the reasons for our suffering or tell us why he apparently doesn’t intervene more. But this much is sure: He cares deeply and he is suffering with us.
You don’t like the way this world is? God doesn’t either. In fact, he hates certain things that take place, but he is at work for good in the midst of it and, in the end, he will bring something beautiful out of it.
As expressed by quadriplegic Joni Erickson Tada, “God permits what he hates to achieve what he loves.”
Fourth, we realize that only God can bring good out of evil and light out of darkness. He who hurts with us will help us, and the one who understands the depth of human evil is the one who can bring healing and hope.
According to Kitamori, “Those who have beheld the pain of God cease to be loquacious, and open their mouths only by the passion to bear witness to it.”
And so, in the end, we stop talking and we stop writing, and we pray for God to bring beauty out of ashes and life out of death, in this world and in the world to come. Right now, the agony is great.
Dr. Michael Brown
Saturday, April 7, 2012
For God So Loved The World That He Gave His Only Begotten Son
"John 3:16 - The Story of Love" came from the movie (The Bridge), a beautiful Oscar-nominated movie and winner of many prestigious film festivals that tells the story of the close relationship between a bridge operator and his young son and the fateful day when both try to head off an impending rail disaster.A steam train full of hundreds of passengers are unaware of the danger as they head towards an open drawbridge. When a desperate young woman witnesses an act of virtue beyond imagination, her life is forever changed.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Mike Adams - One Rape Two Victims
I appreciated your article on abortion (whether you'd abort Hitler). I read on your page on Facebook that you've gotten hate mails after the article, I know you always get lambasted by the intolerant left. It means you're doing what's right. Anyway I wanted to send you this message, because I appreciate all your efforts. Almost 30 years ago, when I was 19 I was raped. I learned a month later that I was pregnant as a result. Everyone urged me to abort, but what struck me at the time was that that baby was as much a victim of the rape as I was. And it didn't deserve to be punished for it. I decided to carry the pregnancy to term, and place the baby up for adoption. In 1982, that baby was born and he was given to a wonderful Christian family, and I know that he has been a joy to them. I lost nothing by carrying that pregnancy to term. It didn't hurt me, or cause me to miss out on anything. There is nothing that can't be postponed to preserve an innocent life. Anyway, I wanted to add my voice to those who contact you in thanks for providing a much needed message to so many, especially young people. I hope your clarion call, strikes home. God bless you.
Dear (name deleted):
I appreciate your kind note. It helps to explain why women who experience unexpected pregnancy due to rape are less likely to abort than those who experience unexpected pregnancy due to consensual sex. In the aftermath of the rape, your encounter with evil caused you to think very deeply about the prospect of inflicting pain and violence upon another. You could not even imagine consenting to violence against another human being. Not after what happened to you. You dealt courageously and head-on with a very important question: “Isn’t it better to suffer evil than to inflict evil?”
In a sense, the question is an easy one. The assumption of those supporting the “rape exception” (to criminalizing abortion) is plainly silly: that aborting the product of rape will put an end to the suffering of the rape victim.
After only a month, your suffering was barely beginning. I have known women who have been raped and not experienced a single nightmare for many months. But when those nightmares began, they went on for years and years. Counseling helps such women. But it will not bury the memory entirely. Terminating the life of a product of rape can no more cause a woman to forget a rape than terminating the life of a product of casual sex can cause a woman to forget a one-night stand. It is just plain common sense - the kind that often eludes us when we discuss abortion.
The callousness of those who encouraged you to get the abortion is revealed by asking a couple of simple questions: What about the life of the rapist? Do we even remember the time when we used to execute the rapist rather than executing the baby for the crime of rape?
That was not a rhetorical question. It was in my lifetime. Before 1966, no state allowed for abortion in circumstances of rape. And no Supreme Court decision prevented states from executing for the crime of rape. In 1973, the Court said states cannot protect the product of rape from execution via abortion. In 1977, the Court said we must (repeat: must) preserve the life of the rapist because the constitution demands it. Today, some people applaud the right to kill the innocent human while shielding the guilty rapist from execution. In fact, they call themselves “humanists.” Some even call themselves “humanitarians.” I prefer to call them “intellectually bankrupt,” “morally bankrupt,” or both.
