Ploion - Christian book reviews and sermon ideas

The Lost Symbol review (a Christian perspective)

2009-12-29T10:30:00.000-08:00

This review of Dan Brown's "The Lost Symbol" contains no spoilers.

It does not happen often that an author has to meet expectations of the reading public on such a grand scale as did Dan Brown, who after achieving commercial success with his novel The Da Vinci Code spent several years researching and writing before finally submitting another manuscript to the publisher.

One thing must be admitted. Dan Brown has definitely matured and came to understand his position of authority in matters of religion (it may sound unbelievable, but many people found Brown's novel insightful and thought-provoking). It is my opinion that the author of The Lost Symbol deals with his subject matter in a much more responsible way. He clearly avoided openly attacking any denomination. Instead, Dan Brown chose the unoriginal route of proclaiming the basic unity of all religions. Confusing New Age theology of eternal feminine was replaced with a version of Deism which, especially given the locale of The Lost Symbol (Washington, D.C.), has distinct taste of American ceremonial Deism -- a much more palatable choice for most readers. It is not surprising that Dan Brown's deity is unapproachable and distant, a merely aesthetic touch to the picture of the world according to Robert Langdon.This really, is the gist of what a Christian reader should know before picking up this novel. The book is just as badly written as the rest of Brown's prose. The movie should be somewhat amusing, though. I'd wait for that.

Sermon Idea: Anthropic Principle in Human Psyche

2009-09-05T18:32:00.000-07:00

Perhaps the terminology I have chosen is not the most likely to be heard from any pulpit, but I sure hope that some educated pastor out there will find words suitable for his congregation to express what I think is no less important that observations of order and precision with which this Universe is sculpted.

First of all, I have to give credit where it's due. The gist of what follows was inspired by a few pages in a rather incongruous book called "The Secret History of the World: As Laid Down by the Secret Societies". The book itself is not very useful, and at times simply shockingly ridiculous, but, like I said, credit where credit is due...

Ok, it is a rather well known fact that many properties of the Universe are so finely tuned that even a slightest change would make the existence of humankind impossible. You probably heard of physicists who (quite correctly) assume that if some basic constants that we see in place were different in the slightest degree the Universe would either never be able to sustain its shape or quite likely never would have existed. One such example is the force of gravity. It is exactly as strong as it should be in order for planet Earth to remain comfortably where it belongs: not too far from the Sun and not too close to it. On a greater level gravity also seems to be fine tuned to keep the entire Universe in fairly good balance.

Now, consider this. Our internal makeup is equally dependent on the balance of many forces. A gentle equilibrium is required in order for us to live our lives. Italo Calvino says:"Memory has to be strong enough to enable us to act without forgetting what we wanted to do, to learn without ceasing to be the same person, but it also has to be weak enough to allow us to keep moving into the future." You can apply the same principle to other human capacities. For instance, being able to concentrate on specific tasks is a wonderful thing. However, imagine a person who cannot be pulled away from something not matter what happens. Conversely, imagine someone who is distracted by the least significant things, noises and mental events, thus unable to concentrate on the same idea for more than a second. Both conditions present serious disorders. And yet, the majority of us happily exist within a balanced internal universe of our souls. This truly is the freedom of spirit, if you will. Unlike animals who can safely exist by following instincts only, humans possess the capacity to freely choose between various scenarios of life minute by minute, day by day, remaining the same and yet ever evolving.

What I am proposing here is that the anthropic principle that is sometimes seen as a major component in the Universe's master plan is also at work in the anthropos proper! How could it be otherwise?

Screwtape letters read by John Cleese (audio book)

2009-05-11T18:35:00.000-07:00

If you asked someone to come up with a perfect narrator for C. S. Lewis' "The Screwtape Letters" many names would surface, some would probably sound like a rather good choice, by all would be trumped as soon as you retorted: "Now, how about John Cleese?" Sure enough, in the 1970s, at the very peak of Monty Python's glory, the great comedian recorded a full-length audio version of "The Screwtape letters", including "Screwtape Proposes a Toast", as a bonus track. Recently released as a CD, this audiobook can very successfully serve as an introduction to C. S. Lewis, as well as a welcome surprise for a seasoned reader of the great British theologian.

See also:
John Eldredge. Epic - A review

If Chicago exists, so does God

2009-02-01T03:05:00.000-08:00

Writer John Hodgman, who owes most of his dubious notoriety to the appearances as "PC" in often misleading Mac commercials, is better known amongst intellectuals, such as myself, for his outrageous, albeit somewhat well supported, claim that the city of Chicago, Illinois does not exist. The so-called Windy City is purely a figment of imagination, as well as a product of Midwestern longing for identity and, ultimately, a comforting urban legend of a "a fantasy world ... of gangsters and Italian beef sandwiches and two—not just one—but two baseball teams competing with each other all the time, and streets paved with gold where lobsters walk, or whatever."

