THE GOD DELUSION.

As a prelude to the Christmas season can I make a plea
to all my fans out there in blog-world? Please do not put
a copy of Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" in my
Christmas stocking!

It seems to me that this guy has achieved a prominence
way beyond his abilities by making a career out of winding
up Christians like myself. Our protestations of innocence at
his anti-religion scattergun diatribes only boost his notoriety
and his subsequent book sales. The real challenge Dawkins
presents us with is not his huffing and puffing but our own
internal urge to rise to his bait!

The best thing to do is ignore him. So my New Year's
Resolution is; his name will not appear again in this blog.

For Richard Dawkins' fans out there let me pose a challenge
to you. In "The Sunday Telegraph" review section 'Seven'
published in the UK on 17th the Dawkins' line about religion
is repeated that killing is 'something you might well do if
you've been taught from babyhood upwards that your God
will approve of such behaviour. You don't have to produce
evidence to support your belief. You simply say, "It's my
faith", and are blind to any argument. If part of your faith is
the righteousness of killing infidels or apostates, then that
does seem to me to go further than the ordinary aggression
which you [the interviewer] attribute to humans anyway.'

Well I suppose you might think that given such a scenario
- just as any secular demagogue did with their dissidents.
The issue is; is the nature of religious faith inherently evil
in a way that, say, totalitarianism is not? Apparently
Dawkins would say 'yes'. I don't rate his chances at having
a cosy chat with the likes of Robespierre, Stalin or Pol Pot....
but hey what do I know? I suspect that what Dawkins really
means is not that rational argument is impossible with those
of a religious persuasion, but that such a dialogue is
impossible for him! And that is quite a different matter.
Dawkins may well lack the empathy required for reasoned
discussion but it is illogical to conclude that no-one else can
do it either. To have a rational argument requires making
some attempt to understand the other person's rationale and
just because it is not his rationale does not mean that there
is not a rationale; Dawkins doesn't have to agree with it to
try to understand it. At least you and I are managing to have
a reasonable discussion right now aren't we?

I don't know why I take this so personally because I don't
recognise Dawkins' caricature - maybe I'm more sensitive
than most. Okay the challenge is this: let's get down to
cases, search my blog and find some evidence for the
notion that I advocate killing people. Go a step further -
search the audio library of my church - there are several
decades worth of talks there - where is the evidence that
anyone there has ever urged violence? http://www.shmedia.org.uk/
He says it's from babyhood - okay; check out the Sunday
School material at http://www.tntministries.org.uk/ - where is the
proof that children are being taught to kill in God's name?
And remember - in all of this - we are not discussing
whether Christians fail to live by the principles they advocate,
but whether those principles are themselves inherently evil
....that is the 'Dawkins Doctrine'.

The Christian position is that God alone has the right to
judge an individuals' heart - I cannot do it because I do
not know what God knows. Not only that but I have no
right to do this in God's name because I too am a sinner,
who will be judged against the measure I use! And there's
the rub - one would have to construe God's deferred
judgement as a present day mandate. The Gospel requires
me to forgive others on the basis that God in Christ has
forgiven me. The petty grievances I nurture must be
relinquished in the light of the forgiveness of God I've
received. Those of you who have suffered some dreadful
crime must also seek to forgive but that ability to forgive
one's enemies is not founded upon a shrug of the shoulders
in a "it doesn't matter", vague, sort of way. It is founded on
the ability to commit our deepest wounds to a just God, who
sees all our hurts and who judges wisely, and to whom we
and our assailants will one day be required to give a full
account. Furthermore as a Christian I cannot despise a fellow
sinner because 'there but for the grace of God go I!' God's
love is expressed in two ways - his love of mercy and his love
of justice. I cannot see how he'll square that circle - but I
trust that he can do it - and in reality that is what 'faith' is,
trusting in the character of God revealed in Christ.

If you find this murderous evidence I'll join you on your side
of the barricade - and you know who else will be there?
Jesus! You might not have heard that he taught his disciples
to 'turn the other cheek' and 'love your enemies' etc and
the apostle Paul also concurs in Romans 12v14-21. [I do not
mean to be patronising in saying all this; if you source your
information from the likes of Dawkins you may well not know
that it is upon Jesus that the Christian attitude to others is
to be founded]. Of course you will find 'crack pots' if
you look hard enough [you find them in every society] but
it is entirely disingenuous to talk up these examples as
representative.

In fact there is an interesting scrap between Jesus and
his disciples in Luke chapter 9 v51-56 which is very inform-
ative. Jesus is en route to Jerusalem and is passing through
a Samaritan village which rejects him; his disciples ask if
he wants them to call down fire from heaven on the villagers.
Jesus rebukes his apostles and continues his weary way to
The Cross.







tagline: Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion. Dawkins' God Delusion.

Postscript: for further reading can I recommend Alister McGrath's
"Dawkins' God". Blackwell Publishing ISBN-13: 978-11-4051-2538-3.

Laodicea.