Of course, those who argue for the “rape exception” do not really believe in it. In order to have a rape exception, there would first have to be a presumptive rule against abortions for mere convenience. Such a rule would mean that men could no longer use women for sex and then use abortion to divorce themselves from the consequences. And that would involve learning to respect a woman’s body. This is hardly a goal of the sex-driven pro-abortion-choice male.
You stated correctly that there are two victims for every rape. There are also two victimizations of the same woman for every rape. The first is when a man uses the woman by forcing her to have sex against her will. The second is when another man uses the rape victim again in order to justify abortion. Both men are really the same. They are willing to use violence in order to get sex. That is why there really are no pro-choice men. There are only pro-choice males.
Mike Adams
Mike AdamsNOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Mike Adams - One Thousand Pound Bible
It was good seeing you the other day at lunch. I meant to share a story with you but the room was too crowded and the story is too long. So I write to you today sharing something that will surely lift your spirits just the way you lifted mine when I first heard you speak in May of 2007.
My first visit to your church came during the worst time in all of my life. I was struck with personal tragedy in January of that year. That was followed by another tragedy in February, one in March, one in April, and one in May. Things would settle down in July but had I waited until then to visit your church I might not be writing you today. I’m still surprised that my heart or head did not just explode during all of the turmoil in that tragic time of my life.
On my first visit to your church, I listened intently to your sermon on the first letter of John in the New Testament. It was moving – so much so that I made it the subject of a column called “How to Read the New Testament.” Looking back, I am not sure I still agree with everything I wrote in that column. But I did and still do agree with the manner in which you said we should read that letter. You said it should be read like a love letter written just for the reader by someone who is madly in love with him (or her).
Of course, one does not read the entire Bible the way you suggested we read the first letter of John. But your advice was specific to that book. So I walked right out of your sermon and straight over to Barnes and Noble. I bought the ESV translation of the Bible and started reading it over lunch. I ended up reading that first letter of John every day over the course of the next week. Since I wrote a column about it you know how beneficial I found your advice to be.
In the nearly five years since I wrote the column, I have given it very little thought. Then, just the other day, a fellow wrote asking for a link to the column. He wanted to use it in his Sunday school class. Oddly, I received a second email about the column just 24 hours later.
The second of the two letters was far more dramatic and memorable than the first. In it, a man wrote a long and painful account of a series of tragedies in his personal and professional life. I would not have kept reading it had I not seen the reference to the aforementioned column as I glanced casually over the text. It was only the coincidence of getting two emails two days in a row (on the same very old column) that kept me reading.
Eventually, I reached a portion of the email in which my reader said “thoughts of suicide entered my mind each day – every day. Earlier this year, the pain became so intense that I knew that I would either have to find my way back to Christ, or I would have to die.” That was alarming but I kept on reading. I’m glad I did.
The reader continued, “I would have to return to His Word. However, the Bible seemed to weigh a thousand pounds, and I could neither lift it nor open it. Exacerbating this situation was the fact that I realized that I was a coward; I was afraid because the world has become increasingly and vehemently hostile to Christians and Christianity. I knew that reaffirming and declaring faith in Christ would make me a target of the same hatred, ridicule, and scorn I had heaped on others, and I wasn’t ready for it.”
My reader then informed me that, in the midst of his depression, on the brink of suicide, he came across a column I had written. For some reason, he thought that something I said somehow took courage. So he started working backwards through my column archive. Eventually, he read the column referencing 1 John and your sermon that had inspired it. He ended his letter saying that was the very day he found the strength to pick up his Bible and start his journey in the Word anew.
He continued reading his Bible every day. The Book that once “seemed to weigh a thousand pounds” became light as a feather. As he continued to read, his thoughts of suicide disappeared. They were replaced with a burning desire to live again and to walk in the light of forgiveness.
As I read that man’s letter, I realized that it had been a very long time since I told you what your words did for me in my darkest hour. I hope you will forgive me as I am still seeing what those words have done - not just for me, but through me. I am beginning to understand what John meant when he said “What we will be has not yet appeared.”
The ripple effect that flows from our words and from our actions extends far beyond the reach of human perception. It will not be fully revealed until we reach the other side. That is why we need the Word to lift us out of our desperation and move us beyond our present circumstances. It helps reveal the only Light that can lead us out of darkness.
Mike Adams
Mike AdamsNOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)