3 Lies Porn Tells You

 

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/whole-life/3-lies-porn-tells-you

 

By Justin and Trisha Davis

April 18, 2013

Justin and Trisha are bloggers, authors, speakers and founders of RefineUs Ministries. Sharing their story of pain, loss and redemption, RefineUs is igniting a movement to build healthy marriages and families. They are the co-authors of their first book, Beyond Ordinary: When a Good Marriage Just Isn’t Good Enough, published by Tyndale House Publishers.

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

Three years into our marriage, my wife, Trisha, woke up in the middle of the night and realized I wasn’t in bed. She walked out into the living room and as soon as she looked at the TV, I quickly changed the channel.

 

She began to question me about what I was watching, why I wasn’t in bed, and why I would immediately change the channel. Then came the repeated question: Do you struggle with lust and pornography? The more she asked the more intense the conversation became.

 

So I denied everything. I told her I was just channel surfing. I argued with her about what she saw. I convinced her that I didn’t struggle with porn or lust. She had nothing to worry about. I was lying.

 

For the amount of people who struggle with this, we don’t talk about it near enough.

 

I didn’t know it at the time, but that night was the first of many opportunities I had over the first 10 years of our marriage to be honest about my porn addiction. I was a pastor and pastors don’t struggle with lust or porn. At least, no other pastor I knew struggled with it, I felt all alone.

 

The truth was, I wasn’t alone. I had friends I could have talked to. I had accountability partners I lied to. I had other pastors I blew off when asked about sexual sins and struggles.

 

In my mind, my intentions were good—I was trying to protect my marriage. The reality is, porn was telling me lies and I was buying right into them.

 

For the amount of people who struggle with this, we don’t talk about it near enough. We don’t talk about it in our families. We don’t talk about it in our churches. We think avoiding it will make it go away. Statistically speaking, over 50 percent of the men reading this post have had exposure to pornography recently. And it’s not just a “man’s problem,” either. About 30 percent of porn users online are women. It isn’t going away.

 

Here are the three lies porn told me and will tell you as well.

 

1. That was the last time.

 

No matter how many times you’ve looked at pornography, that was your last time. Because you truly believe it is your last time buying the magazine, going to the web site, downloading that movie—you don’t need to confess it, because it was the last time. Until tomorrow or next week or next month. It is the last time—until the next time. If porn can convince you that “this time is the last time,” you’ll never tell anyone.

 

2. You can stop anytime you want.

 

You know what pornography has done to other marriages, to other friends, to other families, to other church leaders…but you aren’t really “addicted” to pornography. You can stop anytime you want. Besides it doesn’t have the same effect on you that it does on other people. It won’t hurt your life, your marriage, your kids, your church, your ministry like it has other people. You are in control of porn, it doesn’t control you.

 

Freedom costs something upfront, but not as much as bondage costs over time.

 

3. Confessing your struggle with cost you too much.

 

Porn wants you to live in secret. Porn causes us to weigh the cost of confessing against the cost of hiding and convinces us that hiding will be less painful. You think you are helping yourself and your marriage by hiding your porn addiction. Your wife—or husband—won’t understand. Your marriage won’t recover. Your credibility won’t be able to be rebuilt.

 

Something I’ve learned the hard way: Hiding sin never provides us with the power

to overcome it. The freedom you long for is found in confession. Freedom costs

something upfront, but not as much as bondage costs over time.

 

Believing these lies will never give you the power to overcome them. Trying to quit will not give you the power to quit. But freedom is possible.

 

Here is what I believe with all of my heart: If you struggle with pornography, God isn’t disappointed in you; He is fighting for you. He died and conquered sin and death so you can have victory in this area of your life.

 

Where do we begin? How can we overcome something that grips our heart and keeps us living in shame and guilt? The first place I suggest everyone that struggles with pornography start is with a Christian counselor. Both my wife and I needed someone with greater perspective and wisdom than we had to help us overcome this struggle in my life.

 

Beyond that, I want to share one principle with you that I believe has power to bring freedom, hope and healing to your heart. It won’t be easy, but it will be worth it.

 

Healing comes through confession and prayer. I know that sounds very churchy, but take a look at this Scripture: “Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective” (James 5:16).

 

The type of confession that James is talking about isn’t a confession for forgiveness; it is confession for healing. There is a healing that comes to our heart as we confess our sins with one another.

 

Most of us have the “forgiveness” part of confession down. We know that in order to get forgiveness from God, we have to confess our sins. Maybe you grew up confessing to a priest, maybe it is something that you do in your quiet time with God, maybe it is something that you do after you’ve made a huge mistake. Most of us know that forgiveness from God comes through confession.

 

We don’t talk about the “healing” type of confession in the Church very often. In fact, we have built a religious system that tries to find healing through hiding our sins, not confessing them. The sins we do confess are “safe” sins: bitterness, jealousy, materialism, anger and selfishness.

 

I was the master at this. I appeared “authentic” for confessing socially acceptable sins while I lived as a prisoner to sins I wasn’t willing to confess. For years, I forfeited the healing that God longed to bring to my heart not because I didn’t confess my sins to Him; but because I refused to confess them to anyone else.

