Full Hitchens/Wilson Debate!

I thought I would re-post this. If you'd like to watch a full, unabridged debate between Christopher Hitchens and Doug Wilson, go here! This one is from Westminster Theological Seminary, and is one of the best samples from their debate tour I've found.

Thoughts on Blogs

I've been telling people over the past 6 months or so, that blogs are a blessing and a curse. This statement has prompted responses of both agreement and disagreement, usually combined with a confused look. It's funny that 7 or 8 years ago relatively no one had a "blog" as we know them today, and now they're one of the most popular mediums with which to share information in our culture. Thus, in such a blog-centralized culture, I think my distrust of the blogosphere comes across to some as old-fashioned and/or backwards (not to mention my mixed opinions about Twitter and Facebook).

But here's the thing: I really do think blogs are great. There are a bunch of them that I follow, and I greatly enjoy the opportunity to get regular updates from writers and thinkers whose material I love to read. Essentially, blogs give us regular new writing from our favorite writers (if that makes sense). The blogging community also gives us a whole world really, where we can read and share ideas with those whom we share similar interests and concerns. You'll notice, my blogroll is ready to go on the side of my page here.

The problem that I do have with blogs, and that has come up in quite a few conversations over the past months, is really best summed up by D.A. Carson in a book I'm reading at the moment. The book is Why We're Not Emergent, by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck; the book is ultimately a critique of the emergent church movement, but in it there's a great little quote from Carson relating to the blogging community. He says,

"The feedback on blogs is immediate. You have a thought and then three minutes later it's published for the world to digest. And then in another three minutes you have anonymous folks posting messages about how wonderful you are. It tends to inflate one's sense of importance."

The author goes on to add,

"We [he and Carson] agree that there is something good about the editing process, the idea that your work sits for a while and is evaluated before being thrust before the world." *

Again, I don't condemn blogging for the most part. I think it's great. I love to read and find new blogs. But, they give every single person a platform to spout their opinions, regardless of how intelligent or ignorant they may be; and like Carson says, once a person publishes his/her thought, anonymous people can post their agreeing or rebutting comments (regardless of how intelligent or ignorant).

If you haven't done it, do me this favor: find yourself a blog post by someone you respect and/or agree with on something, where open comments are allowed on the post. Read the comments and see what people feel the freedom to say. Also watch out for the lack of proofreading.

Ironic that I've said all this in a blog post, and Carson's quote comes from an actual book. For every blog post of mine that you read, go read 2 books by D.A. Carson.

*DeYoung and Kluck, Why We're Not Emergent (By Two Guys Who Should Be), 93.

The Rhetoric of the New Atheism

We're moving quickly through a unit in my AP Language classes that I've entitled "The Question of Worldview," inspired by our required text for the unit, The Question of God by Armand Nicholi. I am stepping out in faith today, by giving a chapter to the students, taken from Christopher Hitchens' book God is Not Great, with the intention of then following up with a reading of a Douglas Wilson article on the New Atheism. The next logical step is to watch the DVD of Collision in class, which is on the lesson plan for later this week. It's a great documentary (I think); definitely pick up a copy, or watch it if you get the chance. I heard they're selling it at Costco at the moment.

As I've been reading Hitchens' book, I've been struck by his use of rhetoric (apropo for AP Language), and which I am discovering in much of the New Atheists' writing. Rhetoric: the art of speaking effectively, using techniques and tools to produce a specific response in the reader. Hitchens' draws eloquently on his vast reading experience, and weaves all his references together so well that he makes a compelling argument that conceals much of atheism's logical inconsistencies. These atheists are good writers, but the reader must beware of the persuasive power of the wordsmith.

Overall, I'm thankful for the chance to read/watch much from the New Atheism debate, at the same time I've been reading so much about rhetoric. It has really added a lot to my perception of those engaging in the debate, from both sides.

On Piper, on Lewis.

On desire, John Piper says this in a blog post from August 3, 2009:

"[...] all the debased enjoyments of the world are echoes of the joys of heaven. The analysis of this is worth a lifetime. And one effect of such an analysis would be to take the notion of “seeker-sensitive” ten miles deeper into Truth. How to penetrate the soul whose every desire is for Heaven while hating Heaven—that is the task."

Blogging about this concept of desire, Piper references the biography The Narnian about C.S. Lewis, and the references made in it to Lewis' own The Screwtape Letters. I love this idea of joy, and both Lewis and Piper have both been hugely influential in my own thinking as I have come to see this truth - namely, that every human desire is a desire for Heaven and for God Himself. Any desire, however big or small, is nothing less than this. Every good gift comes down from God, and is meant to reflect him like rays of light from the sun. As Piper says above, this should be stirring up in a Christian the desire to take unbelievers and fellow believers alike, ten miles deeper into God's Truth than we do. We need to pursue, and help others to pursue a joy in God Himself, because only He can satisfy.

An interesting concept.

Read this article on Britain's first "Atheist summer camp." The camp is backed by Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, and is being portrayed as successful by The Times, and other British newspapers and magazines.

This is truly interesting, in-that these children being sent to this camp are learning about astronomy (and its differences from astrology), along with delving into other avenues of science. An atheist, however, denies his/her only basis for making any claim at all, whether about science or anything else. These poor children are being surrounded by a culture and environment at this camp that is striving to provide an enlightened view of life and the natural world; however, any claim or "truth" taught by these camp couselors and instructors is completely meaningless and carries no weight as these individuals have denied the existence of God Himself as the basis for knowing anything in the first place. The presupposition of the existence of the God of the Scriptures is so transcendent and necessary to any knowledge whatsoever, that even an argument against His existence must rely on that presupposition.

As always, we know that man is sinful at his core and will devise all manner of false explanations and excuses for how the world came into being, and for why evil exists, etc. God alone gives light to the eyes, and only the grace of God makes one able to turn from such things.

Praise God for truth.

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. ~ 1 John 5:20

The late Dr. Greg Bahnsen. A little old, but super relevant in the apologetics arena.

The necessity of reading good books.

For a time lately (as is evidenced by my lack of blogging), I haven't been reading as much as I usually like to, for a variety of reasons.  I've just gotten back into the swing of things a little bit, and it is definitely refreshing.  I just finished Holiness yesterday, which should tell you how slow I have been getting through the books I have going.  

Reading sharpens my mind - I don't know about you but I think more clearly and definitively about God, myself, the world around me, and everything else, when I am getting a regular dose of some reading.  

Holiness has been good, and I will definitely be reading it again in the future (if circumstances allow).  

I have been plugging my way through Bleak House since Christmastime, in my attempt to eventually get through all of Dickens' works.  This is still a very enjoyable read 1/3 of the way through, where I am currently.  It's supposed to be one of, if not the best of Dickens - we'll see how it compares.  I haven't read David Copperfield, but some have said it's possibly the best of Dickens and I just bought a copy a few weeks ago to read over the summer.

    Back to theology, I've started reading a book that's been circulating around church lately - it's called A Gospel Primer and so far it's a very rewarding read.  In all its simplicity it's a very rich book, and a very convicting and encouraging one as well.

Adios.