Christmas, Chick-Fil-A, and Something Lost

The Christmas season was another great time with family, gifts, and--most of all--thoughts and affections centered on Christ.

Christmas morning, we had our own family gift exchange with the children and the reading of the Luke 2 account of Christ's birth. We then drove over to Ruth's folks for time with extended family. On the way over, I noticed how empty the roads were. Businesses were closed. All was quiet. I saw two other cars on a highway that usually swarms with vehicles.

I liked it.

I like how Christmas pretty much shuts everything down.

Each year I'm reminded that the quietness of Christmas was, for the most part, the way every Sunday was--years ago. I don't remember it in my lifetime, but older folks will tell us that everything pretty much shut down on Sunday.

Because of what such a phenomenon in society would indicate, I find myself wishing for that Sunday quiet again.

I know--and am a defender of--the idea that days are to be regarded by the individual conscience of the believer (Romans 14). But I still have to honor what a business like Chick-Fil-A does each Sunday: Close Up Shop.

Everything changes, people say. But not always for the better. Sometimes good things get lost.

It's Christmas Time in the City or Peace on Earth Goodwill Toward Men

Took a trip to Knoxville yesterday. The whole city was shot full of people. Traffic was thick. But I've never before seen so much courtesy in a town full of drivers. Several times, people stopped to let me turn into the traffic. Found myself doing the same for others. It was like we had a collective understanding that, "Ok, we're all in this together, so we'll make the best of it." I was really impressed. Good job, Knoxville.

Now, was all this courtesy due to Southern hospitality or was it "Christmastime in the city?" Did the season afford us "peace on earth, good will toward men" at traffic lights?

What did the messengers mean when they first proclaimed, "Peace on Earth, Goodwill Toward Men?"

Well, "Peace on Earth, Goodwill Toward Men" is not the basis of a Coke commercial where we sing together at a candlelight vigil and pause for refreshment and group hugs.

The peace expressed that first Christmas night was God's goodwill toward humanity.

Why would it be so remarkable a statement?

Because men are sinners and rebels against this good, holy God.


God created man to be in perfect fellowship with Him, but we spurned Him and chose our own way. We established hostility toward God in our hearts. And we see it everywhere.

There is much to show that God made obedience easy. He created man without a sinful nature, placed him in an ideal environment, provided for all his temporal needs, endowed him with strong mental powers, gave him work to engage his hands and his mind, provided a life-partner, warned him of the consequences of disobedience, and entered into personal fellowship with him. Surely, God cannot be blamed for man's apostacy. - Henry Theissen.

We are foolish enough, in the midst of all this, to believe that we actually have a case against God. We blame Him. We blame others.

We want to blame crime on poverty. We want to blame child abuse on one's background. We want to blame terrorism on the existence of capitalism and a free society... The list goes on and on... I am not saying that environment has no influence on people, but it is never a root cause. We must take personal ownership of our transgressions, because sin is a willful transgression of the law. We established "enmity" against Him in our hearts.

I cannot place the blame for my particular set of sins on anyone else: It falls to me.

Until a person recognizes that his sin problems are rooted in rebellion for which he or she is morally responsible, there is no hope for that person to be released from his or her bondage. It is a problem between the person and God.

"Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be, So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." -Romans 8:7

C.S. Lewis put it to a point when he mentioned that man is not simply a weak creature who needs rehabilitation. He is a rebel who must lay down his arms.

The wonderful scandal of it all is that God justifies and forgives rebels--at a high price to Himself: the sending of His Son.

"Peace on earth, goodwill toward men" is not referring to a heart-felt cry for human to human reconciliation, or courteous driving, as nice as those things are.

"Peace on earth, goodwill toward men" is the great truth that God is willing to be reconciled to rebels who have dishonored His glory and had murderous intentions toward their Creator.

Christ Himself is God's goodwill towards men.

Christmas launched the ministry of reconciliation in the life of the Messiah.

Amen.

A Great Article by Janie B. Cheaney

"Loud shouts and lack of knowledge disfigure today’s attempts at discourse."

I’d like to direct folks to Janie B. Cheaney’s recent article in World Magazine. It is fitting for our day: a time when reasoned discourse is well-nigh impossible. Evoking Plato’s Republic, she likens today’s left wing (and I’m sure she’d include some from the right) as people in the cave with no fire behind them. Everyone’s in the dark screaming over each others’ voices.

Her quotes range from Socrates to Garrison Keillor to Solomon in a very enlightening way.

Check it out Here.

Jean Dublog

I recently came under the scrutiny of Jean Dublog. He had some fair criticisms of Anvil and Fire. The reason I mention that is to let those who saw it know that I'm linking to him again.

He has a very interesting post about ethics and blogging. I think all the bloggers that come here will find it thought provoking.

I really think we should all read it.

Here it is.