This is the seventh (and final) church in the opening chapters of
the Book of Revelation; and it is here that the Autumn term of
"Central Focus" concludes. Our Bible Study resumes in January in
chapter 4. These seven churches are being evaluated by the Risen
Christ; they all face challenges; a couple are commended, most
are censured, none are without hope.

It seems to me that unless "religion" results in meaningful, self-
critical reflection then such belief systems can only ever serve as
'flags of convenience' for whatever tribe we identify with. It marks
out "us" from "them" in our tribal conflicts and the values we
ostensibly hold to are in reality subverted to other ends. We take
God's name in vain when we claim his endorsement of such conflict
and we will have to give an account for that one day. The chief
problem of the Laodicean church is its complacency and self
satisfaction - the horrifying thing about it is that Jesus Christ is
outside seeking admission! This is a church where the 'life' of the
organisation happily ticks over and Christ is not at the heart of
it.

The challenge is to examine our own hearts and see where we
have subtly excluded Jesus and settled for mediocrity. It is that
lukewarm notion of 'faith' that the Lord finds so nauseating. "Be
zealous and repent" he says. This is not to be zealous for the sake
of being zealous - this is to be passionate about Jesus and the
priorities he has. Of course being a 'zealot' is so un-english and is
so uncool; but maybe that is the cost of discipleship for us!

A Tale of Two Cities.

Leeds and Bradford are two West Yorkshire cities less than ten miles apart
but their fortunes could hardly be more different. Bradford is my home town
and every time I visit it I genuinely want to like the place but such efforts on
my part are tinged with pathos. Even now I still love the night-time view from
Carr Lane across the city. But the close knit (not to mention stifling) working
class suburbs with flagstone paving and cobbled streets have long since vanished.

I find it sad to hear my relatives speak of the place in more prosperous
times when Bradford was at the heart of the worsted (wool textile) industry.
Once upon a time it hosted several department stores and had some real
civic pride. But textiles went into decline decades ago and Bradford hasn't
been able to find a new niche in the world; or so it seems to me.

The poverty of the place is reflected in the shops in the town centre - all
the major stores have relocated and have been replaced by shop squats
and discount stores. How many such shops does a place need?

Leeds in contrast seems ever more prosperous, having sensibly
pedestrianised the city centre [though this makes for some fiendishly difficult
traffic systems!] The range of shops there is quite astonishing; Helen & I
often do our Christmas shopping here rather than London! Leeds has a
cafe culture 'buzz' about it. I certainly enjoyed living in Leeds during the
1980s before I moved to London.

Another feature of the contrasting cities is how in the 1960's Leeds kept its
Victorian buildings when Bradford was happily demolishing what was then
regarded as its thoroughly unfashionable heritage. I bet the city fathers
regret that now! Anonymous, lookalike steel and glass boxes were erected
to replace the Victoriana but these now seem shabby and soul-less. Plans
are afoot to regenerate the city centre but one wonders how can a town
recapture its sense of place?

My temptation is to look back and feel rootless; so I'm glad to have been
reminded of where my true citizenship really lies. Last night in our penultimate
Bible study of the year we looked at the church in Philadelphia (Revelation 3).
They were a church that felt under the cosh but Jesus tells them that they
belong in the New Jerusalem. And that is where my home really is.....that's
not in the past but is a present reality and an eternal future........the place
where Ithaca and Darien meet!



Post Script: 23rd December 06. I should add that the village of Saltaire on the
outskirts of Bradford was recently given the status of "World Heritage Site".
The village was created by a local mill owner called Titus Salt for his workers
back in the 19th Century.
The grid of streets named after Titus Salt's family has become home to the
world's largest Hockney collection and has been joined by other arts, hi-tech
firms and shops. So maybe there is some room for optimism after all!

I.C.R?........"brush & tar!"

December 2006's thought from my agnostic calendar is;

"Although the ICR often emphasizes that it is the
scientific nature of creationist theory which brings
scientists to a belief in a supreme being, it is curious
that they include a requirement for membership (the
inerrancy of the Christian Bible) which effectively
excludes Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and the
majority of Christian sects (who do not accept a literal
reading of all parts of the Bible) from membership. It
is clear that the ICR, which is the most respected of
creationist groups in its attempts to appear scientifically
legitimate, is essentially an organisation composed
solely of Christian Fundamentalists."
Kenneth R Miller, "Scientific Creationism versus Evolution".

Who on earth are the ICR?.............I've never heard of
them!.........And what on earth have their membership
requirements got to do with me?




tagline: Calendar of Doom.

COSMIC FINE TUNING....
"what banged and why?!"

There are four fundamental laws of physics
which determine the nature of the universe.
They are gravity, electromagnetism, and the
weak and strong nuclear forces.

All these factors (any of which could have
absolutely any value) are, in reality, so care-
fully balanced that the mathematics is
unbelievable. It has been likened to someone
firing an arrow from one side of the universe to
the other and hitting the bull's eye. Or put
another way the odds are conservatively estimated
to be 10 to the power of 55 [that's a 10 with 55
zeroes after it]. If any of those fundamental
values were not exactly balanced as they are by
each other we would not have an ordered, habitable
universe. A slight variation one way or another in
any of the four laws and the universe is a titanic
'black-hole', and a minor tweak the other way, the
universe is a diffuse cloud of gas - with no stars
or planets. Another twist; you can have stars and
planets but no Carbon [and hence no complex organic
molecules]. The universe we observe is exactly as
it should be to sustain intelligent life.

