The sad state of the church in America.


Corssposted from The Fallen World.

I ran across this newsweek article and after some head shaking, I broken heartedly have to agree with the author. Although I am not a Catholic (I am a non denominational Christian), I have seen this trend throughout evangelical churches as well. We have opted for the feel-good social justice approach while ignoring the root principles of Christianity. Namely that our job here on earth is to proclaim the Good News of the Gospel, call people to repentance, and put their trust in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

Obama’s pragmatic approach to divisive policy (his notion that we should acknowledge the good faith underlying opposing viewpoints) and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists. When Obama meets the pope tomorrow, they’ll politely disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality, but Catholics back home won’t care, because they know Obama’s on their side. In fact, Obama’s agenda is closer to their views than even the pope’s.

This is a shame. Have we lost our way so far that we can look the other way at someone who would allow a human baby to be born alive and not feel that child deserves to get medical attention? Will we really look the other way at the exportation of abortion through the Mexico City initiative because we happen to agree with the president that we should feed, clothe, and shelter the poor? Do we ignore what Scripture has to say about homosexuality and the sanctity of human life so that we can feel good about ourselves and our community service?
Apparently we do:

Yet polls bear out that American Catholics do not want to be told by the Vatican how to think. Despite the rhetoric of love and truth, the Vatican shows disdain (if not disgust) toward gays. But 54 percent of American Catholics find gay relationships to be morally acceptable, according to a 2009 Gallup poll.

If there is truly 54% of any group of Christians finding homosexual relationships morally acceptable, there is a total breakdown in the teaching of the church. This would also explain how someone with views like the president can garner support from within the faith community.

For Obama, respectful disagreement and a willingness to recognize differences was the animating spirit of the presidential campaign, and it was central to his Notre Dame speech. That is the kind of politics many Catholics practice. They’re tired of watching the church grasp frantically for control at the expense of truth and love. In America last November, it showed: 54 percent of Catholics voted for Obama.

Interesting that this is the second time “truth and love” have been used to make a point contrary to Scriptural teaching. Start with love. We as people of faith are willing to show love to anyone. We do not hate homosexuals. We do not hate people who have abortions. We do not hate the president. We as Christians have a love for all of humanity. We know what God has said and done for us. We also know what is in store for those who love God and obey Him, and our heart breaks for those who choose to blatantly disobey Him. It is our love for mankind that drives us to reach out and try to find those who are lost.
We do this through the truths that have been revealed to us through God’s word.

As Christians, we take the Bible to be God’s word to mankind, inerrant in its entirety. We have a president who believes that MOST of the Bible is inerrant. I am also afraid that we have a large body of professing Christians that feel this way as well. In this case, all bets are off. We do not have the ability to pick and choose which parts of the Bible are true and which are not. We either accept it as a whole or we reject it as a whole. Truth is not relative. Either something is true or it is false.

There is a principle in Biblical study called hermeneutics. This is how it is determined which scripture is meant for us today and which scripture was meant for a certain people at a given time. For example, dietary laws were given to prevent the widespread death of people eating shellfish when there was no refrigeration and worked very well keeping God’s people alive. As a general rule of thumb (very condensed version): Dietary and ceremonial worship rules were meant for a specific group of people at a given time. Moral laws, such as the Ten Commandments, were meant for all people at all times.

Biblical truth is not subjective. If you walk down the middle of the highway because you believe there is no such thing as 18 wheelers, the truth is that they do exist. And eventually one is going to get you. Not believing in Biblical truth is going to be completely irrelevant when you are standing in front of your Maker. Going to church every Sunday doesn’t make you a Christian much like working in a garage every Saturday doesn’t make you a car.

Category: ,

RSS feed | Trackback URI

33 Comments Leave a comment

Hate to break it to you, but you're just wrong about shellfish.

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 12:48PM EDT (link)

Coastal peoples have eaten shellfish (and pork, for that matter) without refrigeration for millennia without any widespread outbreak of disease due to a lack of refrigeration. The “unhealthy foods” argument concerning the origin of kosher laws is completely bogus.

Only two explanations hold water:

1) Divine command theory: God said not to do it; the end. God doesn’t need to give answers.
(In which case it’s a bit odd that God changed his mind, but I suppose he’s entitled to do that as well.)