 

But here’s 3 truths porn will never tell you:

• Temptation loses its power when we confess.
• Sin loses its ability to keep us fractured when we confess.
• Addictions lose the control they have in our lives when we confess.

The secret sin you keep only has power as it remains a secret. The Light will always overcome darkness. The difficult decision we face is allow that Light into the darkest, most embarrassing parts of our heart. God can’t heal the parts of our heart we refuse to bring into the Light. But when we do, we can be healed.

 

Asking Questions of Evolutionary Creationism

 

"I am not of the opinion that evolutionary theory poses no challenge to Christianity, but neither am I of the opinion that evolutionary theory can be ignored or dismissed. The questions therefore that must be answered, among others I'm sure, are: 1. Is evolutionary theory necessarily teleological for the Christian? 2. Is there a place for natural theology or general revelation in light of evolutionary theory? 3. What priority is to be given evolutionary science in determining Christian dogma?" - Mark Quanstrom

 

 

A Much Needed Conversation

http://exploringevolution.com/essays/2013/04/17/much-needed-conversation/#.UW7dvedkgNZ.facebook

 

by Mark Quanstrom

April 17, 2013

 

I am appreciative to those who recognize that there ought to be a place where serious conversation can take place regarding the relationship between evolutionary theory and Christianity's faith affirmations.

 

I'm appreciative because I am not of the opinion that evolutionary theory poses no challenge to Christianity. I don't think that if we just appropriated the right Biblical hermeneutic, or understood the respective epistemological domains of science and religion, or insisted on science recognizing its "faith" presuppositions, then all would be well.

 

I'm appreciative because neither am I of the opinion that the challenges that evolutionary theory pose to creedal Christianity can be ignored or dismissed. (And just for the record, I am using the word "theory" here in its scientific sense, not in the "detective novel" sense.) I am not in agreement with the young-earth creationists who dismiss or explain away the scientific evidence for evolutionary theory, even if I am sympathetic to their recognition of the problem evolution poses. Evolutionary theory must be taken seriously, as it is providing the best theoretical framework for understanding biological life on this planet.

 

So this is a much needed conversation, and for that reason, I would like to raise a few of the issues that I believe confound an easy reconciliation between evolutionary theory and Christianity. I don't think that the three questions I am raising exhaust the issues, but in my mind, they seem to be three that are worthy of reflective consideration by Christian theologians and Christian biologists alike.

 

 

1. Is Evolutionary Theory Necessarily Teleological for the Christian?

 

The first question that I believe is relative to some sort of rapprochement between creedal Christianity and evolutionary theory concerns how evolution is to be understood itself. There is considerable conversation among evolutionists about whether or not evolutionary theory is teleological in nature; that is, whether the theory necessitates purpose or direction, or whether it is simply descriptive of a blindly mechanistic universe. John Dupre, Professor of Philosophy of Science at Exeter University, in his review of John O. Reiss' Not By Design: Retiring Darwin's Watchmaker, stating the facts of the matter, writes:

Followers of the debate between evolutionists and various waves of creationists, most recently the advocates of "intelligent design," will have been struck by one curious convergence between the views of the opposing parties. Both sides agree that life, whether or not literally designed by an intelligent agent, seems just as if it had been designed.¹

This philosophic presupposition that evolutionary theory is guided by some teleological principle ("survival of the fittest" or "natural selection" for example) is being rejected by many evolutionists precisely because a teleological principle cannot be empirically verified.

So John O. Reiss, Chair of the Biology Department at Humboldt State University, believes it absolutely necessary that evolutionary theory be understood non-teleologically. In the first chapter of his book, he explains his project.

In this book, I try to show that the concept of natural selection is often invoked to explain evolutionary transformations for which we have no evidence that the mechanism of natural selection, as currently understood, was wholly or even partially responsible for the transformation. I argue that we have never been able to overcome the major weakness of this metaphor... This weakness is the implication that there is, in nature, an agent with actions analogous to those of the breeder in artificial selection, a teleological agent that intentionally, and with foresight, 'selects' variations directed toward the improvement of the organism.²

Reiss insists that evolutionary theory, for it to be coherent, must reject any implication or indication of purpose.

 

David Hanke, Senior Lecturer of Biology at the University of Cambridge, goes further and insists that the whole evolutionary theory is compromised precisely because evolutionists infuse it with purpose.

In a chapter titled "Teleology: the explanation that bedevils biology," he writes:

Biology is sick. Fundamentally unscientific modes of thought are increasingly accepted, and dominate the way the subject is explained to the next generation... One major reason is the manner in which Natural Selection slipped seamlessly into the place of the Creator: the Natural Selector as the acceptable new face of the Great Designer... Predictably enough, anthropomorphizing Nature as your selector leads inevitably to the false supposition that there exists the quality of selectability, called 'Fitness' on the basis of which Nature selects... 'Fitness' does not exist – it is another phantom construct of the human mind...
 