Oh Good Grief...

By Joe Raedle, Getty Images











This is an ax-grinding post (or chain-saw grinding--depending on how you look at it...) Forgive me in advance. Allow me one rant. (Do we do that in the blogosphere?) I may need one of those indulgences that Steve and Jeremy Weaver got. Some guys have all the luck.
---------------------------------------------------------
I recently read this article on wood burning in USA Today.

I had just spent some time cutting and splitting wood to get ready for winter when I found Traci Watson's piece. I don't have anything against Watson, but I did find myself saying "Good grief! What are they going to regulate next...I can see it coming."

It seems to me that some people (I'm not necessarily referring to the author of the article) who don't have anything better to do simply want to find a hidden crisis in the mundane. Let's see here... how long has mankind been burning wood?

This seems to be the spirit of the day: "Let's find people with initiative (people who get up, go outside, and get what they need for their families...)--and hinder them, blame them, and eventually regulate them. We can't have people just going out and doing stuff, can we? Where will that lead?

I mean, we can't actually have freedom. What will the environmentalists think?

When will it end?

Good grief.

The Twilight of Atheism

From the Flap: The Twilight of Atheism will unsettle believers and nonbelievers alike. A powerful rebuttal of the philosophy that, for better or for worse, has exerted tremendous influence on Western history, it carries major implications for the future of both religion and unbelief in our society.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Twilight of Atheism ^* is a history of atheism in Western culture. The author concedes that the book could not be an exhaustive study; however, McGrath tries to use “snapshots” in history to give a basic understanding of atheism’s rise.

SUMMARY

Part 1: The High Noon of Atheism

Alister McGrath takes his readers back to the French Revolution of 1789 to start the discussion:

“The French Revolution had shattered the tired old political framework of Europe, sweeping away its outdated, tradition-bound practices and beliefs, and opening the way to a bright new future. A new dawn seemed to be at hand, promising to usher in an era of hope and opportunity (pp. 21-22).”

The beams of a sunrise were rising over a worn-out horizon. The new secularism promised to usher in freedom and peace. In spite of the Revolution’s Reign of Terror, atheism maintained an increasing favor.

McGrath follows this introduction with a discussion of Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud and their influence that laid intellectual foundations for atheism in the twentieth century. “A major cultural shift began, in which culture decisively moved its trust from the dogmas of religion to the theories of science. The transition is neatly summarized in the words that Sir Richard Gregory (1864-1952), one of Britain’s leading scientists, proposed as his epitaph:

My grandfather preached the gospel of Christ;
My father preached the gospel of socialism;
I preach the gospel of science (pp. 77-78).”

Hence a warfare between the natural sciences and religion began. In tracing the battlefronts of this war, McGrath writes about the war’s origins. John William Draper’s History of the Conflict between Religion and Science and Andrew Dickson White’s History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom drew the battle lines. “Both works reflect a strongly positivist view of history and a determination to settle old scores with organized religion (p. 85).” The author’s then focuses on the contributions to secularism by William Kingdon Clifford, Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, Richard Dawkins, and Stephen Jay Gould--among others.

McGrath also shows how a dead, dry Protestantism--devoid of imagination--left a vacuum in Europe that fertile, atheistic minds were more than willing to fill. The literary class seized the mood and the moment in Victorian England and elsewhere to paint a picture of atheism’s hope and freedom. The stage was being set for atheistic states to rise to power in the 20th century.

Part 2: Twilight

“By 1970 many had come to the view that religion was on its way out (p. 174).” John Lennon’s song “Imagine” seemed to reflect the spirit of the age. But as the century started to draw to a close, a resurgence of religion once again captivated the minds of millions. McGrath argues that atheism is now experiencing a twilight. It is a force of the past--much like the old political systems before the French Revolution. It is no longer on the cutting edge.

Why?

1. Intellectually, the “philosophical argument about the existence of God has ground to a halt. The matter lies beyond rational proof, and is ultimately a matter of faith... (p. 179).” McGrath tells the reader that belief and disbelief are both positions of faith. The current rational/philosophical fight has both boxers exhausted in their respective corners. Atheists like to assume the intellectual high ground but often ignore the circular reasoning underpinning their positions.

2. Morally, atheists like to blame religion for war and suffering while ignoring atheism’s contributions to the same: “It is only fair to point out that those who planned the Holocaust, and those who slammed shut the doors of the Auschwitz gas chambers, were human beings--precisely those...declared to be the new ‘gods’ of the modern era, free from any divine prohibitions or sanctions, or any fear of future divine judgment (p. 183).” Mankind without any fear of God “has much to answer for--more violence, bloodshed, and oppression than any naive Victorian optimist could ever have imagined (p. 184).”

Atheism, when implemented in the centers of power, did not follow through on its promise of freedom, peace, and hope.

