Jeremy Harper. Get yours at flagrantdisregard.com/flickr

Archive for the 'Religion' Category

Coming up for air & verse tests

Sunday, March 6th, 2005

(Program Note: This was written on Friday afternoon)

I don’t know about y’all, but this has been an extremely difficult week for me.

At least four, maybe five tests, and a paper. One of the aforementioned tests was a Bible doctrines verse test: We were supposed to regurgitate every verse we (should have) learned throughout the semester. That’s about a full-page, front and back to memorize, perfectly. Some of the verses are familiar; others are not.

It’s quite difficult.

In fact, it got me thinking: Why do teachers require the verses to be recited word-perfect?

Lest you think that this is just whining, let me give you an example: If, in a verse, a student should write “Christ Jesus” when the verse says “Jesus Christ,” that counts as an error, and the student is penalized.

Now, the differences between two translations of the Bible–or even two of the Greek source texts–include such minor variations as meaningless word reversals. One Greek text might read Jesus Christ; another might say Christ Jesus.

So, the BJU student is required to be more accurate than the Bible itself.

(Why yes, I did get a bad grade on the test. How could you tell?)

A friend of mine has a problem with the concept of verse tests in general: His opinion is that such tests encourage taking verses out of context in spiritual arguments. These tests, he believes, condition the student to use verses that support his or her case without considering the surrounding verses.

And he might just have a point.

The Arguments for Evolution

Sunday, February 13th, 2005

One of the things that frustrates me about my Bible Doctrines textbook is its lengthy assault against evolution. Apart from some serious disagreements that I have with him over his reasoning (for example, his argument that the second law of thermodynamics invalidates evolution*), my biggest frustration is his sources. It seems that he hasn’t updated the chapter–or his sources–significantly in over 30 years. Don’t you think that in 30 years the evolutionists would have come up with an answer to your concerns?

Well, they have. John Derbyshire over at the National Review online has answers to some of the recurring arguments of Creationism. Definitely worth reading. An example:

(5) “There is no such thing as half an eye/wing/lung etc.” Yes there is, all over the place, as biologists have been pointing out till they are blue in the face. The common scallop has little light-sensitive patches all round its mouth, for instance. An entire menagerie of animals — frogs, squirrels, even snakes — has rudimentary gliding webs of various levels of sophistication — half wings.

They say that in the realm of the blind the one-eyed man is king. A better way to say “survival of the fittest” is “survival of the least unfit,” a phrase I have to credit to austroblogger, a commenter on Libertarian Girl.

Anyways, read Derbyshire’s whole post.

God’s Jurisprudence

Monday, February 7th, 2005

I promised you something insightful; I hope this fits the bill. Sorry it took so long. Here we go:

Let’s say that a man kills his neighbor and is later convicted of murder and sentenced to death. Let’s also say that the man has a ten-year-old son who was at school at the time of the murder.

Now, does that son bear any responsibility for the man’s crime? Should he be executed too, since he descended from so monstrous a man?

Of course not. Surely it’s plain to see that the sins of the father have no bearing on the status of the son. The Bible backs this up in Ezekiel 18:20:

The soul that sinneth, it shall die . The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

So then, by our own law and by the law of God, people are responsible for their own actions, not their ancestors’ actions.

Now, here’s a problem:

My Bible Doctrines class, in studying anthropology (the study of man) and hamartiology (the study of sin), took an in-depth look at the story of Adam & Eve.

In this story, humanity’s parents committed the only sin available to them, eating from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Because of that action, all of humanity is cursed, in sin, and condemned to hell apart from the help of Christ, according to the book of Romans, especially verses 5:12-14. (The following is from the NASB, which I selected for ease of readability.)

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned–
Rom 5:13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

So, because of the sins of our ancestors, we are declared guilty. Adam’s sin is imputed unto us. We bear the iniquity of the father of all men; “the fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.”

Is this not a contradiction in God’s law?

Ha!

Thursday, January 27th, 2005

First Impressions

Saturday, January 15th, 2005

They say that first impressions are everything; scientists even tell us that students’ impressions of a teacher after “five seconds of soundless videotape… matched those given by his own students after a full semester of classes.”

So, today, my first day of classes, could conceivably set the tone for the whole semester. If that’s the case, this semester will be pretty good.

The rest of this post contains my initial thoughts about this semester.