Stark: irony in the suppression of science record

Obviously religious organisations have often demonstrated this principle.  But insofar as the suppression of science is concerned, the bloodiest incidents have been recent and have had nothing to do with religion.  It was the Nazi party, not the German Evangelical Church, that tried to eradicate "Jewish" physics, and it was the Communist Party, not the Russian Orthodox Church, that destroyed "bourgeois" genetics and left many other fields of Soviet science in disarray.  No one has been prompted by these examples to propose an inherent incompatibility between politics and science.  By the same token, that there have been conflicts between churches and science does not justify belief in an incompatibility between religion and science.  It is, rather, that autocrats do not tolerate disagreement.

For the Glory of God, p128

Welch: enough for today and then enough for tomorrow

Only enough for today.  The tests follow a particular pattern:  God will give us what we need for today and today alone.  No mystery here, it is all spelled out.

(EX.16:16-19)

“Take as much as you want, but don’t keep a crumb for tomorrow.”...In various forms, this will become God’s plan for human life...The plan of course is genius.  Dump a year’s supply of manna into cold storage and, guaranteed, you will forget about God until the supply disappears (DT.8:10-14).  Such prosperity would be a curse.  God’s strategy is to give us enough for today and then, when tomorrow comes, to give us enough for that day too.

Do you see this is exactly what we need?  Fears and worries live in the future, trying to assure a good outcome in a potentially hard situation.  The last thing they want to do is trust anyone, God included.  To thwart this tendency toward independence, God only gives us what we need when we need it.  The emerging idea is that He wants us to trust him  in the future rather than our self-protective plans. 

Running Scared, p76-77

Wright: sermon on mount/passion narrative

Think of the kingdom-agenda of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), which itself points ahead to the cross:  Jesus himself loves his enemies, goes where the Roman soldiers force him to go, and turns the other cheek before being set like a city on a hill, like a light on a pole.

How God Became King, p232

Welch: The One Who Tests

God is the One Who Tests, and He will test you.  Don’t think of final exams and test anxiety.  Think of this test as a way to expose traitors during wartime.  We are potential traitors and don’t even know it.  God tests us because we are so oblivious to the mixed allegiances in our hearts.  The purpose of the test is to help us see our hearts and if they are found traitorous, we can turn back to God.  God is not playing mind games with us, He is forging a relationship. 

Running Scared, p74

Quick review: Voyage to venus (Perelandra)

...by CS Lewis

I had forgotten just how theological this novel is.  Out of the Silent Planet is a SF adventure with a good deal of theological underpinning - but to some extent I could see Hollywood filming it with much of the theology removed.  I think that would be impossible with this book.  It is a deeply theological adventure.  Which makes it less of a page-turner perhaps than its predecessor, but the ideas it explores and the conclusions formed, touch at a deep level.

I remember it as the book that (several decades ago) helped me understand the Fall, but there's a whole lot more going on than that.  Here are explorations of angels, satan, mission, redemption, the nature of God...

There is a subtle similarity/difference between this and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe: in that, later, story CSL imagines what would happen if salvation had to be wrought in a world which is peopled by and run along the lines of a mythological creation.  In Perelandra the question is more: what happens if God continues to create life in the universe post-Earth-Fall, and post-incarnation?

All very interesting....

And what is happening to Ransom?  That Hideous Strength  next year perhaps, and hopefully for the first time in its unabridged version.

Welch: God's word v our feelings

 We tend to judge to judge God’s words by our own feelings and sensory observations...When our feelings conflict with God’s communication, we must side with God’s interpretation.  Any other decision puts us above God, which we already know isn’t true because fear reminds us of our own puniness.  We certainly are not gods! 

Running Scared, p68,69