2) Anthropology: The Israelites grew out of semi-nomadic bands inhabiting the central hill country, where sheep and goats make sense as a meat and milk source. Their enemies inhabited the plains (=Canaanites), where pig makes sense as a meat source, and the coasts (=Philistines and Phoenicians), where shellfish makes sense as a meat source. Groups commonly restrict their diets as a way of distinguishing themselves from their neighbors whom they view as ethnically different than they.
(In which case the entire kosher system has a completely naturalistic explanation and the divine sanction is entirely post hoc, dealing a bit of a blow to a view that Scripture is the inerrant word of God.)

It's obivious you should have just stayed out of this discussion.

Vaughn Harold Tuesday, July 14th at 2:25PM EDT (link)

God always moves at the right moment in the history of mankind to ensure that His called out people, in this case the Children of Israel, are distinguished from those around them, as seen in the book of Daniel, and latter in the New Testament Church. There is no error here.

Divine command theory has not changed for those who wish to live under the Law. Scripture is consistent throughout that the Law cannot save. However, the Law itself, at this point in history, was also another differentiating factor for God’s people.

One cannot view parts of scripture apart from the whole and develop a working view of God’s immutability in His plan of salvation for mankind.

I'm not sure what that had to do with anything I said.

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 2:43PM EDT (link)

My point is that the “God kept the Israelites from eating unhealthy foods” doesn’t hold water, because the foods that the Israelites were forbidden to eat are no more unhealthy than those they were permitted, refrigeration or no.

The author of the original post was attempting to provide a naturalistic explanation for a divine command. I was simply pointing out that the only “naturalistic” explanation that does hold water is an anthropological one that seems to cut God out of the equation, or at least relegate his command to a secondary cause of the kosher laws.

The alternative is to say that God does what he wants and doesn’t need naturalistic explanations to justify his laws.

Your preferred explanation seems to be that God commanded the Israelites to abstain from certain foods IN ORDER to keep them separate from Philistines, etc., combining both options to a degree. That’s a fine explanation, too, although it seems a bit post hoc to me.

In any case, I was more interested in arguing against the somewhat widely held view that kosher foods are somehow “healthier” than non-kosher foods and that God was protecting the Israelites from illness by forbidding pork, etc. That argument is bogus, but doesn’t seem to be one you accept anyway. So I’m not sure what your problem with my comment is.

If your intention wasn't to attack

Vaughn Harold Tuesday, July 14th at 3:21PM EDT (link)

the inerrancy of scripture, my apologies.

Because God has completely revealed His sovereign will as relating to the provision of salvation for mankind one can post hoc the events that took place with the children of Israel to further ones understanding of that plan.

Since scripture tells us that God is in all things, naturalistic explanations do hold water for they further reveal not only His character, but His truth as well.

I agree with you on the unhealthy foods arguement.

No intention to attack Scripture.

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 3:26PM EDT (link)

Quite the opposite actually.

When people set up “X is proof of God’s existence/plan/etc.” and X turns out not to be true (like say, a geocentric solar system), it leads people to unbelief, even if X was never claimed by Scripture.

I probably take a more liberal approach to Scripture than do you (I’m an Episcopalian), but I hope we can agree that we should avoid setting up potential stumbling blocks to belief.

Yes, there is much I think we can agree upon.

Vaughn Harold Tuesday, July 14th at 3:50PM EDT (link)

I do think as Christians we must be careful of relying to heavily on recent scientific discoveries because science is an ever-evolving thing and its positions change as easily as the weather or whoever may be in political power. I would also add that there is much wisdom contained in the dietary laws, to which science has agreed, that make them very unique.

 
 
 
 
 

Ever heard of Red Tide....

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 2:41PM EDT (link)

That was a primary reason for the ban on shellfish. The Mediterranean is known for an abundance of Red Tide. Logic and God’s Law’s were in agreement on this one at the time crabcakes.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

Every meat source is prone to some type of disease.

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 2:51PM EDT (link)

Somehow, though, despite their diets heavy in shellfish, the ancient Greeks managed to avoid mass death due to “Red Tide” (which is technically a name reserved for U.S. harmful algae blooms). Likely because the Mediterranean isn’t any more prone to HAB’s than the rest of the world, despite your contention.

In any case, it’s interesting that God was concerned with protecting the Israelites from the occasional algae bloom but not with protecting them from foot-and-mouth disease and the like.

So the idea that God understands risk mitigation is beyond you??...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 3:12PM EDT (link)

God is just making decisions about his creation all willy nilly and for no logical purpose. Seems a bit more faith based then saying…Oh..shellfish absorb and store more of the toxins from Red Tide then other sea creatures…maybe we should avoid those.

