Month: October 2019

On Skepticism

/ one_monk / Leave a comment

This is a post that helps you the reader to become more acquainted with where I – the author of this site – stand on various topics and theological points. Keep reading to see where I stand on this topic.

This may sound like a strange choice for a site dealing with Christian beliefs to some, but it is an important one because of my personal heavy science background.

Skepticism isn’t truly about simply being skeptical – though people will treat the word in such a fashion.

If you look up skepticism at dictionary.com, you’ll get the following:

  • noun
  • (1) skeptical attitude or temper; doubt. (2) doubt or unbelief with regard to a religion, especially Christianity. (3) (initial capital letter) the doctrines or opinions of philosophical Skeptics; universal doubt.

Many know the first definition but not necessarily the later two.

I have found myself at the center of some misunderstanding when I self-described myself as a skeptic as those individuals of the more atheistic persuasion took that to mean I meant definition #2. Other Christian friends would simply give me a look as they equated the term with atheism. What I had really meant by my statement was more of a spirit of #1 or #3.

What this means is that I do not simply take something as gospel or fact because someone in authority or who is respected says it is so. I need to see the facts. I need to see the Scriptures. I need to see how it all fits together.

Now, if that person is going to go ahead and put all that together right off the bat for me, that makes the situation much easier for me to at least understand where they are coming from – though it does not mean I’m automatically on board with their angle. It typically takes time to persuade me to anything as I need time to mull it over.

By no means am I trying to be some rebel. I simply won’t be a blind sheep.

I will tend to doubt something unless I have prior knowledge that predisposes me to accept what is being presented or until I have adequate time to form a view on the topic/situation.

The same goes for positions involving God and the Scriptures. Key things that helped me in my faith were the providential developments of history that provided a more than stable grounding for the reliability of the Scriptures, and from there giving ground to ideas like Sola Scriptura that leads me to turn to the Scriptures to seek proof for any true position involving God and His works.

What all does this mean?

To be very plain:

  • Want me to take a particular view on Pentecost/End times/Christ/etc.? Show me from Scripture to prove that I should and be thorough. Don’t forget to consider your point in light of ALL of Scripture!
  • Want me to listen to the latest science-backed craze for the environment/health/etc.? Show me from the body of evidence why I should. Present the facts, the data, not simply your interpretation of that data. Also let me see the data from similar research. Does it all fit together? Does any of it seem bogus or exaggerated? Who did the research? Is there any political bias . . . you get the idea I think.

There exists quite a bit of shallowness out there in people’s basis for what they consider to be true and not true. I aim to not be one of those people. I have a strong desire for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but.

So, yes, I’m skeptical in a lot of ways or a skeptic of sorts on a case by case basis. However, I am a Christian as well – I do no doubt Christ. Most of those describing themselves as skeptics out there would fall under definition #2 and not #3 as they make the specific claim of no God. They’re not skeptical on that point. #3 doubt whether they can even know – a sort of universal doubter.

Note: I do these posts not because I think I’m somehow superior in my views or anything absurd like that but out of a desire to be up-front and honest with my readers as to where I stand. Otherwise, you’d be left to figure things out by reading between the lines and/or guessing.

Quote #27 – 1689

/ one_monk / Leave a comment

God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, has ordained civil magistrates to be under him, over the people, for his own glory and the public good; and to this end has armed them with the power of the sword, for defence and encouragement of them that do good, and for the punishment of evil doers.

1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, Chapter 24, Paragraph 1

On Confessions

/ one_monk / 1 Comment

This is a post that helps you the reader to become more acquainted with where I – the author of this site – stand on various topics and theological points. Keep reading to see where I stand on today’s topic.

In our present age, there is this common thought that one’s religion should be kept unshackled from the doctrines, dogmas, and creeds (or confessions) of the past. They think this makes them better and freer than those of the past. As such, they tend to be anti-creedal.

However, it is impossible to truly be anti-confessional. To state you have no confession or that there should be no confession is to inherently make a declarative statement that takes on the role of your confession. By merely taking a stand of any kind, you’ve confessed your position and thereby put forth your creed or confession. Therefore, it is more honest to be forward and state what you have as your confession.

Heretics historically proclaimed that they held to the Scriptures so simply stating “our creed is the Bible” isn’t enough. In fact, confessions were often written in response to historical heresies in order to have a succinct message upon where the church stood that could be referenced against such heresies. These also serve as useful teaching tools for the congregation at large.

I personally enjoy both the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed and my current church subscribes to the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (also called the 2nd London Baptist Confession).

I also think quite highly of the Westminster Confession of Faith.

There are many other creeds and confessions out there and many that are useful for teaching and historical study that I have not mentioned here.

My greatest point is that confessions are important and that a church that claims it doesn’t have one or refuses to state one has thereby made its stance (confession) clear, and such a church is therefore a potentially dangerous place as it will have difficulty identifying and calling out false doctrine. Such a place is not the sort of place one should look to for growth in Christ.

Note: I do these posts not because I think I’m somehow superior in my views or anything absurd like that but out of a desire to be up-front and honest with my readers as to where I stand. Otherwise, you’d be left to figure things out by reading between the lines and/or guessing.

See more in the master list.

Quote #25 – Scripture (parallel)

/ one_monk / Leave a comment

Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord.

Philippians 3:8 (ESV)

More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ,

Philippians 3:8 (NASB, Updated 1995)

Quote #24 – Machen

/ one_monk / Leave a comment

While speaking on the subject of doctrine . . .

If the Church were led to wipe out of existence all products of the thinking of nineteen Christian centuries and start fresh, the loss, even if the Bible were retained, would be immense. When it is once admitted that a body of facts lies at the basis of the Christian religion, the efforts which past generations have made toward the classification of the facts will have to be treated with respect. In no branch of science would there be any real advance if every generation started fresh with no dependence upon what past generations have achieved. Yet in theology, vituperation of the past seems to be thought essential to progress. And upon what base slanders the vituperation is based! After listening to modern tirades against the great creeds of the Church, one receives rather a shock when one turns to the Westminster Confession, for example, or to that tenderest and most theological of books, the “Pilgrim’s Progress” of John Bunyan, and discovers that in doing so one has turned from shallow modern phrases to a “dead orthodoxy” that is pulsating with life in every word. In such orthodoxy there is life enough to set the whole world aglow with Christian love.

J. Grescham Machen in Christianity & Liberalism

Note: if you’re not familiar with the term “vituperation”, think of it as: the act of being invective; you are attempting to censure or put away with abusive language.