There is no selection, only differential survival... ...both 'natural selection' and 'survival of the fittest' amount to no more than survival of the survivors, reflecting the uncreative emptiness of the continuous sieving of living things...³

According to Hanke, there is no "natural selection" or "survival of the fittest," as if "selection" was the means and "survival" was the end. No, it was simply "survivor of the survivors."

 

It seems to me problematic if the future paradigm for evolutionary biologists necessarily precludes a telos or teleological principle. Those who adhere to theistic evolution will necessarily be engaged in conversations about the definition of evolution itself and how the presupposition of purpose affects the scientific methodology. So the first question that I have is this one: "Is evolutionary theory necessarily teleological for the Christian?"

 

Comment 1

 

The last article I have listed below is by an evolutionary scientist/philosopher who

actually proposes the idea of teleology being central to the "bones" of evolution.

Many Evolutionary Creationists also feel this same way as do I.

 

- R.E. Slater (res)

 

 

2. Is there a place for natural theology or general revelation in light of evolutionary theory?

 

The second question I have concerns the place of natural theology or general revelation in an understanding of the Christian Faith. I should confess at the outset that I am not Barthian in this matter. While I recognize the absolute and definitive uniqueness of the special revelation of God in Christ, and while I understand the Reformed rejection of natural theology per se, I would like to accept as true Paul's word in Romans 1:20a, which says: "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen..." (NIV)

And I should note that our theological tradition acknowledges the place of general revelation to a knowledge of God. H. Orton Wiley wrote:

The Scriptures recognize the fact that nature reveals God, not only by frequent references to the work of nature but also by direct assertion. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night... The Apostle Paul... makes it clear that nature reveals God sufficiently to lead men to seek after Him and worship Him...⁴

However, in light of what evolution has taught us about "creation," I'm thinking I might need to be afraid to ask what nature teaches us about the Creator. How is Hume's critique of the teleological argument for God's existence to be answered by Christian evolutionists who embrace natural theology or general revelation?

Look around this universe. What an immense profusion of beings, animated and organized, sensible and active! You admire this prodigious variety and fecundity. But inspect a little more narrowly these living existences, the only beings worth regarding. How hostile and destructive to each other! How insufficient all of them for their own happiness! How contemptible or odious to the spectator! The whole presents nothing but the idea of a blind man, impregnated by a great vivifying principle, and pouring forth from her lap, without discernment or parental care, her maimed and abortive children.⁵

If general revelation, through creation, is a true revelation of the divine nature of God, then are we not with Tennyson, who wrote that nature was "red in tooth and claw" and who then was compelled to ask:

Are God and nature then at strife,

That Nature lends such evil dreams?

So careful of the type she seems,

So careless of the single life.⁶

Indeed, Jerry Coyne, Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, calls into question the natural theology/general revelation of the Christian community in his blog when he challenged BioLogos' use of evolutionary science to draw conclusions about God's character. BioLogos, which is a "community of evangelical Christians committed to exploring and celebrating the compatibility of evolutionary creation and biblical faith," argued on their web page that God's character can indeed be discerned from evolutionary science. Specifically, they posited that God is "Extravagant" (in light of the diversity of life), "Patient" (in light of the length of time evolutionary processes take) and a "Provider" (in light of the complex ecosystems that are necessary for individual species to survive).⁷ Coyne responded:

As an evolutionary biologist, I would see this as deliberate humor if I didn't know better. For I could think of several not-so-nice characteristics of God also manifested by "studying evolutionary science." But I'll leave this amusing exercise to the readers...

And then Coyne asks: "What characteristics of God do you see from studying nature and evolution?"⁸

 

And so the second question I have concerns the place of general revelation/natural theology in light of evolutionary theory? Can we continue to look to nature to discern the Creator?

 

Comment 2 

 

I have attempted some answers to these very same questions which can be found under the

sidebars of "God," "Sin," "Sovereignty," "Theism (both Relational and Process)," and such

like. I believe that God's handiwork does reveal God as it must, but I also believe that His

handiwork has been corrupted by sin.

 

- res

 

 

3. What priority is to be given evolutionary science in determining Christian dogma?

 

The third question I have concerns the specific challenges evolutionary theory poses to the affirmations of the Christian Faith. I'm not speaking of those affirmations that are dependent on a fundamentalist hermeneutic, but rather those creedal affirmations that are grounded in the Bible-entire and not in any one particular passage or dependent on any one particular hermeneutic.

 

For example, granting that the first three chapters of Genesis are primarily theological in nature, how is the doctrine of original sin or inherited depravity to be understood? If Adam and Eve are archetypes, then how is the "fall" to be explained? Is a primeval paradise from which humanity fell and to which it longs to return essential to the Christian Faith as it has been understood in the West?

 

Related to the above questions is the question of death. Christian Faith teaches that death was an intrusion on the created order. Death was the consequence of the fall, is judgment on sin and is an enemy to which the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the victorious answer.