I must admit, that I am a bit partial to this Chicago myth (having visited this ephemerous town a few times). But the idea that something quite universally deemed to be true may have no factual claim to verity is well-known and dear to me. For years I have doubted the existence of the Pope. That's right. I am not at all that convinced that the Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Christ, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Servus Servorum Dei et cetera, et cetera is an actual human being. We may very well deal with a craftily devised representation of our collective need to have a spiritual leader of considerable importance. All public appearances of "the Pope" (a well-paid actor, no doubt), all his actions and proclamations are nothing but an orchestrated attempt to give flesh to certain fundamental values and institutions of the Western civilization. I am willing to debate anyone who claims to have proof of the Pope's existence.

Now, seriously speaking, these two instances demonstrate that some beliefs are better understood when seen through the eyes of a community. The consensus of believers is an extremely powerful epistemological force. I would even claim that certain beliefs cannot be fully maintained by a single individual other than while being a part of a community. Such beliefs also cannot be successfully challenged due to their overwhelming complexity and far-reaching implications, as interpreted and accepted by the community. Therefore, if Chicago exists, so does God.

John Eldredge. Epic - A review

2009-01-21T10:41:00.000-08:00

I won't have too many spoilers in this review, and it is pretty clear from the description (let alone the title!) that John Eldredge attempts to demonstrate how our lives form a part of God's great story, and this story itself is continuously replayed in all of the great works of art, movies and books. Understanding the dynamics of this ever unfolding plot, according to Eldredge, is absolutely crucial to anyone who desires to live a full life in God.

It has always been my feeling that all great books and poems essentially tell the same story. However, this story is not an epic. Instead it is a tragedy. The very purpose of epic literature, as far as I can tell, is to initiate a new member into a society. A classic epic, such as the Iliad or the Aeneid informs the reader of his race's great past, puts within his reach his ancestors' customs, beliefs and even their wisdom. What a classic epic story does not attempt to achieve is producing a visible renewal of the reader's heart, a complete regeneration of his inner self. In technical terms, the epic narrative is not meant to provide the reader with catharsis. That would be tragedy's job. I am afraid that having misidentified the broad genre of the Universe's plot, John Eldredge severely downgraded this great story. When placed on the same level with a vast array of modern books and feature movies Christianity probably gains appeal in the eyes of a casual movie-goer, but it loses any trace of uniqueness and meaning. Seriously, why not worship Gladiator or Frodo instead of Christ? Isn't all the same story anyway? As a result, Epic becomes an excellent example of post-modern Evangelism which is happy to present its narrative to the secular world, in hopes that the world will stick around for a while and maybe even share in it, but this is where everything ends. This version of the Christian faith will not even consider asserting itself as the one true religion.

John Elderedge Epic: The Story God Is Telling

Existence of God: Watchmaker argument

2009-01-14T12:15:00.000-08:00

Rick Warren tells the story about being invited to an academic conference where he felt as if a trap had been set up for him, because he was seated smack in between a couple of hard-core atheists. In the end, it turned out not so bad, and Rick ended up saying to these fellows that he envies their faith. He said, "When I am walking in the mountains and see a Rolex watch I simply cannot believe that it came about as a result of natural events, rather than having being designed."

The so called Watchmaker argument is used very often and it does serve some purpose - the complexity of creation is something to be considered when the idea of God the Creator is being questioned. Evolutionist understanding of the origin of life inevitably involves some form of random play, a coming together of resources and circumstances that creates a living organism, no matter how primitive. It must be understood, however, that a watch simply pales in comparison with the complexity of the most insignificant living beings. I, for one, am quite willing to believe that over a very long period of time particles of matter can every once in a while form a primitive time-keeping device. Why not? All it takes is some source of continuous energy and a visible way for this energy to cause some object to move at a constant rate. I am even willing to throw in a crude clock face or a scale. Of course, this watch would not last long and it would not be as sophisticated as any of the human made watches, not to mention its accuracy. But I absolutely must decline any invitation to believe that pure chance can cause the existence of a time-keeping device that would conform to the following criteria:

It must be able to self-diagnose its own structure, in as much as it relates to the purposes of time-keeping.
It must be able to receive information from the outside world, as far as it relates to the purposes of time-keeping.
It must be able to convert the data about itself and about relevant conditions in the outside world into some form of a record accessible by the next generation of time-keeping devices.
It must be able to either reproduce, split into two separate time-keeping devices or perish in such a way that its remains can be successfully used by the next chance-generated clock or watch. (Personally, I think that splitting the device into two or more parts is the easiest way to preserve information about the whole, without storing a separate DNA-like record. But is it really that easy? If you cut a clock in half how will you get both parts working even though there is probably enough information left over about the initial design?) The next generation device must resemble the original device, as far as its time-keeping functions are concerned. If we want natural selection to kick in at some point, the number of devices, as a rule, must not decline with each generation.

