Transcendent Peace Overwhelms Anxiety

(Green Lake Conference Center, Wisconsin)

(I preached, yesterday morning at Redeemer, on the fruit of the Spirit that is peace. Here's the sermon link - "Transcendent Peace Overwhelms Anxiety.")

Jesus says, in John 14:27, "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid." How shall we understand this?

When the disciples heard Jesus talk about the kind of peace "the world gives," they would have thought of the Pax Romana, the "Roman Peace." The world, so far as they knew it, was at peace. But this peace was far from satisfying, since it was acquired through war, and maintained by power and control. In addition, Israel and other nations were occupied by foreign armies and governors. 

From a Roman standpoint this looked good. But this is peace maintained by military might. 

It reminds me of when I was teaching in Singapore, arguably the most peaceful Asian country there is. I was told it was safe to walk the streets of Singapore at any time, day or night. The crime rate was extremely low. But, as one Singaporean businessman told me one day, "We fear the police." In worldly peace there is always fear. 

Jesus claims to give peace that is different from this. Jesus' peace must be understood as an overflow of the Trinitarian union of Father, Son, and Spirit. This is a union of love, a togetherness of life and purpose, a sharing in the divine essence. This is real peace, from the perspective of the Godhead. This is the peace Jesus leaves with us. 

Jesus does not say he will strengthen the kind of worldly peace we already have. He is not interested in taking the best political, military-maintained peace-solutions, and tweaking them to perfection. Rather he says, "Here, take my peace. I'm leaving it with you."

"To leave" has the sense of "to bequeath," as when property is transferred to an heir through a will. New Testament scholar Andreas Kostenberger says “Jesus’ parting benediction is more than a “cheap wish.” Jesus’ word is efficacious.” (John, 443) 

Jesus' word effects peace, in us.

This makes sense as we understand that, in John ch.s 14-17, we are invited to nothing less than participation in the Trinitarian union, which I refer to as the Big Dance. In the Big Dance there are beautiful relational manifestations, one of which is peace. 

This is not a theory. It's not a solution to some problem. And, importantly, it is not dependent on circumstances. It is the transtemporal essence of God given, on earth, as it is in heaven.

This is the peace promised to us as we abide in Christ. It is what the Spirit produces, in us, as we live attached to God. 

Serving Up Peace in Heaven's Kitchen

(Our front porch)

If you are a follower of Jesus, then you are a peacemaker.

Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God." (Matthew 5:9)

A peacemaker is more than a peacelover. As an analogy, consider food. You are a foodlover. Who isn't? Foodmakers, however, are different. Chefs are fewer yet.

Most love peace. But, as a follower of Jesus, you are a chef who serves up peace in the kitchen called the Kingdom of Heaven.

Why is a peacemaker referred to as a child of God? Because the apple does not fall far from the tree. Like Father God, like child of God.

Some tear down. You build up.

Some destroy. You create.

Some are passive. You are active.

Some weaken. You strengthen.

Some divide. You unite.

Some enslave. You redeem.

Any fool can be a troublemaker. A peacemaker, on the other hand, is an active creator who strengthens relationships. You do this with God. You do this in your family. Such beautiful people seem, to me at least, few and far between.

The peace you have with God and in your family overflows onto your other relationships.

In this, you are like your heavenly Father.

David Chalmers's Zombie Argument Against Physicalism

As we approach Halloween, we're seeing more and more zombies. So it's time to re-post David Chalmers's philosophically famous "zombie argument" against physicalism. In philosophy, few worldviews are more frightening than physicalism.

***

One of my academic interests is "the hard problem of consciousness." The urge to understand this poked me again as I read "I Me Mind: The Unending Quest to Explain Consciousness," a book review by Michael Robbins. Robbins appears to have read much of the relevant literature. He concludes, probably rightly, that no one has a clue how to solve this problem.

One of the major discussants is neuro-philosopher David Chalmers. Chalmers is a "property dualist," which reasons that consciousness is an emergent property of the physical brain. The upshot of this, for Chalmers, is that physicalism is false, because a non-physical property, viz. consciousness, exists. (Chalmers is not a "substance dualist," like philosopher J. P. Moreland is. See here.)