The standard objection to these observations is
that if it didn't exist, as is, we wouldn't be here
to discuss it. This misses the point entirely - it
is like the man put up before a firing squad to be
executed. Against all the odds the soldiers miss.
After the event someone comments that he has had a
lucky escape! Or could it be that the squad had
been bribed, were they drunk, had the rifles been
sabotaged, or was there some other logical explan-
ation? "None of these", says the prisoner, "because
if they hadn't missed I wouldn't be here to discuss
it". One would rightly conclude that the man was
being rather obtuse to put it mildly. There is a
legitimate existential question here.

The usual response is to bring up the 'lottery
analogy'. Of course the odds in favour of any
given winner winning in the lottery are vanishingly
small, but the odds that there will be a winner are
actually very good. Again, this misses the point
entirely. There aren't trillions and trillions of
players in this cosmic lottery. There is only one
and its our 55 figure number which came up. Again,
let me repeat, there is a legitimate existential
question which - despite our best efforts - cannot
be avoided.




tagline; Calendar of Doom. Anthropic Principle.
Cosmic Fine Tuning. Cosmic Precision Tuning.
Cosmological Argument. Goldilocks Enigma.

63rd (Royal Naval) Division.

Ninety years ago exactly on Monday 13th November 1916 the Royal Naval Division launched an attack on Beaucourt near Beaumont Hamel in the closing phase of The Battle of the Somme which had raged from 1st July of that year. I recently discovered that it was on this date that my grandfather was wounded. He would survive the First World War but not before being wounded for a second time.

My grandfather died when I was a teenager and apart from some self-deprecating anecdotes rarely spoke of the war. A chance remark by my sister, that Grandad had a naval rank and the fact that I had coincidentally read something about the RND made me wonder if that was the unit he was with. The Naval Division was one of the most distinguished fighting units of the British army in the First World War!

The army records of The Great War were largely destroyed during The Blitz in 1940 but the documents of the Royal Navy have survived - and it was among these records at The National Archive on-line that I learnt about my Grandad's war. None of us had appreciated that he was in the RND!

I already knew enough about The Royal Naval Division to recognise that this was an elite fighting unit formed in 1914 at the outbreak of the war for amphibious operations. So I was surprised to learn that this was the outfit my grandfather had volunteered for. The RND was the brainchild of Winston Churchill who was then First Lord of the Admiralty - how could any unit created by him not be elite? Among its more famous members were Rupert Brooke,
the war poet, who died en route to Gallipoli. Arthur Asquith, son of the then Prime Minister Herbert Asquith, was a battalion commander. Bernard Freyburg would be a future Governor
General of New Zealand.

In fact the RND was fighting on the Turkish coast in late 1915 when Grandad volunteered. If he was hoping for an exotic posting it wasn't to be. The RND was withdrawn from Gallipoli early the next year and sent to France which is where grandad first saw action. Command of the RND switched from the Admiralty to the War Office (i.e. army) in April 1916 and was redesignated the '63rd (Royal Naval) Division'. Despite now being officially part of the British army the division insisted on continuing to use naval ranks, fly the White Ensign, salute navy style and speak naval slang, even though they were deep inside the french countryside on the Western Front. I imagine any elite fighting force will seek to retain its distinctive character. This did not win it any fans among certain army types who sought to stamp out these idiosyncracies.....and failed. The RND was said to be the only force to have fought both the German army and the British army!

My grandfather [my mother's father] was an all round sportsman; he played football (soccer) and was a fine cricketer. He won a battalion boxing competition cup - which my aunt still owns (we suspect that it was actually a looted chalice!) He had a passionate love of the Yorkshire Dales and would frequently go walking there. The cricketing gene has since passed to my cousins [watch for the name Jonathan Tattersall in the coming years!] But the walking gene passed to me! I love the Dales too.

Grandad's division was in action throughout the Somme Offensive of 1916. In the UK we largely remember this battle for its disastrous first day when British and Commonwealth forces suffered their worst losses ever. We forget that the offensive lasted several months and lessons about the nature of modern warfare were drawn. One of the final actions of the Somme campaign was the attack on the German stronghold of Beaumont Hamel. It was on the opening day of this attack that my Grandad was wounded and evacuated to the 1st Canadian Hospital at Etaples and then back to England. The RND suffered major casualties in heavy fighting over the next few days.

An interesting aside; during the night of 13th/14th one of the RND's junior officers went AWOL. He was later tried and shot for desertion; one of only two British officers shot for cowardice in the whole of the First World War.

From his record it looks like my Grandad spent 2-3 months in hospital and then had a quiet 1917 working as an instructor around various bases in England, he was probably still recuperating from his injuries. He was promoted to Leading Seaman - and then got busted - twice! Family memory has it that he got involved in a fight; I imagine his protagonist came off the worst.

