All posts by Terry Hull

Even Evolution Requires Intelligent Design

On the subject of Intelligent Design, Jim Phillips writes by email:

I don’t understand the issue about Intelligent Design. I am no fundamentalist, but from what I read, 12 billion years (since the big bang) is simply insufficient time to explain evolution on the basis of random selection. All that means is that the selection is not random, that some power, God, force or inclination makes the selection on some basis other than random chance. Besides (I think) that being acceptable generally to a strict fundamentalist (given some variation in time frames), it is also scientifically true. So I don’t quite get the controversy. I suppose it is always easier to vilify than to love.

Missing Link Found

Received this email from John Carlson on the topic of Intelligent Design. Thanks, John, for your thoughts:

Isn’t it ironic that one of the best arguments against Intelligent Design — at least as far as the concept might be applied to the structure and workings of the individual human brain — is the fact that some otherwise “intelligent” people say that Intelligent Design doesn’t exist? On second thought, perhaps this is more paradoxical than ironic. Maybe it’s just dumb.

It seems to me that even rudimentary observations of reality, combined with a measure of common sense, indicate that some form of Intelligent Design must be operating behind the scenes to result in the centro-complexity of the world in which we exist. It is a created complexity that flies in the face of laws of entropy that seem to apply to the universe in general.

Darwinian evolutionary theory, itself, is riddled with paradoxes and holes so big that the Missing Link could drive a truck through them. You know, the truck that sprang forth from a random explosion at a junkyard caused by lightning hitting an old 55-gallon barrel of amino acids, worn-out alternators and old spark plugs.

BTW: I think I saw the Missing Link driving that truck in traffic the other day. It was talking on a cell phone and had the bass-booster cranked up.

Pat Robertson: Leave God’s Judgment in God’s Hands

Pat Robertson is back in the news with another mean-spirited, cold-hearted pronouncement. This time the “700 Club” host declares that Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has had a stroke because God hates him for pulling Israel out of the Gaza Strip.

Two days ago, Sharon, 77, suffered a massive stroke. Doctors have performed two brain surgeries, but Sharon remains in critical condition. Yesterday, as Sharon remained in a coma, Robertson declared on his live TV show, “The 700 Club,” which is viewed by up to 1 million people daily:

The prophet Joel makes it very clear that God has enmity against those who “divide my land.” God considers this land to be His. … For any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, “No, this is mine.”

Robertson also said he considered Sharon a friend. With friends like that — well, you know the rest.

Robertson is referring to an Old Testament prophecy, Joel 3:1-2, which says:

In those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will enter into judgment against them concerning my inheritance, my people Israel, for they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.

Most Christians and Jews agree that Bible prophecy is very hard to interpret. Perhaps Joel was talking about events in his own day, more than 2,500 years ago. Perhaps he was prophesying about the end times, as Robertson believes. But it does not take a scholar to see that the word “enmity,” meaning “deep-seated hatred,” a word which was so ready on Robertson’s lips, does not appear in the passage. It also is plain that God is pronouncing his judgment on nations, not on any one individual.

For Robertson to speak for God and to announce God’s enmity on an individual person, while that person lies in a coma in a hospital bed, while his wife and children and grandchildren anxiously offer up their prayers, is mean, callous, and arrogant. Palestine has been divided every which way for the last three millennia. Robertson is just plain wrong to single out Sharon for vilification. Pat Robertson ought to leave God’s judgment in God’s hands.

This thing of Robertson making a big news splash with shocking statements is getting to be a regular thing. It was just last November that Robertson spoke directly to the people of Dover, PA, again on his live TV program, saying:

I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God. You just rejected Him from your city. … Don’t ask for His help, because he might not be there.

Robertson delivered that stern judgment upon the people of Dover after they voted out their school board over an Intelligent Design debate.

Two months before that, Robertson called on the U.S. government to assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez:

He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he’s going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent. … If he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop.

What is especially troubling is that every time Robertson spouts one of these pontifications, the media can’t wait to serve it up to the whole world. Why? Because they know that such vicious remarks embarrass us Christians. By simply reporting Robertson’s actual words, all believers end up looking bad, and unbelievers are confirmed in their opinion that Christianity is not for them.

So what’s with Robertson? Some speculate that as he gets older (he will turn 76 in March), he’s just losing his grip. I have a different theory. At this stage of his life, Robertson has few reasons to hold back on what he really thinks. What we are witnessing is actually the emergence of the real Pat Robertson. The broadcaster once aspired to political office. In 1988 he was a presidential candidate. His father blazed the trail, serving in the U.S. House and Senate for 34 years. As long as Robertson speculated about another political campaign, he had to exercise some caution about alienating voters.

Now, however, it is all but impossible that Robertson’s name will ever appear on another ballot. That ship has sailed. And with it has vanished Robertson’s concern about what he says or who he turns off. He is remarkably successful (he owns and heads numerous corporations), abundantly rich, and very powerful (he speaks his mind each day to a million eager viewers). Fooled by his own success and power, Robertson now presumes to speak for God himself, declaring God’s judgment on world leaders, calling for the assassination of other leaders, and telling entire towns that God won’t answer their prayers.