Can you back up your assertion that the Greeks, from the time of Leviticus to Paul’s vision, were eating all the shellfish they could regardless of Red Tide, and additionally provide proof that they didn’t suffer from disease and death due to that?

I would also be interested in reading what the levels of Red Tide were during that time frame, since you have asserted that it was no more or less than the rest of the world.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

See my comment below

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 3:17PM EDT (link)

for an article on HAB’s in the Mediterranean. Short answer: They’re recent and caused by waterfront development.

Regarding the ancient Greek diet, the Wikipedia article is pretty good, but if you want to learn in more detail I’d check out Dalby’s fairly recent book, which it frequently cites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_cuisine#cite_note-42

your own link doesn't provide much evidence Crabby...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 3:28PM EDT (link)

It mentions shellfish once and doesn’t state, as you so asserted, that their diets where heavy in shellfish. On the contrary it appears that, from your source, other meats and fishes were more prominent that shellfish.

And again, you haven’t shown that from Leviticus to Paul’s vision that there wasn’t significant Red Tide in the Mediterranean. All you did is site a source that stated that in the modern era Red Tide is relatively new to the Mediterranean.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

and your link requires a login to see the actual data..so it is pretty much worthless to me. nt

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 3:31PM EDT (link)

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

If you're interested in learning and making informed claims,

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 3:40PM EDT (link)

rather than simply asserting whatever you like in the face of contradictory evidence, then you can visit any university library worth its salt and access the article from one of their computers.

You’re welcome, however, to believe that I made the sentence up whole cloth if that’s gentler on your presuppositions.

Yeah, cause that is what I am doing Crab...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 3:48PM EDT (link)

If I told you that I have proof of something and then directed you to a box with that proof but that box was locked and I didn’t give you the key would you simply accept my proof and walk away or would you ask for the key?

So you can pretty much take your attitude and stick it.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

 
 
 

So now my job is to disprove your assertion

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 3:37PM EDT (link)

that “Red Tide” wasn’t a problem in the Mediterranean during the period between the composition of Leviticus and Paul’s (???; I assume you mean “Peter’s”) vision?

I’m not sure what kind of evidence you want me to cite to prove that something that no one mentions in any ancient source didn’t exist. Something along the lines of “My dear friend, Timmaeus, isn’t it great that we don’t encounter algae blooms that infect our shellfish and make us sick?” in a Socratic dialogue?

It seems that all you need to do is to provide one ancient source describing something that might possibly be “Red Tide” in the ancient Mediterranean. You won’t find it, but you’re welcome to try.

Concerning the ancient Greek diet, as I said, see Dalby’s book as well as the others cited on the Wikipedia page. They’ll direct you the the classical sources and archaeological material that demonstrate the diet of the ancient Greeks.

Crabby, it was your assertion that Red Tide didn't occur in the Med...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 3:45PM EDT (link)

I asked you to provide proof, which you can’t.

As far as the Greeks go again you provided a link (a very weak one) and I am challenging it, now I think you know that I can’t get the Dalby book right this second and read all of it just to find a couple of sentences that prove your point, so with that in mind maybe you could just quote the relevant text. This is also an assertion by you so you should provide the proof.

And yes Peter not Paul…sorry for mixing the two up.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

I can't provide proof that something never happened in the ancient world.

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 3:54PM EDT (link)

There is, however, no reason to believe that it did happen. I could ask you to prove that there weren’t dinosaurs in ancient Greece, and by your standard you couldn’t do it. There is no documented major case of HAB in the Mediterranean before the late 20th century.

Regarding Dalby’s book, you can find the relevant material if you (carefully) follow these instructions:

Go here:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0415156572#reader

In the “Search Inside this Book” box, type “shellfish.”

Then click on the entry contained in page 73. It’s discussed in the pages around that but if you view too many pages in the Amazon preview it will block you out from seeing more, so browse wisely.

I think you’ll have to admit that I’ve done more than enough to help you along here. If you’re stubborn enough to refuse to consider that you might be wrong despite the fact that you have absolutely no evidence supporting your position, I don’t know what else I can do for you.

All I asked for was a freakin quote Crab...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 4:01PM EDT (link)

not sure why that set you off…sorry I don’t have accounts at Amazon and your other link…how silly of me not to have forseen that I would need those.

Again I am not say that you are wrong, I am saying that what you have asserted wasn’t supported by the link you provided.

