Josiah Concept Ministries

It seems as though the audience favorite was Dinesh D’souza tonight.  The lanky scholar received thunderous applause after his speech on New Atheism.  D’souza had several tough acts to follow, including a very enlightening speech on the bodily Resurrection of Christ from Dr. William Lane Craig and a lecture on inerrancy of Scripture from Dr. Norman Geisler.

I have only one regret for this conference.  I probably won’t ever get the chance to do it again.  After all, how often do I run into William Lane Craig?

I wish I had challenged Dr. Craig’s view of Calvinism.  Dr. Craig fell into exactly the same trap that I describe in my post on predestination, only he runs into it with God’s sovereignty.  Dr. Craig assumes that the Calvinist and hyper-Calvinist views of human freedom are one in the same.  Dr. Craig affirms the Molinist view of God’s middle knowledge while attacking the Calvinist view of God’s sovereignty as deterministic.  While Dr. Craig affirms that Molinism and Calvinism are compatible, he does not do the compatibility any justice.

Molinism, in brief, states that God has three levels of knowledge.  God’s natural knowledge, stage one, is encompasses every world that is possible.  At stage 2, God’s middle knowledge, He knows all of the worlds that are plausible.  In other words, at this stage, God knows what His creatures will do when given a set of circumstances.  God’s free knowledge, at stage three, is the actual world that God chooses to create from the middle knowledge He has at stage 2.  In this way, His creatures are still free to choose but God has chosen their world for them, so He already knows what the choice is going to be.

Hyper-Calivinism, which Dr. Craig views incorrectly as orthodox Calvinism, views reprobation as a positive action on God’s part rather than a negative action.  Orthodox Calvinism says that God allows reprobates to suffer His wrath (as all of humanity deserves), while positively pursuing the elect with His irresistible grace.  Hyper-Calvinism, on the other hand, has God purposely bringing sin into the lives of the reprobates so that they will suffer eternal damnation.

Chapter IX of the Westminster Confession of Faith details human free will, which clearly states that human will is libertarian (as Dr. Craig affirms) and “. . . is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined good, or evil” (WCF, IX:I).  But chapter IX:III takes into account Scriptural teaching that man’s free will is tainted with sin to such a degree that “a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself [for salvation]. . . .”

This sort of free will is exactly the view that Molinists have.  But Dr. Craig is no monergist when it comes to salvation, and that is his error.  He wishes to retain a synergistic view of salvation, so he has adopted a view that allows for synergism while retaining some of the vestiges of monergism.

Bottom line, it is still Pelagian in nature.

Dr. Craig really disagrees not with God’s sovereignty in election, but with total depravity.  Though he later stated that he affirmed it, I have my doubts that he affirms it in the way a proper Calvinist would.  He still believes that man can come to God apart from the unconditional election.  Dr. Craig believes in a logically untenable universal atonement, and rejects both irresistible grace and eternal security.  As I’ve stated before, all of these doctrines flow from the first point of Calvinism, Total Depravity.  Dr. Craig does not accept total depravity despite his statement to the contrary.  Total depravity simply does not allow for a synergistic view of salvation.

All that said, Unshakable Faith 2008 was a great event that I encourage readers to attend next year if they can.  The planners are already working tirelessly to put something even better together for next year.  My prayers will certainly be with them in their endeavors.

The high point of the first half of day 2 of Unshakable Faith was Dr. William Lane Craig’s presentation of Leibniz’s argument for the existence of God.  It goes like this:

1. Everything that exists must have a cause, either as an intrinsic necessity or from some external source.
2. If the universe has a cause, it must be God.
3. The universe exists.
4. The universe must have a cause.
5. Therefore, God is the cause of the universe.

The solidity of this logic, Craig argues, is very powerful.  It is impossible to deny it starting at point 3, so points 4 and 5 flow necessarily and are therefore irrefutable.  The atheist must deny points 1 or 2 in order to shake this argument, but they will have much difficulty in doing so.  In a future post, I hope to elaborate on the difficulty of denying points 1 and 2, and therefore begin to build a more cohesive case for the existence of God.

The first presentation of the day has convinced me by evident reason that the foundation of any Biblical worldview must reject the evolutionary idea of millions of years.  Dr. Terry Mortensen of the Creation Museum presented a case against millions of years, followed with a breakout session on Flood Geology.  All-in-all, he presented a convincing exegetical case for a 6,000 year old earth.  Time permitting, I hope to elaborate somewhat on that point, standing on the shoulders of the giants of creation science who work at Answers in Genesis, the Creation Museum, and Creation Ministries International.

For now, suffice to say that I have renewed my position that a 6,000 year old earth with no death or destruction prior to the Fall is exegetically necessary for a Christian worldview.  I am a Young Earth Creationist, no longer am I a Young Earth Agnostic as I have stated in a previous post.  I have taken it on faith that God will show me the truth or falsity of that position in His time.

So far, this convention has been an amazing experience for me.  I look forward to more after lunch.