I used to present David Chalmers's "zombie argument" against physicalism in my logic classes. I thought the word "zombie" would interest my students. It's a hard argument to understand. And hard to teach. Here it is. 

The “Zombie Argument” Against Physicalism

THE ARGUMENT:

1. If *physicalism is true, then it is logically impossible for p-zombies to exist. ("P-zombie" = "philosophical zombie. Physicalism entails the logical [or metaphysical] impossibility of zombies. See here Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "Zombies," part 2 - "Zombies and Physicalism.")

2. It is logically possible for p-zombies to exist.

3. Therefore, physicalism is false.

*Physicalism - physical facts determine all other facts. This means that, on physicalism, there are no non-physical facts.

*P-zombie - i.e., "philosophical zombie" - a hypothetical being that is indistinguishable from a normal human being except that it lacks conscious experience, qualia, sentience, or sapience.

If physicalism is true, then there cannot be a world that is a physical duplicate of ours (that is, where everything is physically like in our world), which is not a duplicate simpliciter of our world (that is, which does not contain anything more or less than what our world contains). 

But zombies are conceivable: creatures that are physically exactly like us, but which creatures lack conscious experiences.

Therefore, physicalism is false. 

If it is logically possible for zombies to exist, then consciousness cannot be explained reductively, and non-physical reality exists.

Or... try this.

1. If physicalism is true, then physical facts determine all facts.
2. If physicalism is true, then anything that is physically identical to me will be in all ways identical to me.
3. I can conceive of a zombie; viz., a being that is physically identical to me.
4. But a zombie is not in all ways identical to me – it lacks first-person subjective consciousness.
5. Therefore physicalism must be false.

1. A philosophical zombie or p-zombie is a hypothetical being that is indistinguishable from a normal human being except that it lacks conscious experience, qualia, sentience, or sapience. When a zombie is poked with a sharp object, for example, it does not feel any pain. It behaves exactly as if it does feel pain (it may say "ouch" and recoil from the stimulus), but it does not actually have the experience of pain as a person normally does. (See “Philosophical Zombie,” in wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie)

2. According to physicalism, physical facts determine all other facts. This means, on physicalism, that there are no non-physical facts. Therefore, since all the facts about a p-zombie are fixed by the physical facts, and these facts are the same for the p-zombie and for the normal conscious human from which it cannot be physically distinguished, physicalism must hold that p-zombies are not possible. Therefore, zombie arguments support lines of reasoning that aim to show that zombies are possible. Another way to put this, from SEP: "If a zombie world is possible, consciousness does not in that sense logically supervene on the physical facts, and physicalism is false. If that view is correct, therefore, to prove that a zombie world is possible would be to disprove physicalism."

3. NOTE: The zombie argument against physicalism is, therefore, a version of a general modal argument against physicalism, such as that of Saul Kripke's in "Naming and Necessity" (1972).The notion of a p-zombie, as used to argue against physicalism, was notably advanced in the 1970s by Thomas Nagel (1970; 1974) and Robert Kirk (1974).

4. See the “zombie argument against physicalism” developed in detail by David Chalmers in The Conscious Mind (1996). According to Chalmers, one can coherently conceive of an entire zombie world: a world physically indiscernible from our world, but entirely lacking conscious experience. In such a world, the counterpart of every being that is conscious in our world would be a p-zombie.

The claim of Chalmers and others is a strictly logical claim. Which means: Since such a world is logically conceivable, Chalmers claims, it is possible; and if such a world is possible, then physicalism is false. (Note: “square circle,” or “married bachelor,” are examples of concepts that are logically inconceivable; there is no logically possible world in which such things could exist.) Chalmers is arguing only for logical possibility, and he maintains that this is all that his argument requires. He states: "Zombies are probably not naturally possible: they probably cannot exist in our world, with its laws of nature." It’s easy to imagine a “zombie.” A “zombie” is a creature physically identical to a human, functioning in all the right ways, having conversations, playing chess, but simply lacking all conscious experience.

So if a person can be physically identical to us yet without consciousness, then it would seem that consciousness is not a physical thing. “There is an explanatory gap here that is really something of an abyss,” says Chalmers.