 

Evolutionary science demands that death be understood as an essential part of the biological world. If death is essential to God's creation and therefore a necessary good, then why is there a need for resurrection from the dead? Why has the Christian Faith considered death to be an enemy? Evolutionary science poses challenges to the Christian understanding of Jesus Christ as well. In short, was He the God-man, the prototype of a restored humanity, a second Adam? Did all the fullness of God dwell in human form? Or was he a homosapien on the evolutionary continuum? If so, was He perhaps an exception to evolution and therefore a "tertium quid," which means not fully human after all? If He wasn't human as we are human, then we must rethink atonement as well as Christology.

 

The real issue for Christians which I believe confounds an easy reconciliation between evolutionary theory and Christianity is nothing other than the incarnation. The first confession for Christians is the confession that "Jesus is Lord," that "the Word became flesh." I believe this foundational confession precludes Gnostic answers to the challenges that evolutionary theory poses, for example, that death must be understood in a spiritual sense; that resurrection is symbolic; that the new creation is immaterial. If we take incarnation (and therefore Christianity) seriously, we must take Christ as fully human seriously, and we must take creation as good creation seriously.

 

So I am not of the opinion that evolutionary theory poses no challenge to Christianity, but neither am I of the opinion that evolutionary theory can be ignored or dismissed. The questions therefore that must be answered, among others I'm sure, are:

1. Is evolutionary theory necessarily teleological for the Christian?
2. Is there a place for natural theology or general revelation in light of evolutionary theory?
3. What priority is to be given evolutionary science in determining Christian dogma?
 

Comment 3

Most specifically does Evolutionary Creationism affect classical Christian doctrine... as well it should. Dogmas which are not biblical must fall, and more  helpful descriptions of God, His Word, and His creation, be allowed in. We  live in a world that must now admit this and can no longer consider relevant the older, cherished, Christian doctrines that were concluded during non-scientific eras (nor even our most recent modernistic era of the past 100 years!). However, as I, and others, have shown, through our words and blogsites, what results will be a far richer, more deeply relevant Christian faith than first thought imagined. And that without giving up the fundamentals of our faith... just the fundamentals of our religious ideologies and inaccurate biblical descriptions.  - res

 

 

¹ John Dupre. "The Conditions for Existence," American Scientist, Volume 98, Number 2 (March-April 2010): 170
² John Reiss. Not by Design: Retiring Darwin's Watchmaker. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009) 4.
³ John Cornwall, ed. Explanations: Styles of Explanation in Science. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004) 143-155.
⁴ H. Orton Wiley. Christian Theology, Vol 1. (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1940) 51-52.
⁵ Dorothy Coleman, ed. Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion and Other Writings. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007) 86.
⁶ Alfred Lord Tennyson. In Memoriam A.H.H., LV, http://www.online-literature.com/donne/718/
⁷ http://biologos.org/
⁸ http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/biologos-goes-all-natural-theology/ 

 

 

 

Mark Quanstrom

Olivet Nazarene University

Professor of Theology and Philosophy

 

Rev. Mark R. Quanstrom, Ph.D. is a full-time professor of theology and philosophy in the School of Theology at Olivet Nazarene University. He is also the University Campus pastor at College Church of the Nazarene in Bourbonnais. He began teaching at Olivet in the fall of 2005.

 

Prior to coming to Olivet, he was pastor for 23 years at the Belleville, IL First Church of the Nazarene. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Olivet, a Master of Divinity from Nazarene Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from St. Louis University.

 

His Ph.D. dissertation was published in 2004 by Beacon Hill Press under the title A Century of Holiness Theology. His second book, From Grace to Grace, is a call to holiness which places priority on grace (hence the title) and was published by Beacon Hill Press in October of 2011.

 

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

Additional Articles for Exploration

 

 

"What is Evolutionary Creationism?" A PowerPoint Presentation by Denis Lamoureux

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2013/04/what-is-evolutionary-creationism.html

 

 

Differences between Evolutionary Creationism and Darwinian Scientific Naturalism

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/01/differences-between-evolutionary.html

 

 

YEC or Evolution? Breaking Away from a False Dilemma

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2013/03/yec-or-evolution-breaking-away-from.html

 

 

There is No Conflict Between Science and Faith

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-god-of-science-and-of-faith.html

 

 

Ask an Evolutionary Creationist

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2011/09/ask-evolutionary-creationist.html

 

 

What Do We Mean by God as "Creator-Redeemer"?

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/11/evolutionary-creationism-what-do-we.html

 

 

How Evolutionary Creationism Will Require Rethinking Scriptural Doctrine

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2013/04/how-evolutionary-creationism-will.html

 

 

Common Christian Mistakes Made about Adam and Evolution

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2011/11/recurring-responses-to-adam-v-evolution.html

 

 

Evolution and the Separate Problems of Teleology and Human Consciousness

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2013/01/evolution-and-separate-problems-of.html

 

 

 

 

Interview with Makoto Fujimura, "A Journey of Faith, Art and Culture"

 

"The Four Holy Gospels" - Makoto Fujimura

 

 

A beautiful video on the convergance of modern art and
Christian worship, in the work of artist Makoto Fujimura.

 

 

Ask an artist (Makoto Fujimura)... Response

http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/ask-an-artist-makoto-fujimura-response

 

by Rachael Held Evans

April 16, 2013

 

Today I am pleased to share Makoto Fujimura’s responses to your questions for “Ask an artist…” as part of our ongoing interview series.

