Yearly Archives: 2009

Prepare Ye the Snowblower

It’s snowing right now, the first snow of the winter. It’ll be nice and slippery tomorrow. Oh fun.

Yesterday, I tried to get the snowblower going. Pulled and pulled, but nothing. So I took out the spark plug and sanded off the black stuff, which was pretty thick. I put the spark plug back in, and pulled…and pulled. Nothing.

Maybe I just need a new spark plug. So I went to the hardware store and I got one. Tonight, I went out to give it a try. I opened the compartment where the spark plug goes, and right away realized what an idiot I am. I had screwed the spark plug back in, but hadn’t attached the connector. So my pulls were worthless.

I attached the connector, pulled, and the snowblower started right up. Didn’t need that new spark plug after all.

This is not a mistake Dad would have made, or Stu. Rick would have, most definitely, though chances are he wouldn’t have been able to locate the spark plug in the first place.

At any rate, my snowblower is ready to fulfill its mission in life, tomorrow morning.

Share Button
Comments Off on Prepare Ye the Snowblower

Crying “Miracle!”

Do we Christians cry “Miracle!” too much? David Mills, an atheist, thinks so.

When a doctor gives someone 6 months to live, and he ends up making it 8 months, or a year–is that necessarily a miracle? Or could it be that predicting when a person will die is not an exact science? Or that doctors habitually underplay things, not wanting to say you have a year to live, and then you die in six months? Or could it be that it was the skill of doctors that extended the person’s life?

When a tornado rips through a town and kills a dozen people, you’ll hear survivors say things like, “God miraculously spared me.” Is that an accurate statement? Was it God that killed those 12 people? If so, why did he kill them but spare others? Did he send the tornado, or did it merely result from well-known weather conditions? Was God really directing the tornado’s path?

In “Atheist Universe,” Mills points out that we rig the system, so that we can claim divine intervention no matter how something turns out. If we pray for someone to get well, and they do–it’s a miracle. If they don’t get well, we accept it as “God’s will” or say, “It was simply his time to go.” We never say, “God ignored my prayers.” In fact, we often say that when God doesn’t answer our prayers, that that was his answer.

How does that look to nonChristians?

I occasionally look at the website ExChristian.net, where people who have forsaken Christianity tell their stories. I’ve read a couple posts where atheists told of coincidences happening to their advantage, or people getting well when they weren’t expected to. They say, “If I were still a Christian, I’d say it was a miracle. But since I don’t believe in God, I recognize it for what it was: that’s just the way things worked out.”

I’ve seen people claim divine intervention for some of the silliest little things, like leading a person to the fastest line at the bank because God knew he was in a hurry. People love assembling a string of coincidences into a miracle. I’ve done it. A person sings a nice solo in church, and then says, “I couldn’t have done that without God’s help.” Even though she’s been singing solos for years.

Consider how this looks to nonChristians.

Now, I totally believe in God’s sovereignty, and I believe he’s active in human affairs. I believe he answers prayers and that he brings healing. I believe that he engineers coincidences to make good things happen for us. I believe that, just because our statements may sometimes sound trite, that doesn’t make them inaccurate. And yet–do we overdo it?

Mills writes, “We reserve our use of the term ‘miracle’ to describe only those events that we personally consider positive.” So if you survive a car crash but another passenger is seriously injured, you’re more likely to claim divine intervention than the other person. “If we like the outcome, it’s much easier to see the event as a miracle….We are therefore highly biased in favor of seeing miracles.”

He’s got a point.

On any day of the week, there will be many people who would normally be at the Empire State Building, but who won’t be. Maybe they had a doctor’s appointment, or got sick, or decided to take an impromptu vacation day, or had a late breakfast meeting somewhere. So if a meteor obliterates the building tomorrow, all of those people could claim that God intervened to spare them. But the week before, a similar number of people had doctor’s appointments, got sick, and took vacation days, but since no meteor hit, nobody talks about divine intervention. 