Declarations on Peace

 

                                                  (Anderson Gardens, Rockford, Illinois)

This Sunday morning at Redeemer I am preaching on the fruit of the Spirit that is peace.

In anticipation of this, here are Declarations on Peace. Carry them with you.

Much more to come!

DECLARATIONS on PEACE

THE SCRIPTURE

“Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you...” (John 14:27).

“You will keep in perfect peace all who trust in you” (Isaiah 26:3).

THE DECLARATIONS

·                     I speak to any worry, stress, or anxiety, and I say you cannot stay. Peace reigns in this temple.

·                     Because I trust in God, I am kept in perfect peace.

·                     I am known as a peace carrier at home, in the work place, and in all areas of my life.

·                     I have a unique ability to remain peaceful, even as responsibilities increase.

·                     I do not have to strive for peace, as God has already given it to me.

·                     I bring peace to extremely intense situations.

·                     Those who experience anxiety claim it leaves when they come in contact with me.

·                     My home is filled with a tangible peace. When I walk in, I immediately feel at ease and calm.

·                     My heart and mind are guarded and protected by God’s peace.

·                     My family is blessed with peace.

·                      

·                      

·                     From Steve Backlund

Why Believe the Bible Is a Book From God?

 

                                                                               (Detroit)

Everyone has an authoritative text.

Alisa Childers' new book came out today. I picked it up for Kindle, and am now reading. I thought her first book, Another Gospel?, was excellent. So, I am looking forward to this one.

I like how she writes about the Bible as a from-God book.

"My first book, Another Gospel?, explains the evidence I discovered for staking my life on Scripture after my own faith was severely shaken. The short version is this: Scripture has stood the test of thousands of years, been endorsed by millions who have been transformed by its truth, and given countless believers a solid foundation for knowing God and living out their faith. We have good evidence from history, archaeology, and biblical scholarship to trust that we have an accurate copy and that what it records is true. Jesus told us in Matthew 24:35 that his words will never pass away. We know from Hebrews 13:8 that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He doesn’t change, and his words will remain forever. To put it another way, I believe the Bible is the Word of God because that was Jesus’ view. I am a Jesus follower, and my beliefs reflect what he taught."

(Childers, Live Your Truth and Other Lies: Exposing Popular Deceptions That Make Us Anxious, Exhausted, and Self-Obsessed, pp. 6-7). T

How to Pray for Other People's Change

                                                          (Monroe sunset - 8/15/20)

I cannot change people. But, I can pray that people would change. 

I can pray, e.g., that an abusive spouse would change. I can pray that God would break them in the right place, thereby giving them an invitation to change. But only God can change them.

It is a major step forward in the spiritual life to realize that God is the agent of change, not me. 

This helps me focus on the changes I need. 

The spiritual transformation that happens in my heart is not just for me. When God changes me, he can use me to influence people. I know this, because what I have seen happen in several people has influenced me to be better, and live better, and speak better. It is likely that one of you is among those who have helped me, as I have seen the evidence of what God has done in you.

I have seen people change. Their transformations have influenced me for the good. 

Influence is more powerful than control. Control captures people from the neck up. (Thank you J.H.) Influence captures their heart.

Trying to control, or guilt-manipulate others, de-influences and distances them. More and more, I see that I can let that go. 

At this point I am free to change. The transformation of my heart is in inverse proportion to my controlling demands that others change.

Sometimes God allows me to see how some other person, X, desperately needs to change. God gives me eyes to see this, so I can pray for them, not judge or critique them (which any fool can do). 

Here is a way to pray for X, and their need to change.

• First, pray for more self-transformation into greater Christlikeness. Pray, "God, change my heart!" 

• Second, trust that God can use what is happening in you to influence X. Pray for God to guide you in ways to relate to X (what to do, what to say).

• Third, since all change requires brokenness, pray for X to be broken in the right place. Pray, "God, change their heart!"

• Finally, pray for a fresh baptism of love towards X. For a new anointing of the love of God, manifested in and through you, towards X. 

Declarations of Joy!

 

(At Redeemer, we are carrying these DECLARATIONS OF JOY with us this week, )

DECLARATIONS OF JOY (from Steve Backlund)

THE SCRIPTURE

“The joy of the Lord is your strength” (Nehemiah 8:10).

