The Idolatrous Use Of Scripture

Scripture interprets scripture. Yes. First, the scriptures reveal Christ. Second, the scriptures submit to Christ.

The scriptures are always a means to an end. Christ is that end. The authority of the scriptures derives from that same end. Scripture becomes an idol whenever it serves itself or serves another end. And as an idol, the book has no authority. The history of humanity after Christ is scarred from the idolatrous use of the scriptures. 

"Better him than me"

There is something about the encouragement-by-way-of-comparison (EWC) approach that bothers me. What do I mean by EWC? For instance, say I have a broken leg. I’m somewhat distressed by my one broken leg because it prevents me from doing those things I could do if I had no broken leg. This affects my disposition and now I am down. But, I consider the individual with two broken legs. Furthermore, I consider all of the things that a two-broken-legged person cannot do that a one-broken-legged person can. It seems to me that this person with two broken legs is in a much worse spot than I am. Now I am beginning to feel better. In fact, now things don’t look so bad. Now, I'm encouraged. This is EWC and it seems, at least to me, wrong-headed.

Two Friends Fishing (On Expectations Of Justice)

Sam:  Hand me that light. I can't see what I'm doing with this hook.

Frank:  I don't think we'll catch any more tonight, but here you go.

Sam:  Maybe we should go about this from a different angle.

Frank: You mean we should use different bait?

Sam:  No. I'm talking about the injustice we see in the world. For the last hour and a half we've bemoaned the fact that it seems injustices will never end. In fact, it seems reasonable that our expectations of a just world are unreasonable. I guess what I'm trying to say is that we should always seek to bring about a just world, but that we should also be realistic. It will never happen. It can never happen.

Epistemic Humility As Disposition

With the last post in mind ( found here), I want to come to a clearer understanding of epistemic humility. I want us to think about what we are being asked to do, when asked to nurture epistemic humility. Or better, what are we not asked to do? Epistemic humility could be misunderstood as a request to both believe and not-believe what we in fact do believe. I want to show that is not the request.

Realized Ignorance

I am going to assume, for the moment, that any approach to achieving peaceful coexistence among differing cultures, religions, worldviews, ideologies, etc. will include an account for nurturing epistemic humility. As the world we inhabit “shrinks,” we must find a way to peacefully agree to disagree. More to the point, it is imperative that we realize our ignorance, both individually and as a community.

A Socrates To Me

I was on my way to a training seminar when I experienced one of those encounters that calibrate expectations. I located my luggage at baggage claim, and found my way to the shuttle. As it would happen, it was just the two of us.

A Phenomenological Approach To The Scriptures

The goal of this post is to present a (seminary) model, an environment that allows scripture to speak for itself.  In other words, one which would take a “phenomenological approach” to scripture.

Is Death Natural?

Is death natural?  It would seem that there is very little that is obviously more natural than death.  Every living being we perceive in this world comes into being, lives, and dies.  So why even ask the question?  I ask the question because we do not act as if death is natural.  In some ways we act as if death is unnatural.  It seems to me that if death is one of the obviously natural events in the existence of a living being, then the way that many living beings react to the prospect of death is strange.  Likewise, if death is simply a natural part of living; then why do we not welcome it, embrace it, cheer when a loved one's life ends?  I suppose there are a number of reasons why we do not embrace death and look forward to it.  Nonetheless, given the way we actually do, in most cases,seek to avoid death and become sad when our loved ones die...Is death natural?

Grace, Faith, and Merit

In my last post "Obstacles to Grace?" I quickly stated, " It might seem that 'having faith' is something 'done' by the believer.  I think not, but for the sake of space I will save that for the next post."  I would like to revisit that thought in this post; however, as I have been pondering that statement I have come to the conclusion that the issue at hand concerns Christian faith and merit. Is a Christian's faith in Christ worthy of merit?  Another way to say the same thing...Is grace faith-dependent in such a way that faith may be considered a work (i.e. something done that deserves recompense) through which grace is earned?

Obstacles to Grace?

Last week I was invited into a discussion concerning one short phrase, "obstacles to grace."  The question under consideration could be stated as follows, "Does the phrase 'obstacles to grace' inform or misinform one's understanding of the gospel of grace?"  I realize that some might complain that such a discussion is unhelpful and simply a wrangling over words. That may be the case.  Even so, I liken it to two objects placed on different trajectories. If the two objects begin in the same general place, their difference in trajectory may not be so easily observed. Nonetheless, as the two objects move in the direction of their respective trajectories the difference becomes obvious.  A short phrase like 'obstacles to grace' may seem harmless enough prima facie.  However, I think it may be an unhelpful phrase and have negative import in relation to one's understanding of the gospel of grace.

Why Believe?

I have heard it argued more than once that the sole value of any given religion is essentially a moral value.  The only good that religion, in general or in particular, has to offer is a moral code, or a moral way of life.  In fact, it is argued, there can be gleaned a common moral code from all the great religions.  If all particular religions could be emptied of their respective doctrines and belief systems, then we all could embrace essentially the same, good moral code. In this way, the world would be infinitely better.  No more differences about doctrines and beliefs, just good people getting along...finally.  I can see some sense in this argument.

Time and Meaning

In his recent offering for The New York Times titled "On Modern Time," Espen Hammer examines modern society's perception of time.  Hammer's prognosis is bleak.  Modern society is dissatisfied and the clock is to blame.  So what is the remedy?  Hammer offers one, but it seems wholly unhelpful.  Nonetheless, the subject (i.e. time) is important. That being the case, I would like to share some thoughts that Hammer's treatment of the subject brought to mind.

Does the Scientific Method Employ a Logical Fallacy?

In The Limitation of Bacon's Scientific Method Jacob Schriftman suggests that the scientific method is based on the formal logical fallacy commonly known as "Affirming the Consequent."  If correct, this is an astounding claim.  Could it be that the scientific method is founded on bad reasoning?  In this post I will attempt to explain the suggestion made by Schriftman and then I will share my thoughts on the implications.