The Noah Movie Is Disgusting and Evil—Paganism!

Friends, last night I watched the Hollywood (Paramount) movie Noah. It is much, much worse than I thought it would be—much worse. The director of the movie, Darren Aronofsky, has been quoted in the media as saying that Noah is “the least biblical biblical film ever made,” and I agree wholeheartedly with him.

I am disgusted. I am going to come right out and say it: this movie is disgusting and evil—paganism! Do you really want your family to see a pagan movie that portrays Noah as a psychopath who says that if his daughter-in-law’s baby is a girl then he will kill her as soon as she’s born? And when two girls are born, bloodstained Noah (the man the Bible calls “righteous” in Genesis 7:1) brings a knife down to the head of one of the babies to kill her—and at the last minute doesn’t do it. And then a bit later, Noah says he failed because he didn’t kill the babies. How can we recommend this movie and then speak against abortion? Psychopathic Noah sees humans as a blight on the planet and wants to rid the world of people.

I feel dirty—as if I have to somehow wash the evil off myself. I cannot believe there are Christian leaders who have recommended that people see this movie.   Continue at Ken Ham

Answering Evil

Dr. John Gerstner, my esteemed mentor, certainly had a way of getting my attention and helping me to think more clearly. I still remember when I told him that I thought the problem of evil is irresolvable. Having noted that the best apologists and theologians in church history haven’t answered all the questions raised by the existence of evil in this world, I told him that no one would ever solve the problem on this side of eternity. He turned and rebuked me. “How do you know the problem of evil will never be solved?” he asked. “Perhaps you or another thinker are the one God has appointed to solve this issue.”

With all due respect to Dr. Gerstner, I think he overestimated his students. I haven’t changed my opinion on the problem of evil since that conversation. In the many years I’ve taught philosophy, apologetics, and theology, and in the many conversations I’ve had with hurting people, a full answer to the problem of evil remains elusive. If anything, recent events make the problem seem more acute. In the past year alone, we’ve dealt with terrorists bombing the Boston Marathon as well as the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Connecticut. Hurricane Sandy killed nearly 300 people in the Northeastern United States. We could also mention the hundreds of thousands who died in tsunamis in 2004 and 2011. The list is almost endless.   Continue at R. C. Sproul

Some Thoughts on Pope Francis

It’s another week and thus another interview with Pope Francis. This one, I’m sorry to say, is more than just confusing. It’s a theological wreck.

 

In an interview with La Repubblica, in response to a question about whether there is a “single vision of good,” the Pope said, “Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. That would be enough to make the world a better place,” and “The Son of God became incarnate in the souls of men to instill the feeling of brotherhood.” When the reporter commented, “Some of my colleagues who know you told me that you will try to convert me,” the Pope also said “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense. We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our knowledge of the world around us.”

From Augustine’s Confessions to “Well, everyone has his own ideas about good and bad…” is a mighty long path.   Continue at Russell D. Moore

6 Considerations of the Evil of Sin

Matthew Henry’s A Way to Pray again has a wonderful section instructing us how to pray biblically-informed prayers, specifically, how to plead with the Holy Spirit to convict us of sin’s cancerous nature, and the constant havoc it works in our lives.

1. Consider the sinfulness of sin. Meditate on Romans 7:13; 1 John 3:4; Luke 19:14; Exod 5:2; Num 15:30; Neh 9:26.
2. Recognize the foolishness of sin. Meditate on Psalm 69:5; Titus 3:3;; 1 Tim 6:9; Prov 22:15; Job 11:12; 2 Sam 24:10; Psa 73:22.
3. Admit the unprofitableness of sin. Meditate on Matthew 16:26; Job 33:27; Romans 6:21.
4. Beware of the deceitfulness of sin. Meditate on Obadiah 3; Romans 7:11; Hebrews 3:13; James 1:14.
5. Recognize the offence sin has committed against a Holy God. Meditate on Romans 2:23; Isaiah 1:4; Hosea 12:14; 2 Samuel 11:27; Ezekiel 6:9; Psalm 95:9, 10; Isaiah 63:10; Ephesians 4:30.
6. Become fully aware of the damage sin has done to your own soul. Meditate on Isaiah 50:1; Proverbs 8:36; Isaiah 59:2; Titus 1:15; Jeremiah 2:19; Romans 1:24, 26, 28; Proverbs 14:9              HT: Paul Tautges

Why Doesn’t God Do More to Restrain Evil and Suffering? Part 2

In order to understand this blog, it would be helpful for you to have read the previous one. 

 

Severe suffering seems unacceptable to us precisely because we are unaccustomed to it.