There was a man once who knew the mind of God and actually did speak on God’s behalf. Brother Robertson, you aren’t him. And the difference is stark. He preached that God loves the whole world – the righteous and the unrighteous — and that we should do the same. Mr. Robertson, speaking to you as a brother, I exhort you: try on a little humility.

Is the American Church in Decline?

Is the Christian church of America in serious decline? Is the modern U.S. church a pitiful representation of the church described in the New Testament, the church Christ died to establish, the church we are called to be?

I believe it is. My colleague, Rod Heggy, believes it is. Our concern for the modern church is one reason Rod and I have launched this blog. We want to have a discussion about the modern American church with any fellow believers who will join us.

Why are we concerned?

• The local church has become a community theater rather than a training center. The congregation is an audience of strangers who come for the show, rather than a community of disciples who come to love and serve.

• The word “worship” refers to a weekend musical event rather than a way of life. Thousands of people crowd into auditoriums to enjoy a good program. No, there is not a thing wrong with music or drama or motivational speaking – but is it worship? Is it church?

• The Bible is a neglected book. One of the most familiar admissions of the modern Christian is, “I know nothing about the Bible. It is a foreign book to me.” How did that happen? What does that say about the effectiveness of the church?

• Churches have become personality cults that revolve around their celebrity pastor (often with a pretty co-host/wife at his side).

• Church leadership has passed from the hands of qualified laypeople, who by their spirituality and example have shown themselves “full of faith and the Spirit” and much needed to shepherd the flock, into the hands of salaried staff members, who by their expertise in business and marketing, know how to lead a church corporation. And this is not entirely the fault of power-hungry pastors. It is also because qualified Christian lay leaders have become so rare. But how did the church leadership shortage happen? What does that say about the effectiveness of the church?

• Conviction? Exhortation? Repentance? Commitment? Discipleship? Are these words in the vocabulary of the modern American Christian anymore? Yes, some preachers speak out against sin – but it is more common (and tickles the ear more) to denounce the sins of the culture rather than the sins of the congregation.

• Missions today no longer means supporting the work of courageous spiritual pioneers who have gone to and become part of a foreign culture. Missions means taking our own kids on yet another trip. We are quite comfortable in saying, “Our kids are the ones who get the most out of it,” without even hearing what that says about our commitment to world evangelism.

• The church is no longer God’s voice in the wilderness, crying out against the emptiness of materialism and earthly pleasure. To the contrary, the attitude of modern churches is: “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.” The contemporary church gives a wink and an approving nod to the materialistic lifestyle. Rather than teach through example about the simple life, many modern pastors live in greater luxury than most of their members. Indeed, many churches have wedded the gospel and materialism, espousing the repugnant falsehood that Christianity will make you rich.

Yes, of course, the above pronouncements are broad generalizations. There are surely many churches that are exceptions to this jeremiad. But those churches are increasingly hard to find. Many churches, especially the mega-churches, match the above descriptions. Many of the remaining churches are doing everything within their power to follow in their steps.

As a result, church has become an irrelevant, empty exercise. When church is just another form of entertainment, in a culture that inundates us with entertainment from all sides, what’s the point?

Is all of this nothing more than the rant of a man now past 50 who is just taking up the whine of all older generations, pining for “the good old days.” Maybe so. It was less than a generation ago that I was a teenage member of a vibrant church. I remember — from those good old days as well as from more recent church memories — such things as well-attended Sunday School classes, dynamic home Bible studies, prayer meetings, revivals, evangelism programs, and an emphasis on foreign missions.

Church was not just a stop we squeezed into our busy schedules two or three times a month, but a central part of our everyday lives. Back in those days, some people even worried that we spent too much time in church activities. Today we have certainly cured that problem. But can we survive the cure?

I have much more to say on this topic. I couldn’t say it all in one essay, or one hundred. I am sure Rod also has much to share on this subject. We have both devoted our entire lives to the church. And we continue to be active in the church today. It is from a lifetime of church involvement that we now express our disappointment.

What do you think? If you are a believer, this discussion is as much yours as it is ours. Are you frustrated, too? Or would you like to tell me to shape up and get a better attitude? Whatever you think, I really would like to know.

It is true that I am a little older now, but I suspect that I still have a few decades left to make a difference for the Kingdom. As long as I remain, I will continue to love the church and care about it. However, these days, my love for the church feels a lot like heartache.

Got Religion?

Came across a good blog this morning: Get Religion. Get Religion is written by former Christianity Today editor Douglas LeBlanc and well-known Scripps-Howard religion columnist Terry Mattingly. Lead story today is on the box office beat: “The lion wrestles the big ape.”

Rod: You may be interested in Get Religion’s take on the Indiana prayer controversy you wrote about last week. Daniel Pulliam, who wrote the post, says:

I am dying to know what [U.S. District] Judge Hamilton thinks he can do to [Indiana Speaker of the House Brian] Bosma or any other member of the Indiana House who use Jesus’s name in a prayer.

Good question!

Get Religion also has an interesting recent piece on whether a Mormon (Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a GOP hopeful) can be elected president.

I’m going to add Get Religion to my daily blog rounds and to our blogroll.