In March 1918 the Germans launched their massive Spring offensive. Using all the troops freed up from the Russian front after the Communist revolutionary government made a separate peace; it was Germany's last best chance of winning the war before the Americans could intervene effectively. Incidentally it was on the 23rd March 1918 that my father's elder brother Jim was killed aged 19 - he has no known grave.

To stem the German advance reinforcements were sent to France - including my repromoted grandfather. As best as I can judge it from the history of his battalion it looks as if he went back to virtually the same area he had fought in in 1916! It must have been enormously painful to find oneself fighting desperate rearguard actions across the Somme battlefield which had been bought at such a high cost only two years earlier. He was wounded again, but returned to the front a few weeks later. The British army managed to hold the Germans and then in the Summer of 1918 the allied armies began their 'Advance to Victory'.

During one action involving my grandfather's battalion at this time his immediate commander won the Victoria Cross.

There was a ceasefire on 11th November. The Royal Naval Division was disbanded in 1919 and my Grandad returned home. The RND had suffered over four times its original number in casualties - a dreadful attrition rate even by First World War standards. He died in 1971 in
his late seventies. On my grandad's file under 'distinguishing marks' a tattoo is noted - my grandfather's initials [not an uncommon practice even today for elite forces to have such tattoos to aid identification in the event of their death]. But family memory recalls a tattoo
commemorating his lost comrades. I suspect that the original mark was tattooed over and incorporated into the more recent one after the war. Grandad rarely spoke of the war - perhaps it felt unseemly to glory in events that proved so costly to so many families, including those who had died at their hands. My impression is that that generation had a tacit contract with itself never to talk about such things - perhaps their memories were too painful to address or maybe
they simply felt no-one could understand unless they too had been there. Or it could simply be a refusal to allow those few years to effectively define who one is, Grandad's life was bigger than "war" and maybe that was why it had been fought.

EDWARD O WILSON; Lies,
Damned Lies and Statistics.

November 2006's thought from my agnostic calendar is;
"No statistical proofs exist that prayer reduces illness and
mortality, except perhaps through a psychogenic enhancement
of the immune system; if it were otherwise the whole world
would pray continuously". Edward O Wilson.

I'm intrigued to discover what exotic statistics Wilson is demanding
which can be used to demonstrate 'contingent knowledge' (how life
might have turned out in other circumstances). How can Wilson assert
that prayer has no effect on a statistical basis? How do you know that
I wouldn't still be laid up with back pain? How do you know that I
wouldn't have had a heart attack last year or died in a car crash aged
19 but for someone's prayer?

I'm also intrigued to discover why Wilson has assumed that Christians
claim to be exempt from the common experiences of Mankind. I am
aware of no such assurance in the Bible - quite the contrary. If statistics
prove anything it is that Christians are not above the sufferings of Humanity.
Quelle surprise.

I'm intrigued too why Wilson assumes that prayer is exclusively about
physical healing of a 'name it and claim it' variety when all the Christians
I know would say that prayer is about conversing with God and not
neccesarily about getting stuff. In the words of Robert Law "prayer is
not an instrument for getting man's will done in heaven, but for getting
God's will done on earth". Wilson - it seems to me - has a formulaic
and one dimensional understanding of prayer, one that I would argue is
sub-Christian. I assume, for reasons that are unclear, that Wilson has
excluded from the equation the more usual phenomenon of prayer by
Christians offered in support of those health care professionals who are
there to care for their loved ones using their God given talents. And
Wilson has also excluded the phenomena Christians call "common grace"
where God blesses the unbeliever because he cares for all his creatures.

I'm baffled, but if the charge is that the bloated claims of some tele-
evangelists are to be laid [sotto voce] at my door, I can assure you that
I am sceptical about their claims too, but for a wholly different reason:
miracles in the New Testament are not miracles for miracles sake - they
are 'identifiers'. The miracles point the observer to precedents and
promises in the Old Testament and help them understand who the miracle
worker is. In the New Testament miracles are not mere padding within the
narrative - in reality they contain meaning beyond the event itself. Miracles
attest the revelation brought by the messenger. "Could this be the Christ?",
"who is this, that even wind and sea obey him?", "that you [all] may know
that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.....[he said to the
paralytic] pick up you bed and go home." etc etc etc. You have to test these
things against the claims they make for themselves not by Wilson's skewed
standard - 'supernatural healing on demand' - something Jesus never
promised because that was never the primary function of his ministry. I
should add that even when Jesus and his apostles did perform miracles this
did not automatically result in saving faith, the message of even the authent
-icated messenger could and frequently was rejected. Jesus went so far as to
say that some people will not "be convinced [even] if someone should rise
from the dead" Luke 16v19-31. Biblically speaking the real miracle is that
anyone comes to saving faith in Jesus at all..........and actually this is more
important than mere physical wellbeing.