We American Christians, in our obsession with health, constantly claim miracles happened regarding whatever our health problem is, no matter how big or small it is. Sometimes, should the credit just go to skilled doctors? What about people who die of these same ailments in Third World countries, where they don’t have access to medical care? Does God prefer to do miracles in hospitals?

Mills writes, “Witnessing ‘miracles’ does not evoke belief in God. Rather, belief in God evokes the witnessing of ‘miracles.'” I think this is true when we are quick to see miracles in the truly trivial, banal things of life. 

It sounds like I’m raising questions about my faith. I’m not. I’m really not. I’m just trying to understand how skeptics, looking at us from the outside, view us. And I’m trying to understand what is and isn’t true about the God I serve. Because that’s what it’s all about–knowing God, even if it goes against what our Christian culture teaches us. It’s quite possible that many times, God is saying, “Hey, don’t give me credit for that. I didn’t have anything to do with it.”

Or, maybe I should leave theological questions like this to the professionals.

Share Button
1 Comment

Football Thoughts

I was really impressed with the New Orleans Saints last night. I do get tired of hearing commentator garbage about what a genius Bill Bellichick is, as if he’s some mystical figure come down from the mountain to scowl at us mere mortals. And I think Tom Brady’s over-rated, too. But what do I know? Except that I’m really really biased against the Patriots.

The Colts remain on a roll, winning most games, it seems, with come-from-behind efforts. Classic Peyton Manning. I could see them ending the regular season unbeaten. And then I could see them losing in the first round of the playoffs. Or going to the Super Bowl. Either one.

The first team I loved as a kid was the Minnesota Vikings. So I’m delighted with the season they are having, though they’ve let me down many times in the past. However, if they made it to the Super Bowl, that would be great, and I’d be cheering for them (unless they were playing the Colts). It would mean, of course, getting past the Saints. That would be one amazing game.

Remember how great Drew Brees was with the Chargers? I’ll bet that if they had kept him, instead of clearing him out to make room for Philip Rivers, San Diego, with all the talent they’ve had, would have won a Super Bowl by now.

Share Button
Comments Off on Football Thoughts

No Good Options in Afghanistan

Columnist Fred Kaplan, writing in Slate, expressed his mixed feelings toward what we should do in Afghanistan in “Confessions of an Uncertain Columnist.”

“When it comes to this war, I am the one thing that a columnist probably
shouldn’t be–ambivalent. I’ve studied all the pros and cons. There are
valid arguments to justify each side of the issue, and there are still
more valid arguments to slap each side down. And if the basic decision were left up to me, I’m not sure what I would do.”

He then gives those various pros and cons, and slaps them down. It’s a good column, showing the problems with any course we take in Afghanistan. It sums up well how I’ve felt. I’ve been going back and forth for months about whether we should increase or decrease our presence in Afghanistan.

President Obama and his advisers, military and otherwise, have been carefully working out a long-strategy. Tonight, we’ll learn what that strategy is. I may or may not feel comfortable with it, but it’s not my decision to make. Thank goodness.

Share Button
Comments Off on No Good Options in Afghanistan

Google on the Defensive About Michelle

Google is being criticized because it allows search results to show a Photoshoped image of Michelle Obama altered to make her look like a monkey. It’s a despicable photo. Many people argue that Google shouldn’t allow people to find it.

As much as I dislike that photo, Google can’t take this path. And why, I wonder, aren’t those same people up in arms about all the other stuff on the internet which can turn up in search results?

You can find white nationalist sites, anti-Semitic sites, information on making a bomb, unflattering caricatures of nearly any public figure, and pretty much anything having to do with sex. All things considered, this photo seems pretty trivial. If Google censors this one photo, it opens a huge, huge door. Imagine all the people who will come storming through the door next, pointing out how their pet cause was slighted and demanding that Google make it stop.

Google says, “We do not remove a page from our search results simply because its content is unpopular or because we receive complaints concerning it.”

