Naturalism Begs the Question

Begging the question, for those who aren't already aware, is an informal
logical fallacy in which the arguer 'sneaks' his conclusion in as one of the
premises which support his conclusion.

Naturalism, begs the question by its very nature.
This is one of the reasons it is so difficult to sit down and have a truly
productive debate with many people who hold this view.

One side likes to posture as if they are objectively neutral,
but they are, in fact, not. They pit science against religion, declaring
religion as falsity based upon myth and fable and science as
the only begetter of truth. But this isn't science, this is scientism.

Naturalism commonly refers to the viewpoint that laws of nature
(as opposed to supernatural ones) operate in the universe,
and that nothing exists beyond the natural universe or, if it does,
it does not affect the natural universe.

So, in discussing historical events, such as the validity of the Gospels for
instance, we are already off to a poor beginning.
The naturalist presupposes that miracles cannot occur.
His argument against the existence of miracles might look like this.

1.) Nothing exists beyond the natural universe and the natural laws that guide it.
2.) The supernatural cannot be explained by the natural universe or natural laws.
3.) The supernatural does not exist.

See a problem here? The conclusion is just a negatively phrased
version of the first premise. The preceding logical argument might as well
have been written:

1.) The supernatural does not exist.
2.) The supernatural cannot be explained by the natural universe or natural laws.
3.) The supernatural does not exist.

The conclusion is the same statement as the first proposition; only worded
differently. Circular reasoning alone does not disprove the validity of an
argument. But it puts it in a severely compromised position.

If someone sincerely wishes to objectively weigh the validity of their worldview
against opposing ones, one must set aside such presupposing baggage at the door
and weigh the evidence as it stands.
Obviously we do not rely on supernatural explanations where a natural one
will do. We always check for a natural explanation first.

If my car refuses to start tomorrow morning, I probably won't assume
that angry fairies sabotaged my engine.
I'll check under the hood for mechanical failure.
Once evidence mounts to indicate a supernatural cause, however,
I should not avoid objectively examining all options merely because of a prior
obligation to my worldview.

In my opinion, a more humble approach is in order.
For me to assume that since I have never witnessed a miracle during my lifetime
(if that were indeed the case) that no miracles have ever occurred in the entire
history of the universe seems slightly rash and illogical.

Elimination By Replacement

In the twelfth chapter of the book of Romans, the author exhorts us in the following
manner:

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Romans 12:1-2

But ye have not so learned Christ; If so be that ye have heard him,
and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:
That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man,
which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
Ephesians 4:20-24


There are two basic concepts presented to us here.
And I like to think that the two go hand-in-hand.
First, we have the exhortation of presenting our bodies a living sacrifice
to God our Lord and King.

For us to present our body to the Lord is a perfectly reasonable expectation
on His part. He created us, He redeemed us from an eternity apart from
Him.

The second, is actually, in my opinion, the precursor of the first.
Paul tells us not to be conformed to this world that we live in, but
to be transformed by the renewing of our minds.

As I have been working through the book 'Love Your God With All Your Mind'
by J.P. Moreland, I came across a compelling quotation which I'd like to share:

"...my habits dwell in my body and its members.
Some people frown so much, gossip so often, or eat certain soothing foods so
regularly that routines and habits get deeply woven into their bodies.
In the right circumstances, their faces are habituated to frown, their tongues
to talk, and their legs to walk to the refrigerator without even thinking about it.
To change our habits and to interact differently with the world, we need to
retrain our bodies to form new habits that replace old ones...
But how do we gain the motivation, the insights, the perspective
necessary to change? Anyone who has struggled with bad habits knows
that you don't become transformed by just willing the old habits to go away...
According to Paul, the key to change is the formation of a new perspective,
the development of fresh insights about our lives and the world around us..."

J.P. Moreland obviously intends this as an opening to an in-depth study
of intellectual development in the Christian worldview.
However, it reminded me of something else critical in studying this crucial
Scripture.

One does not simply eliminate bad physical or mental habits from one's life.
To do so would be foolhardy and to invite disaster.
Instead, one should replace the bad physical or mental habit with
one or more suitable good physical or mental habits.

Elimination alone produces an unhealthy vacuum, where replacement
does not, and instead leads to further productivity and positive growth
and development as a servant of Christ.