So what test then can we apply which is congruent with Christ's claims?
It is a remarkable fact that within thirty years of Jesus' three year ministry the
message of the Gospel had spread from a tiny band of followers on the
Roman periphery to all around the empire. They had a sizeable community in
Rome itself - sufficiently large to be worth persecuting by the Emperor Nero
and strong enough to survive. The promise is not that Christians are exempt
from difficulties but that God's grace is sufficient to help us through them. If
you want statistical evidence of a miracle look at the growth of the apostolic
church and its survival - and its continuing survival today despite physical
persecution and intellectual ridicule.





tagline: calendar of doom.


Postscript: Quite coincidentally the November 2006 edition of
"The Briefing" [issue 338] majors on the whole 'health & prosperity'
gospel and offers a critique of it from a Christian perspective.
http://www.matthiasmedia.com.au/
http://www.thegoodbook.co.uk/

UNIVERSITY OF SCIATICA .

During the spell I was laid up with back pain I made
use of time off of work to read books, listen to audio
Cds and watch documentaries on TV and DVD. I call
this time in my life "The University of Sciatica"!

I've already mentioned Melvyn Bragg's "In our Time"
radio series in an earlier blog, but I want to flag up
a couple of other good sources I discovered during
my enforced 'sabbatical'.

'Amazon' are always a good resource if you are house
bound. Great books, reasonably priced delivered to
your door. If you are not a great reader why not try
an audio book? Push the boat out and try a subject
or author you've never heard of - who knows where it
might lead?! You will be the richer for having tried!
Amazon also have a great DVD rental service.

I stumbled across a company based in the USA who
provide university (college) style lectures in a variety
of media. I've bought a few courses in audio CD from
them over the last few months "CS Lewis", "Western
Civilization", "Russian Literature", "Natural Law", "Books
that changed the World", one on Chinese civilisation
"From Yao to Mao" and latterly "The Birth of the Modern
Mind - an intellectual history of the 17th & 18th centuries"!
These and many other courses are available from 'The
Teaching Company' http://www.teach12.com/ Check out their
e-catalog! Some advice; (1) I personally wouldn't order
the transcripts as the courses do come with some,
perfectly adequate, written notes. (2) For customers
outside the USA be aware that your local customs may
impose a charge [eg HMG Customs will levy a charge on
product worth over $50]. These are my only caveats -
this company is an excellent resource; I recommend them
to you.

As for Bible teaching I thoroughly recommend
www.shmedia.org.uk and www.thegoodbook.co.uk Maybe
you too will one day have an opportunity like mine to
create your own curriculum in your own learning experience!
Don't knock it! The Good Book Company also offer
correspondence courses to certificate level through the
"Open Bible Institute" [formerly known as the Moore
College Correspondence Courses]. I've done the 'Bible
Introduction' and 'New testament 1' [that's Mark's Gospel]
in times past and I'm presently having a crack at 'Old
Testament 1' [that's the Pentateuch]. The exams are
optional - but hey if you're going to do the work why not
go for the certificate?! http://www.open-bible-institute.org/

Just one more recommendation; I created my own
'University of Sciatica' t-shirt online at http://www.eshirt.it/
Honest, it's a really easy site to use and they have some
great designs which you can customise, or you can upload
your own image if you like.

Over the last couple of months I've been gradually
increasing the number of hours at work; initially doing
office based stuff and more recently doing clinical work
on the Children's Intensive Care Unit at 'Sonata Smith's
Hospital' in London. Oh, and earlier this month I managed
to do my previously aborted walking trip to the Lake
District. So things are definately moving in the right
direction.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUCA.

My name is Luca and I am a stray cat.I think my
previous owners must have got bored with me.
It's not uncommon for Humans to take us to a
strange part of town and drive off. I had to live
rough for a while.

One rainy day I wandered into someone's garden
and peered in through the french windows. I must
have looked a sorry sight - dripping wet and half
starved.

I don't blame Pete & Helen for not feeding me
straight away because they probably thought I
had a home to go to. I stayed in their garden in
the meantime cos it's quiet there. Anyway they
gave me some food when they could see how
thin I'd become. After that I couldn't keep away.
I'd eat anything back in those days. I love roast
chicken - definately my favourite - let me know
the next time you're cooking and I'll drop in for
dinner! I suppose it is fair to say that I've become
a bit more picky about my food these days; I'm not
so keen nowadays on 'Whiskas' Cod - if that's put
out for me I'll wander down the street to Shirley's
to see if there is a better offer!

Pete & Helen called me 'Lucas' at first until they
realised that I was a girl! I have a lovely black
and white coat which is nicely complemented by
a new red collar - it is so nice to feel that I 'belong'
to someone again!

What gets me is how capricious these Humans are.
One day just when I was beginning to feel a bit
more confident I was whisked away to an evil
place called the Veterinary Surgeon.

I was stabbed, poked, de-fleaed, de-wormed,
vaccinated and had THREE teeth extracted because
they had gone
" bad "

.......whatever that means. I was hopping mad
and sulked for days! They said
" it was for my own good "
- yeah right. They said all this
" treatment "cost them £300 - I have no comprehension
whatsoever what this means. I suppose I just have to
take their word for it on
" faith "!