Susanna Wesley had nineteen children; nine of them died before they reached the age of two. Puritan Cotton Mather had fifteen children and outlived all but two. Ironically, the problem of evil and suffering seems worse to us who live in affluent cultures precisely because we face less of it than many people have throughout history.

I heard an exasperated woman at a restaurant table loudly proclaim that her Porsche had to be taken in for repairs and now she had to drive her Audi. In contrast I have met devout Christians in Africa and Southeast Asia who have endured famine, genocide, and persecution, yet smile genuinely as they affirm God’s goodness and grace.

C. S. Lewis wrote,

Imagine a set of people all living in the same building. Half of them think it is a hotel, the other half think it is a prison. Those who think it is a hotel might regard it as quite intolerable, and those who thought it was a prison might decide that it was really surprisingly comfortable. So that what seems the ugly doctrine is one that comforts and strengthens you in the end. The people who try to hold an optimistic view of this world would become pessimists: the people who hold a pretty stern view of it become optimistic. [1]

People who ask why God allowed their house to burn down likely never thanked God for not letting their house burn down the previous ten thousand days of their lives. Why does God get blame when it burns, but no credit when it doesn’t? Many pastors and church members have experienced church splits, feeling the agony of betrayal and disillusionment. But where were the prayers of gratitude back when the church was unified? Our suffering seems extreme in the present only because God has graciously minimized many of our past sufferings.   Continue at Randy Alcorn

How Great Evil Confirms the Biblical Teaching about Demons

I can mourn with and pray for the families in Connecticut who lost their children (and in a few cases their spouses) in the school shooting. I certainly cannot offer any definitive explanation. I am dedicating this week’s three blogs to perspectives that may be helpful to some. Keep in mind that we are treating only a few aspects of the problem of evil, and therefore much will remain unaddressed. For a larger perspective, see my books on this issue, in particular If God is Good.

Acts of extreme evil, though routinely used as arguments against God, are actually arguments for supernaturalism.

I spent hours walking through Cambodia’s Killing Fields. Vek and Samoeun Taing, a gentle Cambodian couple who had survived there with a young child for two years, escorted our small group. Feeling numb, I saw the skulls piled up and stood by the mud pits where killers threw hundreds of bodies. A human jawbone lay at my feet. I picked it up, held it in my hand, and wept.

The darkness felt overwhelming. Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge murdered nearly one-third of the country’s population. Yet the three million slaughtered in Cambodia amount to less than one-fiftieth of the murders by twentieth century tyrants, who killed mostly their own people. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao accounted for most of the carnage, but the ongoing state-sponsored killing in Sudan, including the Darfur region, follows the same script. (And this figure ignores the staggering number of preborn children aborted throughout the world.)   Continue at Randy Alcorn

There Is Spiritual Evil in the World

Since the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut there have been numerous explanations offered to account for what happened. Television reporters and commentators have spoken about evil. One said that “evil rolled through” Newtown.

It does not take particular genius to see that mass murder is evil but it is important that we understand that evil is not something that rolls or just appears in otherwise innocent bucolic places. Evil is something that fallen creatures do. Scripture explains that the Evil One had already fallen. The Evil One made use of the serpent in order to tempt the first image bearers. As the Reformed theologian Caspar Olevianus said, Adam made a false covenant with Satan and repudiated the covenant the Lord had made with him. Adam accepted the Liar’s offer but instead of eternal life and glory through obedience Adam earned death and corruption through disobedience. He is our father and we are his heirs.

At the birth of Jesus, the Evil One sought to destroy him in his infancy. In his attempt to eliminate the One who could destroy him, he waged war on infant boys through King Herod. Our Lord Jesus confronted the reign of the Evil One in the world through weakness. The Evil One attempted to seduce the Second Adam as he had the first. Again he offered The Man that which was not his to give on condition that the Last Adam should make covenant with him. Jesus rebuked him...   Continue at R. Scott Clark

See also: John MacArthur

W.E.B DuBois Would Not Vote in This Election

I know. I was surprised at the notion myself. A tireless champion of Civil Rights, a participant of the Niagra Movement and one of the founders of the NAACP, one would expect DuBois to argue the moral responsibility of voting–particularly for a people recently disenfranchised.

