The big news in the publishing world today is that our friend Hunter Baker, author of The End of Secularism, will be the author of one of the volumes in a forthcoming series from Crossway Books.

JACKSON, Tenn. – January 24, 2012– Union University President David S. Dockery has been named the editor of a new series of books designed for Christian students and others on college and university campuses.

In “Reclaiming the Christian Intellectual Tradition: A Guide for Students,” published by Crossway, Dockery and other experts argue that vibrant, world-changing Christianity is not anti-intellectual but assumes a long tradition of vigorous Christian thinking and a commitment to the integration of faith and scholarship….

Four other books in the series will also be released in 2012, including “The Liberal Arts: A Student’s Guide,” by Gene C. Fant Jr., Union’s vice president for academic administration, in May, and “Political Thought: A Student’s Guide,” by Hunter Baker, associate dean of arts and sciences at Union, in July.

Good luck with the book, Hunter. It sounds like a much-needed contribution.

I feel the need to comment on a recent news story that hasn’t gotten (I think) as much attention as it deserves.

As I grow older, a particular experience becomes more and more common (and no, I’m not talking about anything having to do with the bathroom). An announcement is made, in a rather low-key way, about some grand theory which was all the rage when I was younger, often one that was used, hammer-wise, to pound on Christians, given as “proof” that we are moral luddites motivated by pure hate. The news item now tells us that new research indicates that the wonderful, world-changing theory has, in fact, not borne the weight of either experience or further research. Take this story from The Washington Post:

For decades, the prevailing wisdom in education was that high self-esteem would lead to high achievement. The theory led to an avalanche of daily affirmations, awards ceremonies and attendance certificates — but few, if any, academic gains.

Now, an increasing number of teachers are weaning themselves from what some call empty praise. Drawing on psychology and brain research, these educators aim to articulate a more precise, and scientific, vocabulary for praise that will push children to work through mistakes and take on more challenging assignments….

You know, just once I’d like an apology from the people who called us names. But I don’t expect that to happen. It might damage the apologizers’ self-esteem, after all.

Also from Sweden, “a ‘church’ whose central tenet is the right to file-share has been formally recognised by the Swedish government,” reports BBC News. It was founded by a 19-year-old philosophy student.

I am temporally at sea today, awash in the tides of chronology. My calendar tells me it’s Monday, January 2, but it doesn’t feel like Monday, January 2. That’s partly because although today is a holiday, it’s not January first (I suppose), and partly because of the energy drain caused by a weekend spent mostly with people. I spent much of this day certain I had a dentist appointment this afternoon, and it was only when my cell phone alarm failed to go off that I realized the appointment is actually for tomorrow. January two and twos-day; you can see how I got confused.

Time is the the great puzzler, God’s subtlest joke, in my opinion. And yet, it’s deadly serious. Take Jesus’ parable of the stewards and the talents (Matthew 25:14-30):

“Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them. To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability….”

“Talent” is a Greek term for a sum of money, and our own English use of talent as meaning a special, inborn ability comes from an interpretation of that passage.

But although I wouldn’t go so far as to call that interpretation entirely mistaken, I think there’s a simpler meaning. I suspect the Lord’s intention when He spoke of the talents was simply “time.” Each of us is given some—some of us more, some less. But whatever we’ve got, we’re responsible for. We may complain that we have no great gifts or abilities, but we always have some time, up until the day we die. And we can choose whether to use that time constructively or not, boldly or cautiously. The real targets of the parable are people who are lazy and cowardly.

In other words, it’s directed precisely at me. As for any application to you, you may judge for yourself.

A blessed new year to you.

“Journey to Bethlehem,” by Pieter Bruegel (1566)

[I thought it might be amusing to retell the Christmas story in saga style. The result is below. I’d intended to post this Christmas day, but got distracted.

This version includes some imaginary information not found in Luke’s account. This is because sagas are very different literature from the gospels, and the telling detail is a necessary part of the technique, even if you have to make it up. ljw]

There was a man called Joseph, son of Jacob, son of Matthan, one of the clan of old King David from Bethlehem. Joseph was an honest man, and very clever at building things. But he didn’t get on with his kinfolk, especially his brothers. One day he said, “I’m going to move up to Nazareth in Galilee. They talk strangely up there, but at least they talk sense, and there’s work to be had.” And his brothers said, “Don’t let us stand in your way.”