It's enough to make you doubt the goodness of Man!



PostScript: 26th October 2006.
I might have misjudged Luca by implying that she is an
ungrateful cat. This morning when I returned home after
a night shift there was the biggest, deadest MOUSE laid
out on our doorstep!
Personally its not my taste, but I appreciate the sentiment!
To everyone out there in blog-world - I hope that your day
starts as fruitfully as mine!

Signed: a shamefaced cat owner.

FRIDAY THE 13th!
Superstition & Destiny.

The problem with superstition is the implication that one's
destiny is ultimately controlled by forces the control of
which is the province of a professional magician class.
Being interested in Astronomy (not to be confused with
Astrology!) I entered my birthdate into a computer
programme checking on planetary positions. To my
surprise the Sun was in the constellation Leo - my
"birthsign" is supposedly Virgo. I don't mean the Sun
was on the margins of the two it was definately well
within the 'wrong' star sign!

Since Ptolemy the ancient astronomer defined the
Zodiac two and a half thousand years ago a phenomenon
called the precession of the equinoxes has shunted the
constellations along a month or so. It's like having a
calendar without the leap years - over time the months
end up out of synch. It is amusing to think that astrologers
claim to be able to read ones destiny but cannot get the
one objective starting point right!

I once put this to an astrologer friend of mine; "so what star
sign am I? Leo or Virgo?".......... "Typical b****y Virgoan!"
she replied!

The point is as a Christian I don't believe my destiny is ruled
by the date. I don't accept that the date defines who I am.
To give way to such fears is to deny that Jesus is Lord.
He is the one who defines who I am and he is the one
who controls my destiny.

MELVYN BRAGG; "In Our Time".

Melvyn Bragg has returned to BBC radio 4 recently with a new
series of "In Our Time". The format is a discussion by a panel
of experts chaired by Bragg exploring the history of ideas.
It is on at 9am on Thursday mornings for 45 minutes and a
shorter version is repeated the same evening at 9.30pm on
Radio 4. [92.4-94.6 MHz; 198 kHz].

I've always been a fan of this programme since I heard an
explanation of 'the standard model' of sub-atomic particles
which 'blew my mind'!

The subjects can be rather esoteric but they do provide
you with an introduction to topics you might never have
heard of otherwise. Sometimes they look at science,
sometimes it's history, other times it can be literature or
philosophy. I often find that "In Our Time" can inspire
me to look further into a given subject - you don't always
have to agree with a panellist's opinion to feel curious
enough to follow it up with some reading of your own.

Earlier this year I had to take some time off work because
of back pain. This period was a great opportunity to listen
to some of these programmes I'd recorded over the years.
I called this my "University of Sciatica"! [Don't you think that
sounds a bit like a midwestern college? I even had a T-Shirt
made up with this name - how sad is that?]

Anyway I am writing to recommend this radio series and to
let you know that you can access the archive of previous
discussions at the website below, either to listen on-line or
download in an mp3 format.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/inourtime/inourtime.shtml

DAN BAKER'S AUNT SALLY.

October 2006's thought from my agnostic calendar is:

"Faith is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith,
then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its
own merits." Dan Baker.

"Aah.......this is obviously some strange usage of the word 'faith'
that I wasn't previously aware of!" (Apologies to Douglas Adams
and 'Arthur Dent'!)

One cannot have faith in something [that is trust it] unless at
some level you are convinced it already has merit. Derrrrr!

It makes you wonder what the apostle Paul was doing in Athens
debating with Epicurean and Stoic philosophers, or why he
spent two years "reasoning daily in the Hall of Tyrannus" with
all-comers [see Acts 17 &19!]. Incidentally what have I been
doing this last year with "Calendar of Doom" if not arguing the
merits of the case?

To have a mature dialogue on issues that divide us requires an
agreement over what exactly we disagree on! Can I recommend
Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology" published by IVP:
GB ISBN 0-85110-652-8 or USA ISBN 0-310-28670-0. The
contents give a surprisingly accesible account of evangelical beliefs.
Chapter 35 and specifically pages 710 & 711 puts paid to a couple
of commonly accepted, but laughable, concepts of 'faith' including
the irrational belief in something despite the abscence of evidence
version which yanked Dan Baker's chain. There is a good explanation
there of what 'faith' really means in the context of the evangelical
faith [and frankly I'm not an apologist for any other kind].

Biblically speaking 'faith' is not so much about believing abstract
assertions, it is more akin to trusting in the character of a personal
being and the promises they make. A Christian is someone who
believes that there is ample evidence to justify not merely a belief
in God's existence but crucially to trust in God's character. Now
Dan Baker will almost certainly not accept that evidence as
compelling - but that is a totally different issue to simply asserting
that Christians have put the 'faith' cart before the evidential horse!