Jesus said:

When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out;
and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first...
Matthew 12:43-45

This concept of replacement of the unclean with the clean seems to be further
reinforced in the book of Galatians.

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like:
of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past,
that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Galatians 5:19-23

Indeed, it could be argued that the entirety of the Christian paradigm from beginning
to end involves this conversion process.
First with a dramatic conversion which takes place instantly upon coming to
the salvation of Christ in our lives. And continuing day-by-day in our lives
through daily submission to His will and guiding hand.

But this work, I am convinced, involves replacing old thoughts and habits
with new and healthy ones. Sloth with study, disobedience with obedience, rebellion
with humility, anger and resentment with peace and joy.

You may have heard the old saying 'an idle mind is the devil's workshop.'
I am firmly convinced that there is some truth to this statement.
I have found in my personal life, since my return to the Lord, that my
studies in the Scripture and of reading various philosophical and theological books
had left no fertile ground in my mind for satan to manipulate.

Don't misunderstand. We are all subject to temptation.
But speaking on behalf of myself, I have noticed a distinct lack of place for
the devil to do his work in my mind when it is sharpened and disciplined
by the Word of God and by continuing research and study for the Lord.

Interesting Quotation

"The church is safe from vicious persecution at the hands of the secularist,
as educated people have finished with stake-burning, circuses, and torture racks.

No martyr's blood is shed in the secular west.
So long as the church knows her place and remains quietly at peace
on her modern reservation.

Let the babes pray and sing and read their Bibles, continuing steadfastly
in their intellectual retardation; the church's extinction will not come by sword
or pillory, but by the quiet death of irrelevance.

But let the church step off the reservation, let her penetrate once more
the culture of the day and the . . . face of secularism will change from a benign
smile to a savage snarl."

-R.C. Sproul, John Gerstner, and Arthur Lindsley

Moral Relativism

I'd like to kick the proverbial hornets nest and talk about moral relativism.
At a presentation to seniors at a Christian high school in Des Moines,
Gregory Koukl walked up to the chalkboard and wrote two sentences.

"All views have equal merit and none should be considered better than another."

"Jesus is the Messiah and Judaism is wrong for rejecting that."

Everyone nodded in agreement as he wrote the first sentence.
He could barely get finished writing the second, however, before hands flew up across the room.
"You can't say that," someone challenged, clearly annoyed.
"That's disrespectful. How would you like it if someone said you were wrong?"

Koukl responded, "In fact, that happens to me all the time, including right now with you.
But why should it bother me that someone thinks I'm wrong?"
"It's intolerant," the student replied.
Greg pointed at the board and said, "Is this a view, the idea that all views have equal merit
and none should be considered better than another?" They agreed.
Then he pointed at the second statement. "Is this a view?"

Slowly the point began to dawn on the class. They had been taken in by a modern trick
called 'tolerance'. All too often in the media I see Christians branded as narrow-minded,
egotistical, Bible-thumping, fundamentalist bigots.
Why? Because they deigned to carry an opinion not aligned with what our society
considers fair and in support of 'civil liberties'.

We'll save the discussion of what 'civil liberties',
or what the latest weekly definition of it even means, for another day.
The term civil liberties has been such a hot-button topic during the last few decades, that
to invoke its use during a political speech or rousing address by the media seems enough to
engender righteous fury and indignation in all listeners; inciting them into a frothing-at-the-mouth
frenzy of frenetic activity replete with pitchforks and flaming torches, ready to burn the
fundamentalist dogs from the midst of the congregation.

But the point of this essay is the concept of moral relativism.
Which is, at its core, that there are no such things as objective moral values; only subjective ones.

Why would Christians at large be dubbed racist, egotistical,
narrow-minded, judgmental, hypocritical, etc?
Because if you are truly a Christian, you must believe in objective moral truths.
But if you share your beliefs about these truths, you become intolerant and judgmental.
Now here I'd like you to make an important observation.

The words racist, egotistical, narrow-minded, judgmental, self-righteous, and so on
are not merely adjectives. They are themselves moral judgments.
Moral relativism is a self-defeating principle.
It makes a statement about morality, that there is no objective morality,
that itself is objective in nature, and therefore should be dismissed forthright
as hogwash.

