logos redux

One of the arguments that young earth creationists/Biblical chronology proponents regularly employ is that the Cosmos was created with the appearance of age. That is, the world was made X number of years ago, and at its creation it was made to appear much older than it actually is.

A common reply to this argument is that such a scenario would be deceptive. Why would God intentionally deceive us by creating a world that looked as if it were much older than it is?

The problem is that these questions are generally asked rhetorically. Those who ask them don’t want an answer. They view the question as prima facie evidence against the argument for the appearance of age. It works like this:

a.) Creating a world that looks old but is actually young is deceptive.
b.) God is not a deceiver.
c.) : . The world was not created with the appearance of age.

I find this strategy to be rather profoundly lacking. First, it leaves out one of the fundamental steps in the logical process (from the perspective of young earth guys). Continue Reading…

I’m currently reading this book by Peter Leithart. I haven’t gotten too far into it but already Dr. Leithart has noted some fascinating insights on the eschatological typology of David as the King of Israel who set up the tent of God’s dwelling in which, unlike the Mosaic tabernacle, there was no gradation of holiness (i.e. holy place, most holy place). Instead there was simply a tent which housed the ark of God’s dwelling. As the anti-type Jesus, the Great King of Israel was responsible for the final rending of the veil, eliminating fully the gradated spaces of holiness and allowing all of the people of God full access into his presence.

This is the miracle of the divine liturgy. As priests united to the great High Priest we are all invited into the most holy place every week to be cleansed and blessed, to offer sacrifices and praise and to eat a meal at peace with God.

With around a third of precincts reporting it looks like John McCain will take South Carolina in a relatively narrow victory over Huckabee with, Romney, Giuliani and Paul following in that order. It could turn out otherwise, but it appears that McCain has been holding about a 6-8% lead since the polls started reporting.

In Nevada Clinton beat Obama by a relatively narrow margin and it would appear that Edwards was slaughtered. I think his campaign may be over. With those two super-stars fighting an all out battle for the Democratic nomination he would be a fool to not just bow out now and quit wasting his money. (Of course this is coming from someone who likes Ron Paul, but Paul has a message that is enough different from any mainstream candidate that I think it’s worth him sticking around just to be a voice of dissent and challenge the mainstream. I can’t see that John Edwards is really that much different from Hillary or Barak.)

Update

With close to half the polling sites reporting the race between McCain and Huckabee appears to be tightening to within 4 or 5 percentage points. Read more here.

Make that 3%. This is getting close. Also, it looks like Thompson has pulled ahead of Romney with a respectable 16% and, get this, Ron Paul is beating Rudy Giuliani. That makes me proud of the good people of South Carolina.

Final Update

It looks like they’ve called SC and the results are:

John Armstrong has a long but interesting post challenging some of the McCain hatred so easily found on talk radio and in the right-wing press.  I must confess many of his arguments are compelling, and I’m someone who has never thought too highly of McCain.  I was especially surprised to hear that Tom Coburn from my home state of Oklahoma has endorsed him.  I respect Coburn a lot and value his opinion.

I have been asking myself, since the primaries began in earnest with the Iowa caucus, and especially since John McCain won in New Hampshire, "Why does the conservative talk show contingent despise John McCain so profoundly?" Except for Michael Medved, who I think has openly endorsed McCain, the loathing for him as a presidential candidate is almost as pronounced as the conservative media’s loathing of Hillary Clinton. Why?

I have to say I was puzzled until I looked into this more deeply. (Understand, I am not formally endorsing a candidate, though some will insist that I am, but asking a serious question that I think thoughtful people should ponder.)

For the record John McCain’s well-deserved career title is that of a "maverick." But he is a very conservative maverick no less. I went to the Web site of the American Conservative Union, a lobby organization that ranks congressional members each year with a percentage of how consistently conservative they are in their voting record. John McCain got an 82% rating in 2006. Kansas senator Sam Brownback, a much respected Roman Catholic conservative from Kansas who dropped out of the presidential primary a few weeks ago, got a 94% rating from the ACU. And Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma conservative, got a 98% rating. So, who do you think these two strongly conservative senators have endorsed for president? You would never guess John McCain if you listen to the conservative talk show media….

 

This conference which will be held here in St. Louis February 26-28 should be good.  Speakers include:

• Bill Boyd
• Matt Brown
• Jeremy Jones
• Greg Thompson
• and Jeffrey White

And the topics of discussion will be:

• The ethos of our church
• The theological practices of our church
• The worship of our church
• The ecclesiology of our church, especially as it relates to other ecclesial bodies
• The mission of our church to the world

Apparently Mike Huckabee thinks it’s okay to use God as a humorous prop with a bit of touching sentimentalism at the end just for good measure. Disgusting.

Biblical Horizons now has a blog here. Check it out. It is a multiple contributor site that will host the insights of many of my favorite theologians and pastors.

(See Introduction, Parts I & II Below)

As I thought about this theme of not rebelling against God and not fearing man in light of the fact that God delights in us and will give us the world, whether in this life or the age to come I couldn’t help but think about the story that I have come across just recently in my teaching at a classical school of the martyrdom of St. Ignatius of Antioch. Ignatius was the second bishop of Antioch a contemporary of the Apostle Paul, and likely a disciple of St. John himself. Continue Reading…

(See Introduction and Part I Below)

We must not fear the people of the land.

The second response that the children of Israel should have had to God’s delight in them and promises to them is to not fear the people of the land. The fear of man is a result of rebellion against YHWH. It is only when, through doubting God’s promises and thus rebelling that we begin to fear man. In fact in a sense, the fear of man is simply the other side of the coin of rebellion against God. If we no longer trust in God, and have rebelled against him we must trust in our own abilities. This means that we will measure risks according to the way of the world. The children of Israel sized up themselves, and sized up the men of the land, and found that they were as grasshoppers in their own sight, and in the sight of the enemy. These were big, warrior men; descendents of the Nephilim, the mighty men of old. It was as if they were to go plunder a land occupied by an entire army of Goliaths. But they did not see through eyes of faith. Their hearts and minds had submitted to the bondage of rebellion and thus they were unable to see things as they were. Continue Reading…