Rather than view 'faith' as some special category of knowledge semi-
detached from reality, it is important to say that we all put our trust
in others from time-to-time [eg the pilot of my holiday flight, the
cook who prepared my meal, even the compiler of the bus timetable
etc etc etc]. All civilisation hinges on those little quantum packets of
trust we both give and receive. But we have already covered a lot of
this ground back in February's "Calendar of Doom" when we looked
at 'Doubt & Certainty' with Voltaire. Incidentally the compiler of the
'agnostic calendar' was asserting 'faith' in Dan Baker when they chose
his quotation - they trusted in the veracity of his accusation.

Let us hope that it was not the case that he thought it is sufficient
merely to caricature and misrepresent someone else's position. If so
it can only be the gallery he is playing to. Or it might simply be that
he hasn't done enough background reading before launching his
attack.

Either way; when he sorts himself out his little homily against
"intellectual bankruptcy" will be a tad more credible.




tagline: Dan Baker. Misrepresentation. Caricature. Versus. Peter
Swift. Faith. Gospel. Evangelical. Evangelicalism. Christianity.
swiftypete. Jesus. Jesus Christ. Intellectual. Mature. Calendar of
Doom. The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy. H2G2. 'Safe'. The
God Delusion.

REVELATION: a Beast of a Book!

This Saturday at my church [St Helen's Bishopsgate in
London] we had a day long introduction to the book of
'Revelation' for the the Bible Study leaders [aka "SLOBS"!].
I am one of the small-group leaders and this was our
opportunity to collect our thoughts before launching
into this series of studies. Personally I have some misgivings
about using this book for a participatory Bible study but
that is the challenge I guess.

Revelation is a 'happy hunting ground' for all sorts of strange
teachings and cults.....and some despair of ever truly under-
standing it. The best advice I can give is, get the 'big picture'
before being drawn into discussions about particularities.
The key to any Bible book is often found in its broadest
perspective. The book of Revelation suffers from folk
rushing in to interpretation and application without first
getting a grasp of the broad structure of the book.....which
reduces it to a Christian version of 'Nostradamus'. Revelation
has a repeating cycle of sevens using symbolisms which
would make perfect sense to the first century readers.....
why else would John have written it? The themes the book
explores are relevant throughout history......why else did God
include it in the canon of scripture? The only substantial future
event yet to unfold is Christ's Return. We must guard against
the temptation to believe that our generation and our
nation has a exceptional role to play in this drama.

Can I recommend a couple of books? "Revelation Unwrapped"
by John Richardson: ISBN 0 9524894 2 2 (UK) or ISBN
0 646 28287 5 (AUS). This is only 74 pages long but it provides
a good handle on 'the big picture' and critiques less helpful
interpretations by well-meaning but off key Bible teachers
who are often certain and seldom right! Bible believing
Christians affirm "primary literal inspiration of scripture" but
some good hearted people assume that this must also require
literal interpretation of the text. This invariably causes
problems when we need to understand symbolic or figurative
language - of which 'apocalyptic' literature is full - and leads
to a wooden literalism which often misses the point the Bible
is teaching.

My personal view [which should not be thought of as having
any official status with my church] is that it is unfortunate that
some Christians are content to take their theology from pulp
paperback prophecy rather than draw it from the source of
God's Word.......this results in a 'group think' which is hard to
justify when put to the test. I do appreciate that there will be
people out there whose trust in the Bible is founded upon a
supposed correlation between the Bible's apocalyptic books
and specific contemporary world events; however I am compelled
to say that such naivety will not pass the test of time. Can I urge
you to look deeper within the Bible text for its real meaning?
If not, you risk founding your faith upon shifting interpretive
sand and not on the bed rock of God's Word. Be wary of
teachers who effectively take the Bible away from you and
render you dependant on their insights rather than help you see
God's Word for yourself.

Another book I would recommend is Graeme Goldworthy's
"The Gospel in Revelation". Again another surprisingly short
book [not to be confused with his similarly titled tome] which
is pure gold! ISBN 0 85364630 9. As a rule of thumb the very
best Bible commentaries are not written by academics for
academics, but by those with a pastoral background for pastors;
the Bible is pastoral theology when all is said and done!

Anyway if you fancy following along our studies in Revelation
these coming months you can access the material at
www.centralfocus.org.uk Better still if you are around London
why not sign up with one of our groups? Details can be found at
www.st-helens.org.uk Studies start 4th October with an
introductory talk by John Richardson - author of "Revelation
Unwrapped"!

tagline: The Beast, the Whore, the Lamb, the Mark, the Bible,
Revelation, revelation.

postscript: 6 Nov 06. I should have also recommended the
excellent BST commentary by Michael Wilcock "The Message of
Revelation" published by IVP. ISBN 0-85110-964-0.
Some people find Paul Barnett's "Apocalypse Now and Then"
helpful; published by Aquila Press ISBN 1 875861 41 6.

49er

Last week I had my 49th Birthday. To mark the occasion I thought
I would quote something which (I think) Bob Hope once said;

"When you are 20 you care desperately what other people think of
you. When you are 40 you are past caring what other people think
of you. When you are 60 you realise that other people were never
thinking about you in the first place".

I wish I'd thought of saying that!