 

Makoto Fujimura is an artist, writer, and speaker who is recognized worldwide as a cultural shaper. A Presidential appointee to the National Council on the Arts from 2003-2009, Makoto served as an international advocate for the arts, speaking with decision makers and advising governmental policies on the arts. Makoto’s work is exhibited at galleries around the world, including Dillon Gallery in New York, Sato Museum in Tokyo, The Contemporary Museum of Tokyo, Tokyo National University of Fine Arts Museum, Bentley Gallery in Arizona, Gallery Exit and Oxford House at Taikoo Place in Hong Kong, and Vienna’s Belvedere Museum. He is one of the first artists to paint live on stage at New York City’s legendary Carnegie Hall as part of an ongoing collaboration with composer and percussionist Susie Ibarra.

 

Makoto founded the International Arts Movement in 1992, a non-profit whose “Encounter” conferences have featured cultural catalysts such as Dr. Elaine Scarry, Dennis Donoghue, Billy Collins, Dana Gioia, Calvin DeWitt and Miroslav Volf. His second book, Refractions: A Journey of Faith, Art and Culture, is a collection of essays bringing together people of all backgrounds in a conversation and meditation on culture, art, and humanity.

 

In celebration of the 400th Anniversary of the King James Bible, Crossway Publishing commissioned and published The Four Holy Gospels, featuring Makoto’s illuminations of the sacred texts. In 2011 the Fujimura Institute was established and launched the Four Qu4rtets, a collaboration between Makoto, painter Bruce Herman, Duke theologian/pianist Jeremy Begbie, and Yale composer Christopher Theofanidis, based on T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets. The exhibition will travel to Baylor, Duke, and Yale Universities, Gordon College and other institutions around the globe. Bucknell University honored him with the Outstanding Alumni Award in 2012. He is a recipient of two Doctor of Arts Honorary Degrees, from Belhaven University in 2011 and Biola University in 2012.

 

You asked some fantastic questions, and I hope you are challenged and inspired by Makoto’s responses.

 

From Red: I have always felt that Christian art (particularly music and written fiction) is of a much lower quality than what you find in the 'secular' world. Despite growing up in church and being fairly comfortable with the church culture, Christian music, novels, and other forms of art have always left me feeling bored, restless, and honestly, a little fed up. I've had many conversations about this over the years, and most people seem to believe that Christian art has become anemic because Christians are afraid to look at the "tough stuff" in life and want everything to be safe and sugar-coated. Others suggest that North American Christians are trained from childhood to follow all the "rules," and that this attitude can subconsciously hinder adults from knowing how to truly "create" apart from a pattern. I was wondering if you have noticed this anemia in the Christian arts, and if you have a theory about the cause?

 

Let me first address some "macro" issues regarding faith and culture issues. Since I am from a theological perspective that sees culture as a good gift from God, I do not seek to define "Christian culture" verses "secular culture." In John 10, Jesus speaks of leading the sheep out of the gate; thus, in this case, the sheep are led out into the wider pasture of culture. Why? It's because the sheep need to find nourishment outside of their pens that they cannot otherwise find. I believe that Christians’ response to culture need to be the same: We need to be let out, guided by the Holy Spirit, and be nourished by the greater culture - otherwise we will starve!

 

So in answering the weakness of Christian creative output, I would say that we shouldn’t have a mindset in which we categorize, "Is this Christian, or not?" But instead ask, "Is this good and point toward our thriving?"

 

From Eric: One thing I appreciate about your art is that it's refreshingly free of what people often think of as Christian clichés. How would you advise artists (and musicians, writers, etc.) to create works that reflect Christianity without restricting their vocabulary to that overly-familiar set of religious symbols? (I'm thinking of the prayer-and-conversion scene in every "Christian" novel, the hymn-tunes quoted in "Christian" instrumental music, the sermonizing in "Christian" poetry, and so on.) Is this just a matter of improving our technical skills, or are there intentional strategies you've found for broadening artistic vocabulary?

 

First, I would focus on making our Christianity a noun, rather than an adjective. Rather than creating Christian art, make art that is thoroughly and completely in Christ. That means we need to start with knowing Christ, and walking intimately with God. Second, endeavor to learn symbols from all sorts of cultures, including "pagan" cultures. I believe that all cultures have keys to unlock our deeper understanding of the Gospel, but those nuggets of truth have been twisted. We need to go into the Babylons of the world, like Daniel, and first learn to be a better Babylonian than the Babylonians. Then we need to work to untwist the cultural language, and interpret their dreams. We may even, then, create new expressions and new words, which, it seems to me, the Holy Spirit offers.

 

From Sarah: How can the church start to unleash the artistic talent in the community beyond designing posters and church bulletins (i.e. support the arts in a deeper sense)? What role should the church play in the arts?

 

How we allocate our funding has to do with fundamental bottom line issues. Churches are operating under a utilitarian pragmatism, with a "zero sum game," of resources competing with one another, much like a big businesses. We do not see beauty as valuable. Why? Well, I believe this mindset has as much to do with how we view the gospel as how we view the arts.