Except in China. There, if the Chinese government says remove it, they remove it. But in America…let the photo remain. And let those people all in a huff about it go after some of the multitude of other junk on the web which is far, far more offensive. Or, go after whoever created the photo, and the people who post it.

Share Button
Comments Off on Google on the Defensive About Michelle

Inferior to Canada? What Up with That?

I was working on some statistics for the countries where we have United Brethren churches. In looking at square mileage–physical size–I noted that the United States is the third largest country in the world, behind Russia and Canada. So we take the bronze, which is just not acceptable for an American. We’re accustomed to being first.

Now, the United States, with 9.83 million square miles, is far behind Russia’s 17.1 million square miles. But we’re only 158,000 square miles smaller than Canada. It seems like we could make that up fairly easily.

Keeping Afghanistan or Iraq would provide more than enough territory, but we don’t want to go that route. I’m pretty sure the Afghans and Iraqis would object.

Tunisia, Surinam, Uruguay, and Cambodia are just about the right size, with a few square miles to spare. But I can’t get excited about any of them.

If we had hung onto the Philippines (300,000 sq.mi), instead of granting independence in 1946, we would now be a firm number two. What was Truman thinking?

We could conquer Cuba (110,860 sq. mi), and that would cut the distance. Then throw in the Dominican Republic (48,700) and grant statehood to Puerto Rico (13,790), and we’d be there. Those acquisitions would also give us a lot of really good baseball players.

Of course, the best solution would be to annex Canada. That would give us a combined area of 19.7 million square miles and vault us straight to the Gold not only in square mileage, but in hockey as well. Of course, Russia would just turn around and take over any number of adjacent countries which were once part of the USSR, and we’d be back to the Silver, with China now taking the Bronze.

I just don’t like being Number 3

.

Share Button
Comments Off on Inferior to Canada? What Up with That?

Learning Why Atheists Reject Christianity

mills-harris-books250.jpg Surveys show that atheism and agnosticism are on the rise in the United States. Christianity is ascendant in other parts of the world, particularly Latin America and Africa, but not in Western countries. I don’t know why. But I decided to try to understand better how atheists see the world and view Christianity.

A lot of books have been written lately by atheists–evangelistic atheists, I should say, intent on converting people away from whatever religion they belong to. Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are probably the best-known writers, but comments on Amazon told me that they tend to be obnoxiously condescending and combative.

Instead, I ended up with “Atheist Universe,” by David Mills, and “Letter to a Christian Nation,” by Samuel Harris. Both were excellent books. Yes, they attacked Christianity strongly, but that was the point.

Mills, who at one time was an on-fire evangelistic Christian, devoted a chapter to a lot of different subjects. I appreciated his understanding of how Christians think and what we believe, even if he has rejected all of it personally. The Harris book–a short little thing, more like an extended essay–was like a highly condensed version of “Atheist Universe,” hitting many of the same areas in a compact–and very compelling–manner.

Let me say right now: these books didn’t shake my faith at all. I’ve seen and experienced way too much of God and His Word to doubt him. Those books would be devastatingly effective with someone who was questioning his faith, but not with me.

Both spent a lot of time disputing Creationism and Intelligent Design. Many of their arguments made great sense to me. But I’m a total non-scientist, and we’re talking about very complicated issues which require a depth of knowledge which I fully lack. Creationists and ID folks could rebut Mills and Harris, I’m sure. I can’t, and don’t intend to immerse myself in these subjects to get up to speed.

However, I admit that Mills and Harris raised serious questions in various areas beyond science–questions which I cannot answer. They pointed out things in Scripture (usually fairly) that are inconsistencies or dilemmas we Christians, perhaps lamely, prefer to ignore. I realized how commonly we fling around pat answers. And pat answers don’t fly with people like Mills and Harris, nor with other skeptics or with people honestly searching out Christianity.