In 1985 I spent a few months with "Youth with a Mission" at Holmsted
Manor in England doing a "Discipleship Training Course" (a mini pre-
Toronto Toronto if you get my drift). 1987-88 I went on to do a year
at The King's Lodge at the "School of Biblical Studies" under Charlie
Bassett which provided a much needed counter balance to the
previous charismania and helped give me a superb overview of the
Bible.

Have you noticed how a lot of parachurch organisations emphasise the
"youff" element? YWAM [pronounced why-wham incidentally], Youth
for Christ, Teen Challenge, Campus Crusade, Young Life etc to name
but a few. Now that I've hit middle age, what groups are aimed at the
likes of us?
I want to flag up the possibility of launching a new organisation called
OGWAM....Old Geezers with a Mission. If you think that this is a good
idea please send fabulous amounts of money to my off-shore bank
account!

RICHARD DAWKINS: but is it
"life as we know it"?

September 2006's thought from my agnostic calendar is;

"If we want to postulate a deity capable of engineering
all the organized complexity in the world, either instant-
aneously or by guiding evolution, that deity must already
have been vastly complex in the first place. The creationist,
whether a naive Bible-thumper or an educated bishop,
simply postulates an already existing being of prodigious
intelligence and complexity. If we are going to allow
ourselves the luxury of postulating organized complexity
without offering an explanation, we might as well make a
job of it and simply postulate the existence of life as we
know it!" Richard Dawkins.

Ah, but that is the question isn't it? Is it really an explanation for
"life as we know it"? Dawkins view of "life" is that 'fish are machines
for replicating DNA in the sea, birds are machines for replicating
DNA in the air and people are machines for replicating DNA on land'.
The question that is crying out to be answered is; is this an adequate
description for "life as we know it"? It is akin to someone saying
that they have a blueprint of an aircraft and assure you that this
tells them everything there is to know about flying! It has all the
lucid simplicity of the madman - I doubt that you would have faith
in such a person to fly an aircraft you were aboard that's for sure!
[And we all put our trust in other people at some time or other].

What am I driving at? Sure DNA helps replicate creatures, I don't
deny that. What I do deny is that this explains everything about
"life as we know it". Dawkins uses the word "life" to mean 'bio-mass'
and nothing else because a materialist is blind to the non material
dimensions of "LIFE" in all its fullness. "LIFE as we know it" is
much more richly textured and the non-material things we
experience are just as real; imagination, creativity, justice, love
(and hate), good (and evil), joy (and sadness) all make up a fuller
picture of "life as it exists".

Dawkins once wrote "in a universe of blind physical forces and genetic
replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going
to get lucky, and we won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any
justice. The universe [has] no design, no purpose, no evil, no good;
nothing but blind pitiless indifference. DNA neither knows, nor cares.
DNA just is, and we dance to its music." As an explanation for LIFE
is this adequate? To a materialist with a minimalist abstract notion
of life; yes.

But it seems to me that there are universal principles of justice as if
there is a natural law written into the fabric of the Cosmos - and
such law makes little sense without a law-giver. We care about the
suffering of those involved in natural or manmade disasters when
Dawkins' abstractions logically require indifference. DNA doesn't
care but personal beings do. Bafflingly even Dawkins uses words like
"evil" and "wicked" to describe those people [like me] he does not
approve of, as if even he is compelled at a subconscious level to
acknowledge that such categories exist [as with all such barrackroom
moralists his anger is peppered indiscriminately about - nonetheless
even he is a grudging witness to the reality of non-material values].
Why should I think that Dawkins is any more perceptive about LIFE?

All moralists [whether they realise it or not] have a simple formula
in their heads and it goes like this "the world would be a far
better place without.................people in it
(fill in the blank space)"."Evil" is always a
description of someone other than ourselves; it is
only the Christian who recognises that it is their name that should
be there! This is what Christians call "repentance" - the
acknowledgement of ones own evil, indeed it is this which makes a
Christian Christian (and is not to be confused with those who are only
notionally "christian").

Dawkins postulates life as an abstraction but LIFE as it is actually
lived [beyond the lucidity of the madman] is not an abstraction
LIFE is personal. From these thoughts I would argue that there is
adequate evidence of a cosmic creative lawgiver; one who is
personal; one who has nothing to learn from us about love and justice
- and thus is someone to whom I am accountable for the evil [aka
abscence of love & justice] which infests my heart and in whom I,
as a Christian, trust to pilot me home safely because I know that
I cannot do it.

I don't postulate I observe.



tagline: Calendar of Doom. swiftypete. swiftypete. the swiftypete. the
swiftypete blog. Peter Swift is swiftypete. life. existence. meaning.
reductionism. versus. christianity. richard dawkins. Peter Swift
is the swiftypete. The God Delusion.

post-script: I had intended to talk about "Cosmic Fine Tuning" as material
evidence of a creator but I've written enough already and it will have to wait
for another day.
post-post-script: There are some good articles on Genesis and Science in the
October 06 edition of "The Briefing" [issue 337]. Back issues can be obtained
from http://www.thegoodbook.co.uk/ or http://www.matthiasmedia.com.au/