 

Jesus commended Mary of Bethany (in John 11-12) for extravagantly offering perfume valued at a year’s worth of wages to anoint him for his burial. She broke open the nard of mystery of our being, of who Christ was, and Jesus stated the she "has done a beautiful thing to me. And wherever the Gospel is told, what she has done will also be told." My question is this: Is our gospel accompanied with just as gratuitous, generous, creative and beautiful acts as Mary's? Perhaps both the quality and the power of our art would reach a different height and depth if we created from that perspective. (See my essay "Beautiful Tears" on my website.)

 

From Rachel: Oftentimes, particularly in a religious community, there is the assumption that artists should essentially work for free. While we wouldn't expect, say, a roofer to put a new roof on a church without compensation, we often expect artists to contribute to our churches/ holy spaces/ programs/ events without getting compensated for their time. How have you navigated this somewhat awkward territory? And why is it important for the Church to support artists, not only spiritually and emotionally, but also financially?

 

In answering the more pragmatic questions about how an artist can deal with "working for free" issues, I have always advised artists to set expectations first, whether the task at hand is a) volunteer work, or b) professional. If I am asked to volunteer, I will say yes or no based on my time commitment availability. If it is professional, I will be honest about how much my work is worth. I am fine to discount so that the church can still afford my work, but they need to know the sacrifice (of me and my family) going into such a project.

 

From Cassie: Growing up Chinese, my parents found any visual depiction of Christianity to be idolatrous, which I believe is due to the fact that much of the trappings of high church tradition were too similar to the ancestor worship with which they grew up. How do you respond to claims that visual art can be idolatrous? And what do you do in your painting process to maintain faithfulness to the text? Do you think being a Japanese artist gives you any unique perspective on religion and art?

 

The Second Commandment does not prohibit making of images. It prohibits making of idols. Idols are "a good gift of God that has been made into an 'only thing.'" (Tim Keller, my pastor). Sex, money, love are all good things that can become idols. The Old Testament is full of images and art, from representational to abstract (see Solomon's Temple). We need to understand that at the same time the Decalogue was given, strict instructions were given to Bezalel and Oholiab to carve the Ark of the Covenant. Thus the expression in the Second Commandment "You shall not make for yourself a carved image," is tied to prohibition of "not bow down to them." Bezalel and Oholiab carved images, but in accordance with God's design. After Christ's incarnation, the author of The Book of Hebrews tells us that Christ, the perfect Temple and Sacrifice, fulfilled the design that Bezalel and Oholiab executed in Christ's Body. I take that to mean that all manner of expressions (much like in Peter's vision of eating forbidden animals) are now freed from the curse.

 

Therefore ALL expressions are permissible, but that does not mean that all expressions are created toward our full thriving. We twist the good gifts of God to make idols (Madison Street Ad agencies do this all the time!) We are to, in Christ, liberate all mediums and expressions from "our bondage to decay...to bring into the glorious freedom of the children of God." (Romans 8:21) We are not only children, but heirs, with full authority to bring to our materials and mediums to steward over them.

 

Ancestor worship, I suspect, began as a good effort to remember and honor the dead, to pass on the family history to the children. It has been twisted into a type of duty, a legalistic bounds that require offspring no freedom toward thriving or full experience of love. We need to remember that our reaction against such idolatry, even in our religious duty, can also become just as legalistic. The enemy, and our orphaned hearts, always twist good intent to create bondage to others and ourselves. Christ came to liberate us from that, and the Holy Spirit guides us to live our identity as Christ's heirs, God's Princes and Princesses, to co-create with the great Artist.

 

From Annie: Your thoughts on creating in a generative way have been transformational for me. How do you hold the tension of sharing your art generously and letting it incubate? Do you always lean towards sharing and giving art, or are their seasons (or pieces of art) that you hold close for a season?

 

The tension between being too generous and cultivating your own work and time is much like being a gardener. First you must spend much time tilling the soil, planting and nurturing. Unless you have a beautiful flower to share, we cannot share beauty at all! It's ok to say "my flowers are not ready to be picked yet...”

 

 

 

 

My Top 5 Books on Creativity

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/march/my-top-5-books-on-creativity.html

 

by Makoto Fujimura

March 27, 2013

 

Literature that reveals what art and beauty ought to be.

 

 

The Gift: Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World
Lewis Hyde (Vintage)

 

Simply the best book on what art ought to be. An underground best seller among the creatives in New York City since it came out over 30 years ago, The Gift articulates what artists know in their bones—that their creativity is a gift, not a commodity.

 

 

 
 
 

On Beauty and Being Just
Elaine Scarry (Princeton University Press)

 

Though not a Christological reflection, this is one of the most thoughtful, and beautiful, discourses on the value of beauty and how seeking after beauty leads us toward justice. This book was also an underground best seller in the 1980s among creatives.

 

 

 

 

 

Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art
Madeleine L'Engle (Harold Shaw Publishers)

 

L'Engle illumines our creative journeys, prodding and nudging us to consider the mysteries inherent in our everyday lives and to infuse creativity with faith.