“A merry heart does good, like medicine” (Proverbs 17:22).

“In Your presence is fullness of joy” (Psalm 16:11).

THE DECLARATIONS  (Repeat these, saying them out loud, many times today.)

• I am an outrageously joyful person.

• My joy level is increasing daily, and I have been created to experience fullness of joy.

• Even in the midst of uncertainty, I live from a place of unshakeable joy.

• My joy levels do not depend on circumstances or how I feel.

• I love to laugh out loud, and I purpose to do so frequently.

• I experience great joy in my life even before I see the breakthroughs I am believing for.

• I naturally know when to “weep with those who weep” and “rejoice with those who rejoice.”

• I am a carrier of infectious joy, and I release joy to others.

• My joy & laughter are powerful weapons of spiritual warfare and help create breakthrough in my own life and the lives of those around me.

• I reject foreboding and embrace hope and joy.

• I am building a stronghold of joy in my life.

 

The Biblical View of Marriage Is Between a Man and a Woman

(I'm re-posting this for my Deconstructing class.)

I gave this sermon at Redeemer on Feb. 28.

Fast forward to 1:02.

My Top Ten Books for 2022

 

                                                   (My home office, and Zoom room.)

Here are ten books I read in 2022, that I found excellent. In alphabetical order.

Charles Camosy, Losing Our Dignity: How Secularized Medicine Is Undermining Fundamental Human Equality. This was a Christmas present from my son Dan. Eye-opening, for me. 

Sabine Hossenfelder, Existential Physics: A Scientist's Guide to Life's Biggest Questions. Does the past still exist? Do particles think? Was the universe made for us? Has physics ruled out free will? I may not agree with all her outcomes, but I love thinking about life's Big Questions. (Such as in one of my all-time favorites, by Jim Holt, Why Does the World Exist? An Existential Detective Story.)

Greg Johnson, Still Time to Care: What We Can Learn from the Church's Failed Attempt to Cure Homosexuality. When I read the reviews by Tim Keller, Becket Cook, Mark Yarhouse, David Bennett, and Wesley Hill, I knew I needed to read Johnson's book.

Craig Keener, Miracles Today: The Supernatural Work of God In the Modern World. Meticulous inspiration from one of the world's greatest New Testament scholars. 

Louise Mabile, Paul Copan, et. al., The Morality Wars: The Ongoing Debate Over the Origin of Human Goodness. I took this book on vacation with me this summer. One of the books to read on metaethics.

J. P. Moreland, A Simple Guide to Experience Miracles: Instruction and Inspiration for Living Supernaturally in Christ. Inspiring, encouraging, moving, clarifying.

Harold Netland, Religious Experience and the Knowledge of God: The Evidential Force of Divine Encounters. An excellent book for me, adding to my thoughts on "The Case for Religious Experience" in my book Leading the Presence-Driven Church. 

Roger Olson, Against Liberal Theology: Putting the Brakes on Progressive Christianity. Olson persuasively, and carefully, shows how liberal theology is best classified as another religion, and how progressive Christianity's end-game is liberal theology.

Carl Trueman, Strange New World: How Thinkers and Activists Redefined Identity and Sparked the Sexual Revolution. An excellent follow-up to Trueman's majestic The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution. 

Ben Witherington, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Galatians. At Redeemer we've been preaching through the heavyweight book of Galatians. Witherington is a great scholar, and an excellent writer.

Bonus favorite - I've been loving listening to the Latin jazz music of Juan Carlos Quintero. 

Linda and I have two grandchildren. I am re-reading children's books. To include my favorite...  

Teaching Spiritual Formation in 2023 at...

 

Payne Theological Seminary

Feb. 28 - March 3

A four-day intensive class

On campus

For information and registration...

Maryjo Lewis

Registrar

1230 Wilberforce Clifton Road

PO Box 474

Wilberforce, OH  45384

T:  937.971.2865 

F:  937.250.7957

www.payneseminary.edu

Renewal School of Ministry

Six 1 1/2 hour Zoom sessions, on Monday evenings

Begins Monday January 16, 2023

Classes are 8-9:30 PM EST

1/16; 1/23; 1/30; 2/6; 2/13; 2/20

Cost: $10 covers all six sessions

For information and registration go here: https://hsrm.org/rsom. 