Now, don't draw an erroneous conclusion and assume I'm saying that there is no
such thing as being overly judgmental.
I believe that holding a strong opinion or belief and vocalizing about it is fine.
It's when you abuse your position to physically or mentally abuse someone else, that
the problem enters.

J.P. Moreland wrote an excellent synopsis about how the definitions of a number of very
important things have changed in our culture within the last few years.

"Another modern trend is a change in what we mean by the good life.
From Old Testament times and ancient Greece until this century, the good life was widely
understood to mean a life of intellectual and moral virtue.
The good life is the life of ideal human functioning according to the nature that God Himself
gave to us...

...Happiness (Greek: eudaimonia) was understood as a life of virtue, and the successful person
was one who knew how to live life well according to what we are by nature due to the creative
design of God. When the Declaration of Independence says we are endowed by our Creator
with certain inalienable rights, among them the right to pursue happiness, it is referring to
virtue and character. So understand, happiness involves suffering, endurance, and patience
because these are important means to becoming a good person who lives the good life.

Freedom was traditionally understood as the power to do what one ought to do.
For example, some people are not free to play the piano or to say no to lust because they have not
undergone the training necessary to ingrain the relevant skillful habits.
Moreover, since community is possible only if people accept as true a shared vision of the good life,
it is easy to see why a sense of community and public virtue could be sustained given this understanding of the good life, happiness, and freedom.

Traditionally, tolerance of other viewpoints meant that even though I think those viewpoints
are dead wrong and will argue against them fervently, nevertheless, I will defend your right to argue
your own case. Just as importantly, I will treat you with respect as an image bearer of God,
even though your views are abhorrent to me.

Finally, while individual rights are important, they do not exhaust the moral life because virtue and duty are more central than rights to the moral life properly conceived."

These traditional views have been replaced with the following re-interpretations in our modern society.

The good life is the satisfaction of any pleasure or desire that someone freely chooses for oneself.
The successful person is one who has a life of pleasure and can obtain enough consumer goods to satisfy his or her desires.

Freedom is the right to do what you want, not the power to do what you, by nature, ought to.
Community gives way to individualism with the result that narcissism increases.
If you are free to create your own moral universe, and there is no right or wrong answer to
what you should do, then morality (or everything) exists to make you happy.
When a person considers a life-altering decision like abortion, or physician-assisted suicide,
the person's individual rights are all that matter. Questions about virtue or one's duty to the broader
community simply do not arise.

Tolerance has come to mean that no one is right and no one is wrong and, indeed, the very act
of stating that someone else's views are immoral or incorrect is now taken to be intolerant.
Once the existence of knowable truth in religion and ethics is denied, authority (the right to be
believed and obeyed) gives way to power (the ability to force compliance).

Why is the idea of moral relativism so dangerous? Because it has insidiously crept into our culture
and I have heard many Christians touting it as doctrine.

Ultimately, one can usually define the qualities of a moral principle by observing its champion.
If we agree that pacifism is a good moral principle, we can look at Ghandi and see the virtues it
brought forth in his life.
If we agree that selflessness is a good moral principle, we can examine mother Theresa and
see the virtues that being selfless brought about.

So who is the champion of moral relativism? Who espouses its characteristics completely?
A complete and utter sociopath does. Someone who does whatever is pleasing to them at the moment
without any concern for the subjective viewpoints of those around them.
So beware of allowing this seemingly innocent opinion take foothold in your mind.

The Most Profound Proof

In my researching of apologetics books and materials, I often times have wondered
which argument makes the strongest case for proof of God to those who don't believe.
What evidence exists that can sway the most hardened mind.
In the midst of reading my books, I came across an example, that I found
so humbling it brought me to tears.

It's a story of the kind of life lived that serves as the best proof for God's existence.
Because the strongest testimony to God, in my opinion, is the amazing change
He brings about in the heart and life of the true believer.
So allow me to share with you this true story that touched my heart,
taken from the pages of The Life You've Always Wanted by John Ortberg.