I’m not afraid of truth. By pointing out things in Scripture which appeared to be inconsistencies in my beliefs, they pointed out real truths about Scripture. It’s there, written right in God’s Word, and inspired by God Himself. No sense denying it, unless I want to take Thomas Jefferson’s approach and scissor out parts I don’t like. Mills and (to a lesser extent) Harris revealed to me new mysteries about God, things that require answers. I find that invigorating, rather than faith-quenching.

While I don’t have the answers, I, Steve Dennie, know that answers exist. Because I know God, and don’t doubt him. THAT kind of answer would drive Mills and Harris nuts. But sometimes, pat answers are valid. Especially if that’s all we’ve got for the moment, and maybe until we enter eternity.

I emerged from those books appreciating their intellectual honesty and why they have rejected Christianity. And I realize there are new mysteries surrounding God, the universe, and the Bible that I need to probe.

I also, now, realize the threat these compelling atheist writers pose to the souls of men. They are a potent weapon in Satan’s arsenal.

Share Button
Comments Off on Learning Why Atheists Reject Christianity

Humor Diversion

funny-pictures-cat-stares-at-goat.jpg

Share Button
1 Comment

Books: Forsyth, Patterson, Sandford

Nov_3books300.jpg I’m a little behind on reviewing books I’ve read. Here are three recent novels.

The Afghan, by Frederick Forsyth. This one disappointed me. Forsyth did a great deal of research, and felt like he needed to inflict it all on the reader. I was never really engaged in the plot. At least not until the end, when he kicked into a higher geer. Interesting ending. But the rest–just skip it.

The Dangerous Days of Daniel X, by James Patterson and Michael Ledwidge. This is a new series under the Patterson brand. Daniel X is an alien, who himself is an alien hunter. He tracks down and kills aliens living on earth. It was interesting, quirky, and fast-paced. I’ll look forward to additional books in this series. It’s mostly fluff, but I like that sometimes.

Dead Watch, by John Sandford. Not one of his better books. Certainly far beneath the Lucas Davenport “Prey” books. Here, Sandford introduces a new hero, and instead of a murder mystery, we get a political thriller. I’d say the political thriller isn’t Sandford’s forte. The plot was certainly intricate enough, and I liked the hero, and it moved along, and…so what didn’t I like? Don’t really know. But it just didn’t satisfy me.

Share Button
Comments Off on Books: Forsyth, Patterson, Sandford

Peering Beneath the Palin Fan Base

This video was shot at Sarah Palin’s book-signing in Columbus, Ohio, last weekend. Her adoring fans had great trouble saying what she stood for. I’m sure the video was shot with a particular agenda, so you need to take it with a grain of salt. The people who made it through the editing process are clearly just Palin groupies. I’m sure some thoughtful people also bought her book.

(If you’re reading this on Facebook, you’ll need to click on “View Original Post” to see the video.)

A similar video could be made at Obama events. With one big exception….

I was looking, but didn’t see anyone of color or ethnicity in the video. All reports about these signings are pretty similar in that regard. She clearly stirs up strong emotions among white people. What should we make of that? To me, it’s worth exploring.

In America, we need to be on guard concerning racial issues. We’ve come
a long way, but too many racial tensions lie dormant, awaiting a match.
A populist like Palin (or Buchanan, or Beck, or lots of others) can easily stir up those tensions, whether
intentionally or not. Now, just because the crowds around Palin are
predominantly white doesn’t mean
she condones racism in some way. That’s not a valid leap. But the situation is
something worth monitoring.

Look, I’m not out to bash Sarah Palin, so don’t go ballistic and label me a liberal dirt-monger. Palin’s a good, charismatic, engaging
person. But when I see masses of white people flocking around someone, with hardly anyone of ethnicity in the picture–well, that gives me pause.

Share Button
Comments Off on Peering Beneath the Palin Fan Base

Receive Posts by Email

If you subscribe to my Feedburner feed, you'll automatically receive new posts by email. Very convenient.

Categories

Facebook

Monthly Archives