But in a piece entitled, “Why I Won’t Vote,” delivered on October 20, 1956, DuBois made an eloquent case for not voting at all.  The entire speech really should be read; it’s haunting in its description themes and tensions in 1956 that could as easily apply to 2012. DuBois begins with a kind of biography of his voting record:

Since I was twenty-one in 1889, I have in theory followed the voting plan strongly advocated by Sidney Lens in The Nation of August 4, i.e., voting for a third party even when its chances were hopeless, if the main parties were unsatisfactory; or, in absence of a third choice, voting for the lesser of two evils. My action, however, had to be limited by the candidates’ attitude toward Negroes. Of my adult life, I have spent twenty-three years living and teaching in the South, where my voting choice was not asked. I was disfranchised by law or administration. In the North I lived in all thirty-two years, covering eight Presidential elections. In 1912 I wanted to support Theodore Roosevelt, but his Bull Moose convention dodged the Negro problem and I tried to help elect Wilson as a liberal Southerner. Under Wilson came the worst attempt at Jim Crow legislation and discrimination in civil service that we had experienced since the Civil War. In 1916 I took Hughes as the lesser of two evils. He promised Negroes nothing and kept his word. In 1920, I supported Harding because of his promise to liberate Haiti. In 1924, I voted for La Follette, although I knew he could not be elected. In 1928, Negroes faced absolute dilemma.   Continue at Gospel Coalition

See also:  John MacArthur Rebukes Democratic Platform

The Evil of Apostasy

IS it so that many of Christ’s pretended disciples do, some time or other, fall totally and finally away from Him? Then let me exhort and persuade all hearing me, but especially you who have been lifting up your hands to Him at a communion table and professing to be His disciples by laying your hands on a slain Redeemer, to endeavor firmness and stability in cleaving to Christ and His way…To enforce this exhortation, consider first the evil of apostasy either in part or in whole.

1. It is a provocation of the highest nature. And there are especially two evils in it, which cannot but awaken divine resentment, viz., treachery and ingratitude. 1st, There is treachery in it. What husband would take it well, if his wife should abandon him and follow after other lovers? My friends, you have been taking God for your husband in a solemn manner before angels and men. Will it not be treachery in the highest degree to go and prostitute your souls unto sin, His greatest enemy? Will not this cast a calumny(1) and reproach upon God, as if others were better than He? This will make Him say, “What iniquity have your fathers found in me?” (Jer 2:5). “O my people, what have I done unto thee? and wherein have I wearied thee?” (Mic 6:3). 2dly, There is ingratitude in it also. It was a very cutting word that Christ had to His disciples…“Will ye also leave me?” The same is He saying to every one of you: “Will ye also go away, after such proofs of My kindness, after such repeated vows and obligations?” From all [this], it is evident that apostasy is a provocation of the highest nature.

2. Your backsliding will give a deep wound to religion and bring up a reproach upon the good ways of God. You have been owning Him as your Lord and Master and declaring before the world that you think His service the best service, His wages the best wages; that one day in His courts is better than a thousand (Psa 84:10). Now, if after all you backslide, will not the world conclude that you have not found that in His service that you expected? Thus, others will be scared from the good ways of the Lord.   Continue at Ebenezer Erskine

Spurgeon on the Amusement-Driven Church

As a young Christian I remember stumbling across this statement by Charles Spurgeon on how entertainment and amusement are not part of the tools of Christ’s mission for the Church in the world. The 21st Century church in America desperately needs to hear this. Spurgeon wrote:

An evil is in the professed camp of the Lord, so gross in its impudence, that the most shortsighted Christian can hardly fail to notice it. During the past few years this evil has developed at an alarming rate. It has worked like leaven until the whole lump ferments!

The devil has seldom done a more clever thing, than hinting to the Church that part of their mission is to provide entertainment for the people, with a view to winning them. From speaking out the gospel, the Church has gradually toned down her testimony, then winked at and excused the frivolities of the day. Then she tolerated them in her borders. Now she has adopted them under the plea of reaching the masses!

My first contention is that providing amusement for the people is nowhere spoken of in the Scriptures as a function of the Church. If it is a Christian work why did not Christ speak of it? “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature, and provide amusement for those who do not relish the gospel.” No such words, however, are to be found.

Again, providing amusement is in direct antagonism to the teaching and life of Christ and all His apostles. What was the attitude of the apostolic Church to the world? “You are the salt of the world,” not the sugar candy; something the world will spit out, not swallow.  Continue at Nicholas T. Batzig

Soft, Effeminate Christianity

I came across this quote by Horatius Bonar and thought it was worth sharing. Bonar is warning against a kind of soft and, in his word, effeminate Christianity, that may come about when Christians are too afraid to fight for what is right and to protest against what is wrong.