"The state-run convalescent hospital is not a pleasant place.
It is large, understaffed, and overfilled with senile and helpless and lonely people
who are waiting to die.
On the brightest of days it seems dark inside and it smells of sickness
and stale urine. I went there once or twice a week for four years, but never
wanted to go there, and I always left with a sense of relief.
It is not the kind of place one gets used to.

On this particular day, I was walking in a hallway that I had not visited before,
looking in vain for a few who were alive enough to receive a flower and a few words
of encouragement. This hallway seemed to contain some of the worst cases,
strapped onto carts or into weelchairs and looking completely helpless.

As I neared the end of this hallway, I saw an old woman strapped up in a weelchair.
Her face was an absolute horror. The empty stare and white pupils of her eyes
told me that she was blind. The large hearing aid over one ear told me that she
was almost deaf. One side of her face was being eaten by cancer.
There was a discolored and running sore covering part of one cheek, and it had pushed
her nose to one side, dropped one eye, and distorted her jaw so that what should have
been the corner of her mouth was the bottom of her mouth.
As a consequence, she drooled constantly.

I was told later that when new nurses arrived, the supervisor would send them to feed
this woman, thinking that if they could stand this sight they could stand anything in the
building. I also learned later that this woman was eighty-nine years old and that
she had been here, bedridden, blind, nearly deaf, and alone, for twenty-five years.
This was Mabel.

I don't know why I spoke to her---she looked less likely to respond than most
of the people I saw in that hallway. But I put a flower in her hand and said.
'Here is a flower for you. Happy Mother's Day.'
She held the flower up to her face and tried to smell it, and then she spoke.
Much to my suprise, her words, although somewhat garbled because of her
deformity, were obviously produced by a clear mind.
She said, 'Thank you. It's lovely. But can I give it to someone else?
I can't see it, you know, I'm blind.'

I said, 'Of course,' and I pushed her in her chair back down the hallway to a place
where I thought I could find some alert patients.
I found one, and I stopped the chair. Mabel held out the flower and said,
'Here, this is from Jesus.'

That was when it began to dawn on me that this was not an ordinary human being.
Later, I wheeled her back to her room, and learned more about her story.
She had grown up on a small farm that she managed with her mother until her
mother died. Then she ran the farm alone until 1950 when her blindness and sickness
sent her to the convalescent hospital.

For twenty-five years she got weaker and sicker, with constant headaches, backaches,
and stomachaches, and then the cancer came too.
Her three roomates were all human vegetables who screamed occasionally, but
never talked. They often soiled their bedclothes, and because the hospital was
understaffed, especially on Sundays when I usually visited, the stench was often
overpowering.

Mabel and I became friends over the next few weeks, and I went to see her once
or twice a week for the next three years. Her first words to me were usually an offer
of hard candy from a tissue box near her bed.
Some days I would read to her from the Bible, and often when I would pause
she would continue reciting the passage from memory, word-for-word.

On other days, I would take a book of hymns and sing with her,
and she would know all the words of the old songs.
For Mabel, these were not merely exercises in memory.
She would often stop in mid-hymn and make a brief comment about lyrics
she considered particularly relevant to her own situation.
I never heard her speak of loneliness or pain except in the stress she placed
on certain lines in certain hymns.

It was not many weeks before I turned from a sense that I was being helpful
to a sense of wonder, and I would go to her with a pen and paper to write down
the things she would say...

During one hectic week of final exams, I was frustrated because my mind seemed
to be pulled in ten directions at once with all of the things that I had to think about.
The question occurred to me "What does Mabel have to think about---hour after hour,
day after day, week after week, not even able to know if it's day or night?"
So I went to her and asked, 'Mabel, what do you think about when you lay here?'

And she said, 'I think about my Jesus.'
I sat there and thought for a moment about the difficulty, for me, of thinking
about Jesus for even five minutes, and I asked, 'What do you think about Jesus?'
She replied slowly and deliberately as I wrote.

'I think about how good he's been to me. He's been awfully good to me in my life,
you know... I'm one of those kind who's mostly satisfied...
Lots of folks wouldn't care much for what I think. Lots of folks would think I'm
kind of old-fashioned. But I don't care. I'd rather have Jesus.
He's all the world to me.'