  

 

 

 

 

The Mind of the Maker
Dorothy L. Sayers (HarperOne)

 

Sayers, known as an Inklings friend of C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien as well as for her popular mystery novels, develops an imaginative and provocative discourse between Trinitarian theology and creativity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Four Quartets
T. S. Eliot (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)

 

Eliot is one of the most important thinkers on creativity in modern times, as evidenced by this mid-20th-century masterpiece. In "Qu4rtets," a collaborative project integrating creativity with various disciplines (fujimurainstitute.org), you can peek into his mind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"What is Evolutionary Creationism?" A PowerPoint Presentation by Denis Lamoureux

 

"I'm very comfortable with the concept of theistic evolution. I'm deeply convinced of God's

authorship, but I've never expected Scripture to give me a scientific explanation of the

entire process of creation. I expect science to do that. Scripture, in every form and genre,

testifies to the nature and character of God and to the dream of God; science describes

how the dream of God moves and breathes and coheres." - Jon Middendorf

 

 

Thankfully the term Evolutionary Creation is beginning to "catch on" and replace the outmoded descriptive title of Theistic Creation, placing the emphasis on how creation came into being and away from its older, non-specific twin that simply referred to God as creation's author without implicitly telling us by what process God created creation (by implication evolution was its means).

Certainly God is creation's divine Author, but what we wish to see acknowledged is by what means, or by what process, had God divinely chosen to create. Because of the insight science has given to us we now understand that creation resulted by an evolutionary process. And for the Christian it is a process that was mediated and sustained by God. An omnipotent God that directed its process, and is now sustaining this very same process (because, as a principal, evolutionary development does not cease, but is an ongoing process). Who has given to creation its purpose and identity (its teleology and nature), even while He has directed its very complex creation.

And unlike the bible's more ancient biblical authors, prophets, priests, and people in general, we now know through science a lot more about the evolutionary process of creation than those ancient peoples knew themselves (nor could they wildly imagine based in ancient societies that were deeply augmented around universal ideas of mythology and ancient cultural folklores). A process that was directive, mediated, and initiated by God Himself. A process that involved a phenomenal level of complexity using chaos and randomness as its natural means. A means that shares with us God's phenomenal level of sovereignty even as He guided its chaotic, random, evolution from pure energy, to living systems, unto the level of humanity we now observe today.

Moreover, the idea of Evolutionary Creationism affects many classical Christian doctrines requiring a level of sophistication previously unthought through the church's 2000 year history (or 4000 year history should we include Israel's historical progression). During these past two years of writing I have attempted to describe, and reposition, many of these doctrinal developments in detail, thus providing to the theological student, and general Christian worshipper, a biblical guide to detailed examination and discussion by theme and by topic. Hence, I would encourage each reader to make use of this site's very helpful sidebars as they have grown and accumulated through my own personal journey of questions and amazement.

Below, Denis Lamoureux gives a brief 12 minute PowerPoint sketch of what is meant by Evolutionary Creationism. To which Peter Enns reviews Denis' book, "I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution." Afterwhich I provide several Amazon reviews to both of Denis' published books on this subject, along with a chart from his latest book (apologies for its smallness - even when clicked upon! Its the best I could do).

May God bless your study even as you consider this subject's depth and interconnectedness with the Creator God Himself, and those ancient Scriptural references that He has preserved in recording His redemptive work and witness, mission and salvation through Jesus. It has been a phenomenal journey of encouragement and biblical insight providing thanksgiving for God's goodness, love, and wisdom so high above that of our own thoughts and religion. Enjoy.

 

R.E. Slater

April 16, 2013

Video PowerPoint of Book

by Denis Lamoureux

Episode 1 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj1/index.html

Episode 2 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj_2/index.html

Episode 3 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj3/index.html

Episode 4 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj4/index.html

Episode 5 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj5/index.html

Episode 6 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj6/index.html

Episode 7 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj7/index.html

Episode 8 - http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ilj8/index.html
      

Home Return               Web Lectures   Beyond the "Evolution" vs. "Creation" Debate   An introduction to the origins debate.     Beyond the "Evolution" vs. "Creation" Debate          Public High School Version of the lecture above.   Coming to Terms with Evolution: A Personal Story   My story of wrestling with origins for well over twenty years.     Scientific Predictions of the Christian Positions on Origins     Fossil predictions of anti-evolutionary positions & evolutionary creation.   Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution   Summaries of the 10 chapters in my 2008 book.     Ancient Science in the Bible   An examination of Biblical verses that indicate an ancient view of nature.     Human Evolution: An Evolutionary Creationist Approach     Various views for relating human evolution to Christianity.   Was Adam a Real Person?     The most challenging issue in the origins debate.   Intelligent Design in Nature   Does beauty, complexity & functionality in nature point to a Mind?

    

 

What is “Evolutionary Creation”?