For there is some danger of falling into a soft and effeminate Christianity, under the plea of a lofty and ethereal theology. Christianity was born for endurance…It walks with firm step and erect frame; it is kindly, but firm; it is gentle, but honest; it is calm, but not facile; obliging, but not imbecile; decided, but not churlish. It does not fear to speak the stern word of condemnation against error, nor to raise its voice against surrounding evils, under the pretext that it is not of this world.

It does not shrink from giving honest reproof lest it come under the charge of displaying an unchristian spirit. It calls sin ‘sin,’ on whomsoever it is found, and would rather risk the accusation of being actuated by a bad spirit than not discharge an explicit duty. Let us not misjudge strong words used in honest controversy. Out of the heat a viper may come forth; but we shake it off and feel no harm.  Keep Reading >>>

IMAGE

The Amish, A Mullet, and Total Depravity

Straight from the headlines, an Amish community in rural Ohio recently suffered a series of attacks in which members of the Amish community had their homes invaded. Men and women had their hair forcibly cut, men having their beards shorn, a great indignity for Amish men.

Startlingly, the criminals were fellow Amish. The attackers, led by a man named Sam Mullet, were a disenfranchised group, upset at a local bishop’s decision not to excommunicate several others who they felt had broken community laws. To commemorate their attacks, they are said to have taken pictures of those whom they assaulted. A great irony in these attacks is that The Amish way of life is intended to protect its members from the sinful influences of the outside world. (There is also something incredibly ironic about a movement to cut people’s hair being led by a man named “Mullet”.) Unfortunately, this way of living fails to account for the fact that sinful influence can never be escaped because we are all corrupt. No matter where we go, as long as we are there, sin will be there too.

The Biblical doctrine of Total Depravity, one of the doctrines collectively known as the “Doctrines of Grace,” states that the basic nature of man is corrupt, that he is inclined toward evil, and that he is unable to do anything that merits God’s favor because he is unwilling. Total depravity is ultimately oriented toward God and sometimes expressed toward others.

Theologian Lorraine Boettner says it well:  Keep Reading >>>

IMAGE

Martin Luther’s Theology of the Cross: Two Great Articles by Carl Trueman

In an age of evangelical power politics and big church pragmatism, Carl Trueman reminds us that “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” (1 Cor. 1:25). The first article is from yesterday, the second from today:

The Forgotten Insight:

“At a meeting of the Saxon Chapter of the Augustinian Order in the city of Heidelberg in 1518, a monk called Leonhard Beier presented a series of theses which Luther had prepared, whilst Dr Martin himself presided over the proceedings. The Heidelberg Disputation was to go down in history as the moment when Luther showcased his radical new theology for the first time.

At the heart of this new theology was the notion that God reveals himself under his opposite; or, to express this another way, God achieves his intended purposes by doing the exact opposite of that which humans might expect. The supreme example of this is the cross itself: God triumphs over sin and evil by allowing sin and evil to triumph (apparently) over him. His real strength is demonstrated through apparent weakness. This was the way a theologian of the cross thought about God….[Read entire article at Reformation 21]

The God of the Cross:

“Our temptation to be preoccupied with those that our celebrity-aesthetic society finds lovely – the young, the artistic, the talented, the famous, the trendy, the brash, the bold, the beautiful, the cool, the self-promoting and the hip – does not reflect the priorities of the God of the cross. He is more likely to build his church with precisely those that this world considers weak and despised. Indeed, he delights so to do; and our attitude, our self-understanding, our theology, our proclamation of who God is and how he acts, must all reflect that fact if we are to be true theologians of the cross rather than theologians of glory”….[Read entire article at Reformation 21]  HT: Eric T. Young

IMAGE

“I Hope You Rot in Hell!”

Yesterday, a terrible tragedy struck Northern Nevada.  Many of you have probably seen the news about a man who fired on several people, ultimately killing four of them, before taking his own life.  Five of the people who were shot were Nevada Army National Guardsman, three of which died.  Many find themselves utterly dumbfounded by this evil act.  Of course, compounding the issue is that, with the death of the shooter, we may never know why he did it.  There is a tremendous sadness, and even anger over this tragedy.  In fact, one commenter on a news website summed his anger toward the shooter by stating, “I hope God doesn’t show you mercy.  I hope you rot in Hell.”

I have found myself thinking about that phrase over the last twenty-four hours.  What should we think of someone who has committed such an atrociously evil act?  Should we truly desire for someone to “rot in hell?”  Should we really desire that God never show that person mercy?  Ultimately, I believe the answer is no.   Keep Reading...