It is day one of the Unshakable Faith Conference put on at Landmark Cincinnati.  The pastors hope that this will become an annual event, but they don’t think that they can top this first year.  I’m inclined to agree.

First on the menu this evening was Dr. Norman Geisler presenting a talk that the program title “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.”  However, it should have been titled “Atheism is Dead.”  Geisler effectively deconstructed many of the arguments in favor of philosophical unbelief, instead concluding that atheists are atheists not for philosophical reasons but for personal reasons.  Those reasons inevitably point back to the fact that a holy God rejects human sin.  We, as fallen beings, love our sins and wish to remain in them.  Therefore, we reject God.

Two breakaway sessions ran simultaneously.  The first was on the concept of millions of years in regard to the age of the earth and where it came from.  I, however, opted to attend the primer on cults with Dr. Alex McFarland.  Dr. McFarland presented three questions to ask any cultist, after earning their trust and friendship:

1. Can we agree that orthodox Christianity and your church teach different things?
2. Can we agree that your beliefs originated from a definite person?
3. What do you think of that in light of Galatians 1:6-10?

Then, we finished the evening off with a talk from one of my personal heroes, Dr. William Lane Craig.  Dr. Craig spoke not only on the reasonableness of faith in God and on Jesus being the Son of God, but he also spoke of his own personal conversion experience in a powerful and moving speech.  He then asked for anyone so moved to give their lives to the Lord, which I can only pray that some folks did just that.

I got to shake hands with Norman Geisler and sit in the front row of a William Lane Craig lecture.  This is how normal people get around sports stars!  I’ll have more to report tomorrow as the conference closes.  I thank the Lord for blessing me with the time and the ability to attend this amazing event, and I pray that my report touches the life of someone reading it.

As a father and a Christian, I would never leave my daughter’s health up to fate.  Look at that sweet face, beautiful eyes, and that smile that can melt your heart!  She is one gorgeous baby, that is certain.  I couldn’t look into the face of this child who trusts me implicitly with her very life and give her anything less than the finest medical treatment that my insurance can pay for when she is sick.

Yet that is exactly what the parents of Madeline Neumann did.  They left their daughter’s health to the power of prayer.  I believe that prayer is powerful when used correctly–as a tool of communication between the created and the Creator.  Prayer is not a gumball machine.  We can’t just pop in a quarter and get everything that our hearts desire.

Rightly, the parents of Madeline Neumann, nicknamed Kara, stand before a judge, answering to charges of murder.

I had expected the charges to be negligent homicide, but the authorities went one better than that: the charge against Kara’s parents is reckless homicide.

Powerful as prayer is, the law doesn’t recognize it as a substitute for medicine.

The three siblings of Madeline Neumann, the young lady who died tragically as a result of her parents praying instead of seeking medical attention, have been removed from their parents’ custody.

In the original article, the authorities had not made that decision yet since there were no signs of abuse or neglect.  I’m very glad that those kids were removed.

While I agree with the principle that all healing comes from God, as Leilani Neumann told the press, I don’t believe that prayer is the sole vehicle by which God works.  I believe that He works through the competent doctors and nurses, all of whom He calls to do that work.  No legitimate church would see seeking medical attention as a sign of unbelief or as having a lack of faith.

God is not a gumball machine–you can’t just pop in a prayer, turn a cosmic crank, and expect God to answer the prayer in exactly the way that you expected Him to.

God promises to listen to prayer, and listen only. Despite the dramatic hyperbolic language (such as Mark 11:24 and others) used by Jesus, each and every prayer is not going to be answered affirmatively. It will be answered in God’s way and in His time.

So, if you’re sick, seek help from a doctor. Don’t shy away from praying for health or gathering the elders of your church to anoint the sick (Jms 5:14). But don’t expect that God will automatically reach down and heal the sick person. A prayer is only a request, not a demand and it will not always be answered affirmatively.

That means that I think Dale and Leilani Neumann of Weston, WI are guilty of negligent homicide, a statement which will undoubtedly surprise many people generally acquainted with my position that prayer is a very powerful thing. It is. But I believe that prayer is a way to offer yourself to God, not a way to get anything you want from Him.

According to a March 25th article in the Wausau Daily Herald, the Neumanns prayed for their daughter Madeline to get well, but never sought appropriate medical attention. This is just plain stupid. God doesn’t call only ministers into service, God calls people of every profession into their respective services, which includes doctors. He uses doctors as instruments of His healing. How did they expect their daughter to get better if they gave her no help whatsoever?

God’s preferred method of operation is to work through people. So don’t stop going to doctors when you’re sick, Christians! And as for the rest of the children in the Neumann household, GET THEM OUT OF THAT SITUATION FAST!

Praise God for blessing my new blog, God is NOT Imaginary with success! In less than a month, we are coming on 1000 page views already, with a record day yesterday that tops anything this blog has ever seen!

Keep praying out there! I can see the results!

