Anthromorphism

The third question raised by Dimitri was "Do Christians need to obey Old Testament Laws?" While the prior questions could be dealt with summarily by pointing out the misapprehensions of the interlocutors thereof, this question requires a lot more work, as it touches on a number of major conflicts that have embroiled the Church from its inception to today. As such, answering this question will require us to look at it from a number of different angles and to address them one by one as time and space permit.

One of the main ways in which doubters both within and without the Church try to discredit the Old Testament and its teachings is by casting the allegation of "anthromorphism". Simplified, the argument goes like this:

• A passage of scripture shows God acting in a way proper to man: feeling emotion, considering, reflecting, reconsidering.
• God is a perfect being.
• Perfect beings do not feel emotion, consider, reflect, or reconsider. They are spiritual, and do not have hands, feet, or faces.
• Therefore, God did not do these things, nor does He have those parts, and the passage is thus untrue, and can be ignored.

Hopefully you have noticed the major assumption contained in this line of argumentation. In the third point, a mortal human has taken it upon himself to circumscribe God. In opposition to the God described in God's own words, and preserved by the power of the Spirit and the diligence of the Church through Scripture, a philosophical construct of the author's own making is raised up before the people for their worship. Why does God not do these things? "It is not fitting, it is not proper..." To these assertions, Scripture answers boldly:

"Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker, those who are nothing but potsherds among the potsherds on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, 'What are you making?' Does your work say, 'The potter has no hands'?" (Isaiah 45:9)

Man is the image and likeness of God. (Genesis 1:27) When God appears to act like man in Scripture, we do not see that God has lowered Himself, but rather to what heights man has been exulted by God. We are the ones who have appropriated these characteristics from above, not He from below.

Do Humans Have Free Will?

This is part two in my discussion with Dmitri regarding purported contradictions in the Bible. Part One was published last week.

Clearly, from my response to the last question, you know what my answer to this is going to be. Yes, most certainly, and this is the very point of human life. Without free will, we cannot love the Creator. This question is tricky because it is one on which Christians are divided. Some Calvinists deny free will, and hold that only those God specifically chooses to save can be saved, while everyone else is, by God's command, damned, and their own will has nothing to do with this. Others (such as the Catholic Church and myself) see this viewpoint as heresy. Given that this issue has proponents within the Christian Church, it is understandably a bit murky. Let's see, however, if we can part the waters.

Co se děje můj nigga?

Coming a little late to this Rachel Dolezal affair, but I just wanted to point out that, according to genetic science, there is a 1 in 250 chance she's actually telling the truth. Additionally, given the stated facts, I'd like to propose a deal: you guys can have my test scores, and I'll take your affirmative action, scholarships, and ability to summon the DoJ at your slightest whim. I think we both win!

Does God Ever Lie?

The following comes from a series of emails between Dmitri and I regarding this poster and the claims it makes about supposed contradictions in the Bible. In the interest of brevity (that's how you spell laziness, right?) I had Mr. Dragonofski pick his top three choices, to which I would give my best response. He went with.

Does God ever lie? num 23:19, 1sam 15:29, 7:28, titus 1:2, heb 6:18 ≠ 1ki 22:23, 2chron 18:22, jer 4:10, 20:7, ezk 14:9, 2thes 2:11
Do humans have free will? deut 30:19, jos 24:15 ≠ acts 13:48, rom 8:29-30, 9:11-22, eph 1:4-5, 2thes 2:11-12, 2tim 1:9, jude 4
Do Christians need to obey Old Testament laws? gen 17:19, exo 12:14, 17, 24, lev 23:14, 21, 31, deut 4:8-9, 7:9, 11:1, 11:26-28, 1chron 16:15, ps 119:151-2, 119:160, mal 4:4, mat 5:18-19, lk 16:17 ≠ lk 16:16, rom 6:14, 7:4, 6, 10:4, 2cor 3:14, gal 3:13, 3:24-25, 5:18, eph 2:15, col 2:14

I responded to the first as follows. 

God doesn't lie, nor does the Bible say otherwise. The verses referenced to attempt to say otherwise fall into three categories: actions of other beings with God's consent, accusations made of God by others, and the inevitable requirement of free will. None of these things make God a liar.

A Conservative Gameplan

Phase One: The Bat-Signal

One of the major weaknesses of non-leftists in America is the isolation imposed by leftist control of the country's institutions. Because of their willingness to institute witchhunts on the flimsiest of pretexts, people of the various conservative, libertarian, and classical liberal persuasions tend to lay low in the public arena, satiating themselves with talk on the internet rather than action for change. Any successful action against the left is going to need to overcome this anomie, and build social structures that reinforce non-leftist thought and community in order to build the will for further action.

That is why our first step must be a small one. Our goal in Phase One should be merely to create the foundation of our network, to gather like-minded people together in the real world, not just in alt-right blogs and forums. While the internet is invaluable for propagating ideas, it cannot take the place of physical community. Attempting to use it for this purpose just leads to dissatisfaction.

Phase One would be designed to break us out of this electric cage in the simplest and easiest way possible. In order to lay the groundwork for later phases, it would be targeted to the largest potential swath of effectual allies. Leadership and zealotry can be developed naturally out of these raw recruits later, what matters now is simply harnessing our manpower in some tangible way. 

To start, we pick an as-yet not socially fatal conservative issue. A good choice would be the defense of traditional marriage. We then pick a given day of the week, each week, and wear some visible, yet simple item to support the cause. Black armbands, anyone? We publicize it as best we can, and then we wait.

This tactic doesn't require any major effort nor expenditure. Like the left's equal sign Facebook profile pictures, it would be a mere social signifier that would provide a sense of wellbeing and changing the world at little personal cost. Will it actually change anything in and of itself? Certainly not! However, the important thing will be that we don't stop there.