Sin Makes You Stupid

Another “unsophisticated” robbery allowed Detroit detectives to ferret out the villain almost instantaneously. This green hornet apparently believed strongly enough in recycling to write his demand note on the back of a used envelope he had received. No, he didn’t remember to tear off the part inscribed with his name and residential address.   Keep Reading...

According to the FBI, most bank robberies are “Unsophisticated and unprofessional” crimes. Despite the ubiquity of all-seeing surveillance cameras, 76% of robbers don’t bother with a disguise, and 95% have no plan to conceal their spoils.

Case in point, Jack Shreiner. This criminal mastermind handed a New York City bank teller a note demanding money. She surrendered $7,791 in cash. After four days, our evil genius then decided the best place to stash his loot was in a savings account. The enigmatic

part of his brilliant plan is that he selected the very bank he had just robbed.

Perhaps he thought the teller had Alzheimer’s?   

  

Osama Bin Laden and the Terror of Narcissism

Osama Bin Laden was wicked. Osama Bin Laden was feared. He was also, it turns out, kind of pathetic. Among the items American forces pulled out of the terrorist leader’s compound last week are videos of Bin Laden, wrapped in a blanket, watching himself on television. As ABCNews reports, the warlord is seen to be “a vain pathetic old man.” When I read this in the New York Times, I immediately thought of 1990s song “Mr. Jones” by the band Counting Crows: “When I look at the television, I want to see me staring right back at me.”

And what the old fox wanted to see was not just himself, but a younger version. American forces confirm that Bin Laden was dying his beard, to manage his image in order to appear more vibrant to his supporters around the world. Keep Reading...

War, What Is It Good For? Sometimes It’s Absolutely Necessary!

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things:  the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. . . . A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.      —John Stuart Mill¹

Growing up, I felt a need to be like the people I admired. So for a time I wanted to be like Jerry West (the hall of fame shooting guard for the Los Angeles Lakers). Later I wanted to be like Beatles legend John Lennon. However, in the eighth grade while writing a report on the Second World War, I discovered two photographs of my father in The Decline and Fall of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan by Hans Dollinger. I further discovered that my seemingly ordinary father had received both the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart Medals during his tour of duty in Europe. I was embarrassed that I had not recognized what an important role model my dad had always been. From that time I’ve been an avid student of World War II, even taking part of my undergraduate studies in history. Keep Reading>>>

The Tucson Tragedy and God’s Gift of Moral Language

Gnostics: Know Your Heretics

Gnosticism is not a specific heretical movement in church history, but rather a broad umbrella term categorizing a loose collection of false beliefs.

Questions concerning the origins of Gnosticism are still unsolved. Some think Gnosticism originated as a heresy that diverted from orthodox Christian teaching, while others see the movement as an independent, non-Christian movement stemming from paganism.

What does it mean? 

Everett Ferguson breaks down the diverse teachings of Gnosticism into eight categories:

• A preoccupation with the problem of evil
• A sense of alienation from the world
• A desire for special and intimate knowledge of the secrets of the universe
• A psychological (body and soul) and ethical (good and evil) dualism
• A cosmology wherein all beings are derivative from the first, originating principle
• A hierarchical anthropology of different classes of human beings with fixed destinies
• A radically realized eschatology that denied the resurrection of the dead
• A variety of ethical implications ranging from libertinism and asceticism - Continue Reading>>>

A Huge Problem for Premillennarians -- The Presence of Evil in the Millennial Age

According to premillennarians, one group of people on the earth during the millennial age are the redeemed.  No one believes that it is possible for such people who have been raised from the dead when Christ comes back, and who are now glorified, to participate in a revolt like the one depicted in Revelation 20.  Therefore, those who revolt during the millennium must be individuals who have not yet been raised from the dead or who have not gone through the judgment when Christ returned to earth when the millennial age began.  Dispensationalists believe that these are individuals who come to faith after the Rapture and survive the great tribulation and wrath of the Antichrist, while historic premillennarians believe that these are people living at the time of our Lord’s return who are not raised from the dead or judged, and who subsequently repopulate the earth during the millennial age.

But this conception of the millennial age is highly problematic despite the apparent “literal” reading of Revelation 20.  According to premillennarians, the millennium is a period in redemptive history in which people who have been raised from the dead and who now live upon the earth in resurrected bodies co-exist with people who have not been raised from the dead and who remain in the flesh.  How can this be?  Where is this mixture of resurrected and unresurrected individuals taught, or even implied in the Scriptures?  As we have seen, the New Testament writers all anticipate the final consummation to occur at the time of our Lord’s Second Advent.  They do not anticipate the half-way step of an earthly millennium before the final consummation such as that associated with all forms of premillennalism.  Read the rest HERE