Three Christians, Ante and Kathy Pavkovic and their daughter Christen Sugar, were arrested Thursday by the Capitol Police when they disrupted the Senate hearings they were attending. The opening prayer was being offered by a Hindu chaplain, Rajan Zed. The three Christians were shouting Bible quotes, first Psalm 33:12, then from John 14:6, and finally Exodus 20:3.

DefCon is all over the story (of course) and posted the video here. TheHill.com has the story here, as does RNB. The Pavkovics represent Operation Rescue/Operation Save America, and their parent organization’s statement is found here.

So, where do I stand? I don’t know. I think I’ll sleep on it for now.

I’ll blog on this issue later, once I’ve had some time to pray some more about it.

One of the unfortunate side effects of having a hierarchy built into your priesthood is the gross display of politics that comes with it.  Toledo Bishop Leonard Blair has decided to reassign St. Rose parish pastor Thomas Leyland.

Regular readers know that I grew up Catholic, and I attended St. Rose parish in Perrysburg until I fell away from the faith.  I still follow Catholicism, even if only to refute its unbiblical traditions.  Whatever my theological differences with Father Leyland may be, it is painful for me to see an honest man of God be treated this way.

St. Rose was a large parish when I attended, but it has since grown larger.  It is now 8,100 strong.  Father Leyland, pastor since 1999, is loved by all parishioners and well respected in the community.  My mom works at that parish, and has been under four pastors.  She has liked them for the most part, but she appears to have much more respect for Father Leyland.

So why would the Bishop arbitrarily reassign such a well respected man?  Answer: because this well respected man criticized a boneheaded decision.

The Bishop has decided to open a new parish within a few miles of St. Rose.  This has the chance to take half of the membership, and eventually, quite a bit of the students in the school.  Father Leyland spoke out against this move, stating that the new parish is much too close and that no one in the pastorate was consulted when the decision was made.  The Bishop consulted only developers.

Now, the diocese office wishes to reassign Father Leyland, stating that the reassignment is for his benefit and has nothing to do with the criticism.

Yeah, right.

Father Leyland plans to appeal to the Vatican.  I’m going to follow this story and see how it pans out.  I will keep Father Leyland in my prayers.

Oh, and by the way: for you baseball fans, and Detroit Tiger fans in particular, that think the name “Leyland” sounds familiar, yes, Tom Leyland is the brother of Jim Leyland, current manager of the Detroit Tigers.  Leadership runs in the family, apparently.

I will be out of town this weekend to visit my new niece, Allison Lynn, who shares my wife’s middle name.  I love that my family is growing, but I hate that all of the additions seem to live so far away.  Therefore I may not answer my comments or my e-mail in a timely fashion, as I assume that I won’t have Internet access while I’m there.

One last thing: I put my e-mail address on this page for seekers to ask spiritual questions  anonymously.  I want to minister to people, I want to speak God’s truth to all who desire to hear it.  So quit using that link for phishing expeditions.  I will report you.  If your late husband really deposited $2.7 million in a foreign bank account and you absolutely feel led by God to donate the full sum to my ministry because you’re dying of cancer, please use the PayPal links under my “About Us” tab.  Technology is wonderful thing.  It will protect us both–no one has to trade financial information.

I’m sure that PayPal will find a way to broker a transaction of that size for a small piece of it.

I have yet to comment about Jerry Falwell’s death.  Though I mourned the passing of Bruce Metzger, since he did much more work in apologetics and textual criticism closer to my own passion for the Word of God, more than I did Dr. Falwell’s, it is still sad to see any man of God and brother in Christ leave this earth, even though I know it means that God is calling them home.

Dr. Falwell once told a graduating class from Liberty, of which my church’s youth pastor was a part of, that if Liberty ever stopped teaching the Scriptures properly that he wanted them to return under cover of darkness and burn the entire place down.

Of course, as our youth pastor points out, that only means that Dr. Falwell recognizes that the true legacy of Liberty isn’t the buildings but the teaching of a biblical theology from Scripture.  Though he may have said that in a rather run-around fashion, it was only one of many things that Dr. Falwell said that got people’s attention.

But the best attestation to Dr. Falwell was perhaps delivered by N.T. Wright (HT to Daniel from Anchor for the Soul):

Within the strange, large economy of God’s grace, which filters the truth of scripture through all of us imperfect interpreters, it may be that I make just as many mistakes as I think he did, but we are each called to be true to what we find in scripture and I have no reason to suppose he was not as obedient to that imperative as I struggle to be.  May he rest in peace and, with the rest of us, rise in glory where we shall look back on present disagreements like an adult looks back on childhood squabbles in the playground.

May God bless everyone who proclaims and defends His word.  Even those with whom I’m starting to disagree with on stylistic choices, such as J.P. Holding, Crystal (aka Little Pixie of Terror), “Mountain Man,” “Razorphreak,” and the others I’ve talked to in the course of this ministry.  God can use all of us imperfect humans, and that both humbles and amazes me.  It’s a stern reminder to “judge not, lest ye be judged.”