And then Mabel began to sing an old hymn:

Jesus is all the world to me,
My life, my joy, my all.
He is my strength from day to day,
Without Him I would fall.
When I am sad, to Him I go,
No other can cheer me so.
When I am sad He makes me glad.
He's my friend.

This is not fiction. Incredible as it may seem, a human being really lived like this.
I know. I knew her. How could she do it?
Seconds ticked by and minutes crawled, and so did days and weeks and months and years
of pain without human company and without an explanation of why it was all happening---
and she lay there and sang hymns. How could she do it?

The answer, I think, is that Mabel had something that you and I don't have much of.
She had power. Lying there in that bed, unable to move, unable to see, unable to hear,
unable to talk to anyone, she had incredible power."

The Dangers of Sexual Misconduct

The following essay, I must admit, is hard for me to write.
I don't care to dwell mentally upon some of the concepts within, especially considering
some of the lamentable mistakes of my past. It has to do with a terrible lasso
of sin that the satan uses regularly to captivate and ensnare people of all
persuasions and religions into a downward spiral in their lives.
This snare is pornography.

Pornography as it stands, is a tool of the evil one to subtly and insidiously
infiltrate the lives of people with sin, which, once surrendered to, becomes a nearly
impregnable fortress; an unassailable position from which satan is free to rain
volleys of death and destruction upon our lives.
This can even be true of Christians after they become saved, if they are not vigilant.
Each of us has specific weaknesses which we must watch out for.

Why do I use the words 'subtle' and 'insidious' when I refer to pornography?
Most people do not draw those parallels when they think of pornography.
They think of some completely audacious and mentally assaulting imagry.
Well here are my thoughts on the subject.

First, pornography almost never starts with 'hardcore' exposure.
It wasn't in my case. It isn't in most others. The notorious serial killer Ted Bundy
admitted in interviews that his string of murders could be traced back to
boyhood when he began an unhealthy obsession with pornographic material,
'softcore' at first, but progressing to more and more graphic and violent images
until he began acting out his fantasies in real life.

Now this is not always the case. I don't want anyone to mistakenly assume that
I am postulating that people who watch or read pornographic material automatically
evolve into serial killers. But what I do want to say, is that sin is never neutral.
It is never satisfied. It always promises more than it delivers. And it always destroys.
And this is especially true of sexual sin.

"While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage."
2 Peter 2:19

Once we get started down a pornographic path, our minds are quickly seared
and grow callous to the material, and we must in turn seek more and more depraved
material for us to achieve the same level of arousal.
Satan absolutely loves misusing sex. Here's why.

1.) Human beings are designed to appreciate beauty.
We are designed in the image of God. As such, we are distinctly differentiated from animals
in that we can appreciate beauty in the world around us. This includes the male and female
form(s).
If you take a fine work of abstract sculpture and introduce a tiger, for example,  the tiger is not going
to walk deliberately around the sculpture a few times stroking its chin and then say,
"This is absolutely phenomenal artwork. Look at the detail this artist has put here, and here.
Obviously the person who did this was talented in the extreme."
No, the tiger will promptly walk over and defecate on the sculpture.
Why? Because it is an animal.
It does possess the mental faculties and spiritual faculties than man and woman have
been designed with to differentiate between a thing of beauty and a lump of stone.
It brings great pleasure to satan to use our own appreciation of beauty, instilled in us through
the image of God, against us, and in so doing shoot an arrow at the heart of our Creator.

2.) Human beings were designed to desire sexual intimacy.
Let's face it. We were designed to desire sex. Not simply to propogate the species,
but because it is a highly enjoyable experience.
It involves physical culmination of what is supposed to be a pre-existing emotional bond.
Something which seems lacking in most relationships these days and causes much grief.
How many relationships have you seen friends have, or had yourself,
where the entire relationship was based solely on sexual experience without any other substance.
How long has the entire affair lasted? I'm willing to hazard the guess of 'not long'.
I'm certain there are exceptions to this rule.

Sex isn't meant as a method of momentary bliss and gratification.
It was designed as symbolic unity of flesh to culminate a much deeper union of souls and minds.
This is particularly ironic, since all throughout Scripture we see a remarkable symbolism used to describe the same relationship between God and the believer and God and His church.
Once again, satan gets no shortage of kicks from throwing the entire gross misuse of sexual
conduct in God's face every chance he gets.