Now Joseph was promised in marriage to a girl named Mary, daughter of Heli, daughter of Matthat, also of the David clan, though they had kin among the priests. Mary was a beautiful girl, and very devout. Some people said she was too devout for her own good. One day when she was praying in the house all alone, a mighty messenger of God appeared to her, clad in mail that shone like the sun, and he said, “Hail, highly favored one! You are about to conceive a Son, whom you will name Jesus. He will be a hero, and will be known as Gudsson, and the Highest of All will set Him in the high seat of David, and He will reign over the Jacoblings forever.”

“How can this be?” asked Mary. “I am a virgin.” Continue reading The Saga of the Nativity →

Sorry to post about bad news so close to Christmas. Tomorrow I promise a Sissel video.

Via my Facebook friend Josh Griffing, this report from a sympathetic Jew at Big Peace, on the plight of Christians in Egypt:

Gordon College is a Christian school between Salem and Rockport. A few weeks ago I spoke there at a commemoration of Kristallnacht, Germany’s night of broken glass, the first mass assault on Europe’s Jews and the harbinger of the Shoah. I told the Christian audience how good it was to feel Christian support for Jews in these times, and that even some of the most stubborn of my people were now appreciating Evangelical support for Israel. I also said that we felt this blessed support came from a spirit of Christian altruism. But given the news from the Middle East, concern for others is surely not the only reason Christians need to support Israel.

I asked how many in the audience of 250 knew of Anne Frank. Almost every hand shot up. Then I asked how many had heard of Ayman Labib. I got a mass blank stare. Ayman was a 17-year-old Egyptian Christian who just weeks ago was beaten to death by his Muslim classmates as teachers watched because he refused their demand to remove his cross necklace.

I asked how many knew about the Maspero massacre, which had left at least 24 Copts dead and 270 injured. And whether they knew that since January, there had been more than 70 attacks on Christian churches or institutions in Egypt.

While tonight you commemorate a Jewish pogrom, I told them, Christianity has just suffered its own “Kristallnacht” … and I have yet to see much of a Christian response.

If I were a utilitarian, I’d recommend that the Christians of the Middle East start demanding their own “homeland.” Unfortunately, the approved method of promoting such a policy, in our time, is suicide bombing, which is forbidden to Christians.

The blood of martyrs is the seed of the church, it’s true. But it would be pretty cold-blooded to look on complacently while our brethren are slaughtered, insulated by a conviction that “it can’t happen here.”

It’s also happening in Africa. Europe is next. Eventually, America will be in the cross-hairs, if nothing is done.

[If you’ve been following the discussion in the Comments on my “The dance of the straw men” post below, you’ll have noticed that I (and some others) have been carrying on a debate with a visitor named Brendan, a very intelligent, thoughtful and courteous Unitarian. I have just posted a comment in response to his question as to why one should believe the Bible, more than the scriptures of other religions.

My response is below. I think it’s worth giving it a blog post of its own. This is not my personal Christian testimony, and it does not delve into the mysteries of grace. It’s just an account of the line of reasoning that leads me to contemplate the Christian faith in the first place.]

As for believing in biblical Christianity, here’s my rationale.

It’s true that faith begins where reason leaves off. But the decision to take that step is itself a reasoned one. It’s as if I were to take a course in mountain climbing. When I decide to do that, I implicitly accept the idea that I will soon step outside my range of knowledge into territory where I’ve never been before, and do things that make no sense to me. I am prepared to follow my instructor’s commands, even though he tells me to do things that seem counterproductive or even suicidal.

As a Christian, I am obligated (and I’m happy about this) to accept the validity of reason. But I also understand that it takes more than reason to describe the universe I actually live in. Every person alive (unless they have a serious personality disorder) understands this. We accept, at some level, that men who live for possessions alone are living an impoverished life. We accept that beauty matters. We admire people who give up their lives (the only lives they’ll ever get, in the materialist view) for a principle or a loyalty. Continue reading Apologia →

If you’re a social conservative, chances are you’ve had a conversation something like this:

Conservative: “But if we accept homosexual behavior as normal, how do we retain other traditional taboos, like the one against incest?”

Liberal: “That’s just a straw man. Nobody’s going to advocate incest.”

Now, read this, from Tauriq Moosa, tutor in ethics, bioethics and critical thinking at the University of Cape Town, South Africa (courtesy of Dale Nelson):

Thirdly, and oddly, people exclaim [incest is] “just” repugnant. We will examine this more closer later. Nonetheless, why should the sexual activities of two consenting adults concern us? This is the same question we can ask those who are ‘against’ homosexuality (which is like being against having blue eyes). It is none of our business what two consenting adults wish to do (as long as no one else is harmed/involved without consent).