You can take your condescension and stick it in the same place as your attitude.

Sorry to offend you by questioning you far superior knowledge of ancient Red Tides.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

You didn't question, you asserted:

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 4:03PM EDT (link)

“The Mediterranean is known for an abundance of Red Tide.”

If you have any evidence to support that assertion, feel free to provide it.

You are right I did assert that...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 4:41PM EDT (link)

and I guess I should back off on that assertion. That said, Red Tide occurs in warmer waters traditionally, correct?

There is a theory out there that also say’s that Red Tide in the Meditteranian was due to volcanic eruptions such as the Thera eruption during the approximate time of the Exodus. Is this definitive proof, no, but neither is what you have provided. So let’s not have different standards.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

That is a claim I've heard before, the problems with it:

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 5:18PM EDT (link)

1) Even if it were the case that volcanic eruptions caused enough warming of the Mediterranean to produce algae blooms, that would be an acute phenomenon and would hardly necessitate prohibiting shellfish all the time.

2) That explanation of the Exodus plagues was a popular one around the turn of the 20th century, largely because it provided a naturalistic explanation for what is portrayed as a miraculous event. In short, some irreligious people were trying to argue that the miracles in the Bible were actually misunderstood natural phenomena (so the burning bush, for example was just an ignited plume of natural gas behind the bush that made it “appear” that the bush was burning). I don’t know of anyone who tries to “explain away” miracles this way anymore, though. Most scholars today either accept that miracles happen or say that the Biblical writers just made them up.

Finally, rereading my comments here, I recognize that my tone was less than cordial. I study the ancient world, specifically ancient Israel, for a living, so sometimes a get a bit overzealous. Apologies for my lack of courtesy.

No problem CrabCakes...

Aaron Gardner Tuesday, July 14th at 5:35PM EDT (link)

I think we were feeding off each other FWIW and I apologize for any overzealousness on my part as well.. As far as naturalism goes, the idea that God uses natural phenomenon as tools within his miraculous nature does not negate his miraculous nature, at least for me it doesn’t.

I will look for something a little more solid than the Thera eruption for proof of Red Tide in the ancient Med.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

As Aaron noted, you're wrong, Crab

aesthete Tuesday, July 14th at 3:07PM EDT (link)

Red Tide was a very serious problem for many groups in the Mediterranean, including the Phoenicians and the Philistines. Just because they were 1) not aware of this problem as far as medicine goes, and 2) had a completely different way of life relative to the Israelites (they were sea-faring cultures, rather than nomadic, as the Israelites were), which made the costs less burdensome than the benefits, doesn’t mean that there weren’t serious risks to eating many of the coastal foods eaten by those two cultures. Cleanliness laws indicate divine knowledge even more than dietary laws, and it has been well-documented that post-Diaspora Jewish communities in both Medieval Europe and the Middle East were less prone to the plagues that would go around. Ironically enough, this partially created the widespread belief in Europe that Jews were, in fact, witches, and has been postulated as one reason for the rampant persecution of them by Europe. Even in the US, the mortality rate of impoverished Jewish immigrants was remarkably close to (if not lower than) that of the general population!

I think that it was more or less all of the above: God likely instituted it to both differentiate them from their neighbors, and to keep them clean all at once. I could be wrong, but given current evidence, I will stick to my theory.

BTW, good diary, wayne!

Guilt is a rope that wears thin.
-Ayn Rand

“I am a freeman in a free state!”
-Last words of Dumnorix, chieftan of the Aedui, 54 BC

Any evidence at all to back this up:

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 3:11PM EDT (link)

“Red Tide was a very serious problem for many groups in the Mediterranean, including the Phoenicians and the Philistines.”

As far as I can tell, the opposite seems to be the case. Significant harmful algae blooms in the Mediterranean are a recent phenomenon:

“The Mediterranean Sea has been traditionally considered as being of low risk for harmful algal blooms due to its oligotrophic nature. Today, the high population growth in coastal areas and the extraordinary increase in the number of harbours for recreational purposes have created suitable nutrient-rich environments for the proliferation of some specific dinoflagellates.”

(Source: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B73D7-4RHP9C7-1&_user=75682&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=957369105&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000006078&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=75682&md5=da3f3084820517a54c01b2e514b3b0ab)

Can't find the article now

aesthete Tuesday, July 14th at 4:03PM EDT (link)

But I do remember reading an article in an archaeology periodical (probably Archaeology Magazine) a few years back that came out pretty strongly against the idea that the Mediterranean has always been so safe. If I remember correctly, the evidence given was from a stele found off the Cilician coast, and various merchant reports from Phoenicia and its offshoots (Carthage and the like). I can’t read the article that you linked to, but I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the idea of uniformitarianism is behind that claim.