Pornography is critical to this equation.
It simplifies sex into an object to be pursued, not a privilege to be enjoyed as a
natural result of a deeper and more fulfilling relationship.
And our entire society and culture is constructed around this misapprehension of
sexual conduct.

Gradually, just as people are when exposed to pornographic material,
our society has grown dull and insensitive to it.
We are saturated with sexually charged innuendo and messages on the television
every day. When we read magazines. Everywhere we go. Everywhere we look.
Women are objectified into sexual objects of desire for young men to look at.
And even though less of a fuss is made about it, the same is true in reverse.
The human body is glorified beyond measure. And constant coarse humor and innuendo
in every corner of our media-permeated culture reinforce these negative values.

And in my personal opinion, any fixations, or perversion aside from this basic misuse
of sexual conduct are just offshoots of the main branch.
In my case, from a young age, I began to develop a sexual deviancy; a fixation that
I associated with sex so strongly, that it damaged my relationships later in life.
And I am sure that this is what the evil one had in mind. He's not merely content to
distort and pervert something that our wonderful Creator meant for our good.
No, his goal is to destroy you utterly. And to do that, any way he can tangle up the threads
of your mind and your basic preferences, aids him in doing so.

But praise the Lord, we can be free from the shackles of bondage through the saving grace
and power of Jesus Christ! Now I want you to understand, sex itself in the
proper context of marriage, is not a shameful deed. It's not something for you to shrivel up
in a corner and be ashamed of. It was designed by God and it was designed to be enjoyable
for a reason.

Scripture states clearly:

Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well.
Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets.
Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.
Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.
Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times;
and be thou ravished always with her love.
Proverbs 5:15-19 (emphasis mine)

The word for ravish here implies intoxication.
It means to reel like a drunkard, to be absolutely enraptured with or taken captive by.
Usually it is used contextually in Scripture to indicate going astray or wandering or sinning
through ignorance.
But here it used in a very positive way to reinforce what God INTENDS for marriage.
In fact, it appears to be the only time in all of Scripture that this particular Hebrew
word is used in a positive manner.

Throughout all of Scripture, even in the Song of Solomon, parallels are being drawn between
our love for the Lord Jesus as the bridegroom, and ourselves as his bride.
The church is the bride of the Lord.
So it is my firm belief, that the believer is supposed to have this
yearning and passion for the Lord we serve.

For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband,
that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should
be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
II Corinthians 11:2-3

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies.
He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh;
but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Ephesians 5:25-32 (emphasis mine)

This may sound bizzare at first.
But give it some thought and examination in the Scripture, and I think you will see what
I'm saying. Many things which God created in nature, seem to be in place not just for us to enjoy,
but for our edification; they paint a clear image of a parallel in the spiritual world.

Is it mere coincedence then, that when we are in love we yearn to be with our beloved,
and just a mere touch is enough to thrill us to the core;
as compared to our relationship with Christ, how we yearn for His presence,
(He IS life and from Him all life flows abundantly), and just the mere
proximity of His presence sends our hearts bounding with joy.

Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Hebrews 1:3

He is our strength. We were created for Him and meant for Him.
And to steal away and follow after false gods and commit idolatry in our lives against the Lord is considered a grievous sin to him akin to the sin of adultery against your spouse in the physical realm.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,
Deuteronomy 5:9

Let me close then, by contrasting appropriate love,
to the seduction of an adulterous woman as layed out in Proverbs.
She goes out to the street and with many a sultry intonation, entices a young stranger with many promises of wonderful sins and that they will go unnoticed; her husband is not home.
This is the same siren call that pornography and sexual misconduct has when
it beckons, but look what Proverbs says is the end of all this:

He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter,
or as a fool to the correction of the stocks;Till a dart strike through his liver;
as a bird hasteth to the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his life.
Hearken unto me now therefore, O ye children, and attend to the words of my mouth.
Let not thine heart decline to her ways, go not astray in her paths.
For she hath cast down many wounded: yea, many strong men have been slain by her.
Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death.
Proverbs 7:22-27 (emphasis mine)

Stern language from the Scripture, and a highly relevant warning to all the fear the Lord.