Repugnance helped many things we now consider wrong to continue in the past, such racial and sexual inequality. We can’t rely on repugnance to justify our social policies, since our repugnance is simply that: our own. Besides which, people are repulsed by different things – and we cannot leave it up to the whims of our emotions to implement policies and laws which could, unnecessarily, cause suffering to other people, as is the case with gay people, women, and indeed the current brother-and-sister couple.

Pretty lively for a straw man, isn’t it?

Liberals—I want to share a serious word with you, in honesty and without malice. If you have any principles—any at all—I promise you that, if you continue on the Left, you will eventually either have to give them up or move to the Right. Because liberalism is not a position. It is a process. That process evolves continually. Nothing is out of bounds for it, given enough time. That’s why so many ‘60s radicals are Reagan Republicans now.

For years, people have been telling me (to take another example) that there’s nothing wrong with homosexual behavior because homosexuals are born that way (I’m still not convinced of that, but it’s beside the point for this discussion). The argument is, “If it’s inborn, it’s natural and right.” Christian liberals say it must be God’s will.

“Why would anyone choose to be gay?” the liberal says. “It’s penalized in our culture. So it must be inborn, and the gays have no choice in the matter.”

Bear that argument in mind when you read this, from Italy’s La Stampa.

A study conducted by neuroscientists at Turin University and researchers at the department of neurological science of the University of Milan asserts that pedophilia is caused by a defective growth factor called pleiotropic protein Progranulin (PGRN). The results were published in the journal Biological Psychiatry and presented during a recent convention of the Neurological Italian Society in Turin.

Now, if this theory is true, explain to me how the previously stated arguments for homosexuality don’t apply just as well to pedophilia.

And no, “You’re a Nazi,” does not count as a valid argument.

“The Annunciation,” by Fra Angelico

My recent Norwegian visitor gifted me with a book called Hva Er et Navn? (What’s In a Name? more or less), about customs and fashions of name-giving through Norwegian history.

In the section on biblical names, the author (Ivar Utne) discusses the origins of the name “Mary” (Maria in Norwegian). I hadn’t been aware there’s so much uncertainty about its meaning. Here’s the relevant section, as translated by me.

No one knows for certain where the name Maria originated. For that reason, several interpretations exist. We know for certain that the name had different forms in Palestine around the time of Jesus’ birth. It was Mariam in Aramaic and Miriam in Hebrew, which were the two languages the Jews used. The New Testament was written in Greek. There the name became Maria, because the Greeks thought “m” an ending that did not go with Mariam.

The trail leads further back. In the Old Testament, written in Hebrew, we find many women named Miriam. The first was the sister of Moses and Aaron, of whom we read in the story of the Hebrews’ exodus from Egypt to Palestine. The names of all three may be Egyptian, as they came from Egypt. The Egyptian meaning of Miriam is “beloved.”

Other scholars contend that Miriam comes from Hebrew and means either “rebel” or “a drop in the sea.” This is because there are Hebrew words with those meanings which sound like Miriam. The “drop” explanation has more recently become “star of the sea” in some naming books, but that explanation is accepted by few scholars.

There are numerous other explanations. In comprehensive naming lists, Maria, for example, is translated “sturdy and strong,” which might be rendered “big and strong.” “Visionary” and “wife” are also to be found among the interpretations.

Sorry I didn’t post anything for Thanksgiving (or Lewis’s birthday, come to think of it; but I did post Lewis quotes on Facebook all day). Wanted to get the two book reviews up, and… well, I’ve been melancholy.

It has to do with the death of my friend “Elmer,” I guess, about which I wrote below. Intimations of mortality. Who’s that bell tolling for again? I’ve never had an actual friend die before. I’ve had lots of classmates die (I have an idea, though I’ve never done the math, that my high school class has had an unusually high death rate, statistically). But nobody I would include in the small group of “friends” has ever died before. This is yet another validation of my lifelong policy of keeping my circle of friends small, so that funeral attendance will be infrequent and Christmas card lists short.

They held a funeral for Elmer down in Kenyon, on Saturday (correction: Friday). I was concerned that, since Jewish law requires quick burial, and Elmer was part of a Messianic synagogue, somebody had disregarded his own wishes,and completely cut out the congregation to which he belonged. But there were many members of the synagogue there, and his rabbi spoke at length.

And it was fascinating. Elmer’s nephew told a number of stories about him, and we all laughed without embarrassment. Because Elmer was never offended, at least by jokes about himself. He had once brought a vegetarian dish to a family meal, and his nephew said it looked like “pig scours” (that’s a term farmers know, but probably unfamiliar to you. I think you’re happier not knowing, especially if you just ate). Elmer thought that was the funniest thing he’d ever heard. Continue reading One last "Elmer" post →