Let Denis Lamoureux Tell You (he wrote the book)
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peterenns/2013/04/what-is-evolutionary-creation-let-denis-lamoureux-tell-you-he-wrote-the-book/

 by Peter Enns

April 15, 2013

Comments

 

Today’s post is more a 12 minute guest slide show (link below) by Denis Lamoureux, associate professor of science and religion at St. Joseph’s College in the University of Alberta (full bio here).

 

I asked him if he would consider explaining the content of his book I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution, which is a great introduction to his view of origins called “evolutionary creation,” a term he will explain in this series, and which he prefers to the more common “theistic evolution.” (The idea is letting the right noun dominate the phrase.) Lamoureux covers chapters 1 and 2 today and I will get the other chapters up very soon.

 

Lamoureux holds three earned doctoral degrees—dentistry, theology, and biology–which uniquely qualifies him to speak to the issue of human origins and Christian faith. He gets the science, he gets the hermeneutics, and he articulates both clearly for non-specialists.

 

A couple of introductory comments about the 12 minute PowerPoint. First, he says some very nice things about me at the beginning, which I attribute to a brain frozen from the long Canadian winter and a truncated hockey season. Second, as I just mentioned, Lamoureux is Canadian, so keep your ears open for an “aboot” or the like. Third, as you’ll see, Lamoureux is no fan of the Intelligent Design movement. Fourth, for those of you who are beyond the beginner’s stage, you can read his much thicker book Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution.

* * * * * * * * *

 

Amazon Review by John Lang

This book is a condensed (184 pages vs. 493 pages) and much more affordable version of Lamoureux's 2008 book, Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution. Because it is more concise, this new book is much more accessible to its target audience; namely, conservative Christians who are wrestling with the Creation/Evolution controversy. I believe it fills a much needed gap in the popular literature aimed at the same audience. Specifically, I believe it delivers the hermeneutical guidance that is lacking in most of the other books addressing evolution from a Christian perspective.

 

I could personally relate to the "journey" that the author and many other conservative Christians have made in wrestling with the creation/evolution controversy. I abandoned the "young earth creationist" position in the 1980's after observing evidence I considered conclusive regarding the age of the earth and the universe. For Christians who may still be pondering that issue, I believe The Bible, Rocks and Time: Geological Evidence for the Age of the Earth is probably the definitive text for reconciling scripture with an "Old Earth" (4.5+/- billion years).

 

For over twenty years, I embraced "Progressive (Old Earth) Creationism". I did not consider evolution to be compatible with the Christian faith. As a result, I never seriously considered the possibility that secular authors might actually be right about evolution. It was not until I read The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief by Francis Collins that I encountered what I considered to be conclusive evidence for Common Descent. The fact that Collins was writing from a Christian perspective made this realization somewhat less traumatic.

 

I read several other books by Christian authors such as Coming to Peace With Science: Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology by Darrel Falk, Random Designer: Created from Chaos to Connect with the Creator by Richard Colling, etc. These only served to solidify the reality of evolution in my mind. There have been a number of books like these that I believe have been very helpful in demonstrating the evidence for evolution in a manner that is sensitive to Christian concerns.

 

Yet I don't believe there are many books that practically guide conservative Christians as to how they can reconcile acknowledgement of evolution with their convictions about the message of the Bible. Gordon Glover's book, Beyond the Firmament: Understanding Science and the Theology of Creation provides an excellent start to this task, but even he acknowledges in his review of Evolutionary Creation that Lamoureux takes the hermeneutical issue to a much deeper level.

 

In I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution , Lamoureux addresses the key issues in a much more concise manner. The significance of this is that he provides practical direction as to how conservative Christians can retain their evangelical convictions while maintaining their integrity with regard to the "Book of God's Works" (nature) and the "Book of God's Words" (scripture). In view of the overwhelming evidence for evolution, coupled with the relative scarcity of credible books addressing the hermeneutical issues that are relevant to the creation/evolution controversy, I consider this book to be a very valuable resource for the conservative Christian community. I can't recommend it highly enough!

 

 

* * * * * * * * *

 

Amazon Review

 

I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution is a condensed read (184 pages vs. 493 pages) and much more affordable version of Lamoureux's 2008 book, Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution.

 

In this provocative book, evolutionist and evangelical Christian Denis O. Lamoureux proposes an approach to origins that moves beyond the 'evolution-versus-creation' debate. Arguing for an intimate relationship between the Book of God's Words and the Book of God's Works, he presents evolutionary creation a position that asserts that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit created the universe and life through an ordained and sustained evolutionary process.

 

This view of origins affirms an evolutionary understanding of the concept of intelligent design and the belief that beauty, complexity, and functionality in nature reflect the mind of God. Lamoureux also challenges the popular Christian assumption that the Holy Spirit revealed scientific and historical facts in the opening chapters of the Bible. He contends that Scripture features an ancient understanding of origins that functions as a vessel to deliver inerrant and infallible messages of faith.

 

The book closes with the two most important issues in the origins controversy: pastoral and pedagogical implications. How should churches approach this volatile topic? And what should Christians teach their children about origins?

Click to Expand



Double Clicking on Link Below will provide a clearer picture -
http://img.docstoccdn.com/thumb/orig/31115493.png




From Episode 4 -