Value Subjectivism

 

                                      (Redeemer sanctuary, on a Thursday morning in October)

Here, according to C.S. Lewis, is what value subjectivism is about.

"We appear to be saying something very important about something: and actually we are only saying something about our own feelings."

He writes that in The Abolition of Man. 

Philosopher Francis Beckwith writes:

"Value subjectivism is a universal acid that cannot be constrained to judgments about the goodness or beauty of the natural world. If it is true, the theory must extend to human nature as well. We therefore, cannot say what is intrinsically good for human beings, since goodness, like beauty, is solely in the eye of the beholder. This means that there is no natural moral law that may guide society in the development of its laws and customs. Truth yields to power and to the value subjectivity of those who wield it. That leaves politics and law in the hands of unaccountable elites who saddle humanity with their vision of “goodness.” Under this scenario, generations of human beings remain in bondage to the capricious whims of the powerful elites. This, Lewis maintains, is the abolition of man." (Here.)

I'm re-reading Abolition.

The definitive book on Abolition is by Michael Ward, After Humanity: A Guide to C. S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man.

Taming My Big Mouth

 

 Back in the era of black and white TV, one of my favorite shows was "The Honeymooners." The show was about the ups and downs of Ralph and Alice Cramden. Ralph was a bus driver, Alice, a homemaker. Ralph had a big heart, but trouble with his mouth. Alice possessed practical wisdom, and exhibited grace. 

Hardly an episode went by without Ralph saying something he shouldn't have. When he realized this, he opened his mouth wide, and said, "Me and my biiiiig mouth!"

It looked like this.

I have said the same, about myself. I've also had moments where I wanted to say something harmful, but didn't. When this happens I thank God for helping me keep my big mouth shut.

James 3:5-6 says,

It only takes a spark, remember, to set off a forest fire. A careless or wrongly placed word out of your mouth can do that. By our speech we can ruin the world, turn harmony to chaos, throw mud on a reputation, send the whole world up in smoke and go up in smoke with it, smoke right from the pit of hell. (The Message)

Richard Foster writes,

"Since sins of speech are so prevalent in human interaction, James offers wisdom to church leaders and members on how these can be avoided in their fellowship. Those who teach must weigh their words with care. But all Christians must be careful with the use of the tongue. A Christian’s speech should bless, not berate or abuse. The tongue betrays the world that is in one’s heart; it is a microcosm of the inner self." 

Here's my prayer, for myself.

God, help me to know when to speak and when to keep silent.

Amen.

Why Pray if God Already Knows What We Will Ask For?

 

                                                             (Lake Erie, near our house.)

Why pray if God already knows what we will ask for? I've given an answer to this HERE.

J. P. Moreland presents what, to me, looks like the argument I gave. (In his book A Simple Guide to Experience Miracles.)

Consider these two statements.

A: It must be the case that if God foreknows that X will happen, then X will happen.

B: If God foreknows that X will happen, then X must happen.

While the two statements seem to be saying the same thing, they are not. Statement A is true. Statement B is false. Statement A does not imply that God determines the future.

So, this statement is false: If God already knows what will happen in the future, then it has to happen, whether or not we pray for it.

For more, see Moreland's book, pp. 51 ff.

Abortion - Links to My Posts

(Bolles Harbor, Michigan)

(I'm reposting this to keep it in play.)

Someone (again) asked me about abortion. Here are some things I have written on this issue.

Briefly, the dialogue went like this.

Q: John, why are you against abortion?

A: Because I am against killing innocent, defenseless human beings.

More below!

Why I Am Against Abortion

Against Abortion: A Logical Argument

Against Abortion: More from Francis Beckwith

"Viability" Is Irrelevant to Personhood (and Abortion)

Statement on the New York State Abortion Law of 2019

Abortion and the "Whatever" In the Womb

Elective Abortion has Nothing to Do with Health Care

Christopher Hitchens Against Abortion

The "Handmaid's Tale" Argument for Abortion

A Scientific Argument Against Abortion

Eminem, Ed Sheeran, and the Pain of Abortion