At any rate, since I haven’t provided a link for my claim, I guess I can’t blame you for not believing my claim, given that it is poorly substantiated. Still, given that I can’t examine the evidence that you’ve brought forth for your claim, I don’t think that I’ll change my own opinion on the issue quite yet (though I don’t hold to it dogmatically, so you could yet convince me :) ).

Guilt is a rope that wears thin.
-Ayn Rand

“I am a freeman in a free state!”
-Last words of Dumnorix, chieftan of the Aedui, 54 BC

It would be news to me, but I'd be interested to see the article.

CrabCakes Tuesday, July 14th at 4:08PM EDT (link)

I’ll surf around JSTOR to see if I can come up with it.

I’m not married to the idea the HAB’s never occurred in the ancient world, although I seriously doubt that they posed any more of a threat than other meat born illnesses. (Since why would the Greeks eat so darn much of something if it kept making them ill?)

If I find the article you mention, I’ll shoot you the bibliographic information for your records.

Alright, thank you

aesthete Tuesday, July 14th at 4:17PM EDT (link)

If you find more substantive proof for your claim, I’d love to see it. I’m not really wedded to the idea that shellfish was harmful; just thought it was cool when I read the article on it. My faith won’t be shattered irreparably if it turns out that I’m wrong :) Take care, and God bless.

Guilt is a rope that wears thin.
-Ayn Rand

“I am a freeman in a free state!”
-Last words of Dumnorix, chieftan of the Aedui, 54 BC

 
 
 
 

Thank you - nt

wayneinnh Tuesday, July 14th at 6:37PM EDT (link)

Thoughts From a Fallen World

Jon 14:6 -
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”

It’s not intellectual to believe we evolved from hydrogen gas.

 
 

I'm glad this provoked a discussion

wayneinnh Tuesday, July 14th at 6:21PM EDT (link)

I for one am always happy to hear debate over issues of faith. While this was on the periphery, I will certainly look into the issues raised here. Heck, for all we know God could have implemented the shellfish restriction to spark this debate knowing someone was going to stumble across it and get saved. What I do know is that in all things God works for the good of those who love him (Rom 8:28.) Who knows, in a couple thousand years we may all be sitting around looking back at this debate realizing we all missed the mark by a mile.

In the meantime, God bless and keep up the good fight.

Thoughts From a Fallen World

Jon 14:6 -
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”

It’s not intellectual to believe we evolved from hydrogen gas.

 
 

This last Sunday's Bible study topic was corollary to this diary

EvanWeeks Tuesday, July 14th at 12:54PM EDT (link)

“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.” Galatians 6:7

Quite fortunately, God is objective Truth. Whether you acknowledge His existence or His divinity, both are true in the deepest sense, and that objective truth is like a bludgeon sometimes.

EvanWeeks - Dad. Conservative. Patriot.

In the age of post modernism

wayneinnh Tuesday, July 14th at 6:28PM EDT (link)

when we are subjected to people telling us that we can’t know what truth is, we are blessed that the Holy Spirit has touched us and revealed the truth of Scripture to us.

Thank you for the comment.
Wayne

Thoughts From a Fallen World

Jon 14:6 -
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”

It’s not intellectual to believe we evolved from hydrogen gas.

 
 

Nice work there Wanye

Richard Mullins Tuesday, July 14th at 7:16PM EDT (link)

You sure are provoking a bit of discussion. BTW, not a bad site there that you have.

For more on my views, go my wordpress site:
http://rpmullins.wordpress.com

For more on Happy jet airlines, go here:
http://happyjetairlines.wordpress.com

For a good dose of satire go here:
http://thesquash.wordpress.com

For more of I like to do a lot:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42008626@N03

A discussion based on the word of God

wayneinnh Tuesday, July 14th at 8:11PM EDT (link)

is always a good thing. Thank you for reading and thanks for stopping by the other site as well. Hope you get your airline off the ground as well.

Wayne

Thoughts From a Fallen World

Jon 14:6 -
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”

It’s not intellectual to believe we evolved from hydrogen gas.

 
 

Leave a Comment

 

Be respectful, or be banned. No Profanity.