Ten Pitfalls of Apologetics

I would like to share by re-posting, something shared by Apologetics315.com;
these being ten pitfalls that can ensnare anyone who undertakes a thoughtful
and rational defense of the faith.

I want to share these, because in my efforts of late to study the field
of apologetics and speak to others on these topics, I discover a number of
these weaknesses within myself. Each is an easy trap to fall into.

The foolish apologist speaks before listening.
Proverbs 18:13 says, "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and his shame."
Not only does he communicate to others that he couldn't care less about what they have to say, but he also becomes unable to give a well informed answer.
The wise apologist is patient, seeks to understand, and avoids monologue.

The foolish apologist overstates his argument.
The foolish apologist doesn't have "good reasons."
Instead, he can prove it. He can show something beyond the shadow of a doubt.
His arguments are presented with all confidence -- and of course he can't be wrong.
Even when using good arguments, he exaggerates what they actually show.
No modesty here, and people balk. The wise apologist argues confidently, yet with modesty.

The foolish apologist wants to win every point.
When the conversation gets complex, he needs to make sure to correct every single error he sees with another person's view.
Never mind that his conversation partner is getting offended by his "attention to detail." This apologist is the fallacy police, the fact-checker, and grammarian all-in-one.
If he makes an error, back-pedaling is in order, with little or no admission of wrong. The wise apologist can discern what really matters in a conversation.

The foolish apologist chases red herrings.
If the topic is the resurrection, just bring up evolution.
The foolish apologist will happily hop down any bunny trail that appears.
The conversation goes in all directions.
He can't make any progress in an argument because he can't spot red herrings,
distractions, and non-issues.
In fact, he may often enjoy these deviations from focused dialogue, because he's proud of his expertise in his own pet subject areas.
The wise apologist knows how to stick to one point.

The foolish apologist is proud of himself.
He likes the fact that he knows terms that make the "novices" around him cock their heads.
He secretly commends himself for reading more books in a month than most people do in a year.
He enjoys the sound of his own voice, and thinks he does a pretty good job in an internet forum.
Apologetics is his tool to show the world he can flex his intellectual muscle.
He's received his reward. The wise apologist humbles himself before God, and looks upon himself with sober judgment.

The foolish apologist seeks popularity.
He enjoys the accolades of others, speaking to lots of people, being a big name.
Name-dropping becomes a normal tool to show others just how connected he is to what's happening in the scene.
He doesn't choose the lowly place. The wise apologist blooms where he is planted.

The foolish apologist neglects spiritual disciplines.
He finds reading philosophy more interesting than reading the Bible, so he neglects the Bible.
Prayer is seldom and rushed. In fact, prayer, meditation, Bible study, worship and fellowship take the back seat to study.
The foolish apologist deceives himself that he is being spiritual, all the while drifting away. The wise apologist sits at the feet of Jesus.

The foolish apologist has not love.
He can speak in the tongues of philosophers and of theologians, but he has not love - he is only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
He has the gift of intellect and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge; his arguments can move mountains, but he has not love - he is nothing.
He gives all his time and energy to study, and surrenders his finances to university degrees, but has not love - and has gained nothing.
The wise apologist is motivated by love for God and love for others.

The foolish apologist isolates himself from others.
He doesn't need their input. He doesn't appreciate correction. He has his own plans, his own agenda, and own personal ministry.
He refuses to let iron sharpen iron. When he falls, he has no one to help him up. He's accountable to himself only.
The wise apologist surrounds himself with godly counsel and fellow laborers.

The foolish apologist doesn't do apologetics.
He becomes an apologetics junkie; a consumer instead of an enlisted soldier. He does more talking about defending the faith than actually defending the faith.
Debates are a spectator sport.
He forgets that souls are in the balance and doesn't even think of preaching the Gospel.
The wise apologist wants to win others to Christ more than anything - and he uses apologetics as a tool to assist in this task.

I think sometimes we forget the reason we defend the faith and attempt
to persuade others. It's so that we can influence others so that they come
to the saving grace of God.
If we fail to provide a gracious and loving example, we fail at our mission.
I pray that the Lord forgives me for my weaknesses, and prevents me from
falling into any of these snares in the future.
Enter conversations with others with a prayerful attitude of meekness and
humility and see where the God leads you.