3. It seems that dry, dusty Christianity discovered a sanctified imagination as atheism lost its imaginative appeal. Alister McGrath then turns his reader’s attention to the worldwide movement of Pentecostalism as one example of why atheism is waning. Pentecostalism offers a direct, experiential relationship with God--and it is a global movement. It captures the imaginations and hearts of people. “There is a rebirth of interest in the spiritual (p. 189).”

The author argues that unimaginative Protestantism may have actually helped atheism rise to its “high noon.” However, Christianity has a way of adapting to the “times” without abandoning its core beliefs. This can be very frustrating for atheists who find Christianity to be a moving target.

Finally, McGrath relates that atheism has primarily been a philosophy of modernity. Now that the world is breathing “postmodern” air, atheism is increasingly out of touch. It recedes with all things modern and “totalizing.” In America the movement has atrophied into a squabbling special-interest group vying with everyone else for media time. The shadows are lengthening.

McGrath is quick to point out that atheism is not going to go away. The future is terribly difficult to predict. Conditions, such as a corrupt and powerful Church, can always make atheism attractive. But for now, it looks like atheism has been marginalized.

STRENGTHS

This book is another excellent primer on the historical developments that have produced today’s atheism. McGrath’s bibliography for this work is thorough; however, the book is not a dry academic offering. I found the book to be a fast and interesting read.

The book is not a philosophical banter set about to prove the existence of God. The author stays to his purpose of following atheism’s history. He treats the subject matter fairly. With an honest and authentic tone, McGrath admits his own emergence from atheism to theism. The work may be difficult for an atheist or agnostic to read, but I believe atheists and agnostics will find the author to be a person with whom they can interact.

This book also sets the record straight on a few issues. Two examples follow.

First, McGrath shows that Voltaire was not an avowed atheist, but one who sided with those resisting a corrupt Church:

“Voltaire regarded atheism with about as much enthusiasm as he did the teachings of the Christian church. In the place of both he urged the reconstruction of religion on the basis of the Supreme Being disclosed in nature....[H]e offered a strong defense of the existence of a supreme being, who was inadequately and falsely represented by the great positive religions of the world, especially the French Catholic church and its leading representatives (pp. 25, 26).”

Second, Bertrand Russell popularized a notion that John Calvin rejected Copernicus’ revolutionary breakthrough by quoting Psalm 93:1. However, McGrath shows that Russell’s account of Calvin as an “obscurantist” is simply a myth. “Take the Calvin myth. The intellectual authority of the great atheist writer Bertrand Russell was such that few bothered to check out his assertions (p. 81).” The myth’s origin is traced as far back as possible, and McGrath must finally conclude, “The remark attributed to Calvin thus had to be dismissed as pure invention (p. 81).”

McGrath also critiques Christianity’s failings that aid the expansion of atheism. Such critiques are difficult for a Christian reader to hear, but they are worthy of consideration. Chapter 8 is devoted entirely to this.

“To suggest a link between Protestantism and atheism might, at first sight, seem improbable, perhaps even bizarre. How could a movement so dedicated to the propagation of the Christian faith conceivably be said to have encouraged the rise of atheism? In making this suggestion, I am drawing together a number of scholarly studies of the origins and development of Protestantism, which indicate that there is a significant link between the movement and the emergence of atheism (pp. 198-199).”

The Christian Protestant reader may disagree with the analysis of chapter 8, but the thinking Christian will want to consider it.

WEAKNESSES

The author cites one Christian doctrine that is repulsive to atheists: eternal punishment. McGrath seems sympathetic to the atheist’s view on this point without offering an apologetic for God’s judicial sentiment. He states, “Christian apologetics cannot hope simply to assert such doctrines as eternal damnation and expect Western culture to nod approvingly (p. 275).” This I already know. But he continues to show how this offends an atheist’s view of fair play. McGrath pretty much leaves the issue “there” making me wonder what he believes about a point that Christ Himself talked so much about.

RECOMMENDATION

As I read McGrath’s argument for the “fading appeal of atheism,” I found myself hopeful and skeptical at the same time. Several parts of the book will encourage the Christian reader.

However, I do not accept the premise completely. I personally believe that atheism retains a subtle, but powerful, hold on even the postmodern mind. Underneath the culture’s belief system, lies a practical atheism that continues to fuel existential pursuits. The American culture claims to be “Christian” but in a vacuous and hollow way. It is not the Christian faith that is sweeping the land, but an existentialism that includes pieces a long-since crumbled Christian movement.

Atheism as a modern, totalizing philosophy may be in its twilight, but atheistic nihilism serving as a jumping point for personal “leaps of faith” is as strong as ever. Which is worse?

Nevertheless, I highly recommend this book. It is a great--well written--history of atheism.
----------------------------------------------
* Alister McGrath, The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World (New York; Doubleday, 2004)