If someone is willing to see chance as a capable agent of events described above, be my guest. But the most difficult thing to explain, in my opinion, is why on earth in any of the next generations we would see the appearance of additional features, such as an alarm with a snooze button. I think that without allowing the possibility of design it is simply necessary to introduce chance at every each step.

Darwin's objection to Christianity

2008-12-27T10:19:00.000-08:00

Darwin once wrote,

I can hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my father, brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine.

It would seem that Darwin could on the very same grounds express his displeasure with an amusement park owner failing to forcefully drag onto the premises of his establishment every single person who (on numerous occasions!) had received free admission tickets and had chosen to through them away. By a Darwinian leap of logic, such an amusement park would be so inherently abominable that its mere existence should be deemed utterly undesirable by all (apparently, even by the folks who are ready to show up at the gate with their complimentary admission tickets).

Wide Angle: Rick Warren's Video Series with Chuck Colson (a review)

2008-12-23T12:08:00.000-08:00

This video series called Wide Angle features conversations between Chuck Colson and Rick Warren. The main focus of the presentation is worldview. Truly, what a delight! Both participants are well-prepared (as you would expect them to be). Even if you happen to be a seasoned Christian-minded thinker, the passion displayed by Colson and the wisdom shown by Warren will keep you fully engaged in their dialogue. They completely dismantle the so-called "contemporary culture" along with its values and presuppositions, while demonstrating quite convincingly that as time passes Christianity has more not less to say to the world of today.

The format of the series includes brief excepts from Warren's sermons and his conversations with Chuck Colson follow up on the points mentioned from the pulpit. For Colson, Christian worldview and its importance was one of the important topics for quite a long time. This subject is also covered in his book How shall we live?

If you watch this series with a group of interested friends there will be no end to discussions. In fact, you may even discover that you really want to read more on certain topics that you previously dwelled very little on!

Obama quotes Rick Warren's "Purpose driven life"

2008-12-18T18:42:00.000-08:00

Did anyone else notice that when defending his choice of Rick Warren as the person to make an invocation during the inaugural ceremony Obama actually quotes a line from Rick Warren's book "Purpose driven life"? Obama speaks about disagreeing without being disagreeable. Sure, this is not a phrase copyrighted by Rick Warren. However, it is a phrase he really likes to use in his sermons, video presentations and, of course, his book:

We can reestablish a relationship even when we are unable to resolve our differences. Christians often have legitimate, honest disagreements and differing opinions, but we can disagree without being disagreeable

("Purpose driven life", p. 158).

You don't suppose Obama actually reads Rick Warren?

Children are born believers in God

2008-12-05T11:04:00.001-08:00

Very interesting finding, reported by Telegraph.co.uk

Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford's Centre for Anthropology and Mind, claims that young people have a predisposition to believe in a supreme being because they assume that everything in the world was created with a purpose.

He says that young children have faith even when they have not been taught about it by family or at school, and argues that even those raised alone on a desert island would come to believe in God.

For what it's worth, I would like to share some of my personal experiences. Around the time when I was 10 (which I can date with some precision, based on where our family lived at that moment) I was preoccupied with the idea of universal determinism (obviosly, I knew no such terms). The world seemed to me a giant wind-up mechanism where every event was pre-programmed. On occasion, I entertained the notion that because of my own free will I can change some events in the future and thus prove this deterministic world order at least partially flawed. Then it occurred to me that my own understanding of the world may also had been pre-programmed, and my seemingly free-will-based attempt to thwart determinism was nothing but determinism in disguise. Admittedly, the idea of a Creator was not manifest in these musings, but it was very much implied.

Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist - a review

2008-12-05T09:30:00.000-08:00

Paulo Coelho's novel The Alchemist holds a curious distinction of being an excellent example of a genre, while at the same time it is a rather mediocre book. I shall explain.

Whenever I mockingly devise an idea for a fantasy book, which I clearly have no intention of ever writing, one inevitable progression of events makes itself available all too eagerly. The hero, usually of humble background, is charged with a quest that takes him to some rather remote areas of his world. Through timely intercession of a mentor and after enduring a few reversals of luck and circumstances the hero learns several valuable life lessons. With the goal of his journey finally in sight, the hero, to his great amazement, as well as to the mentor's patronizing smiles, discovers that the very thing that he zealously sought had always been, as a matter of fact, hidden in his heart (or thereabouts). Don't get me wrong here, many a great story follows this exact progression of events. The difference is, however, that these stories are crafted so masterfully that even upon finishing them you can barely understand that there was absolutely nothing original about their plot mechanics.

Coelho's novel fails at every attempt to veil this universal story. The author must be under the impression that the main value of his book is in its ability to instill in the minds of his readers some solemnly formulated maxims such as:

I told you that your dream was a difficult one. It's the simple things in life that are the most extraordinary; only wise men are able to understand them.

When you want something with all your heart, that's when you are closest to the Soul of the World. It's always a positive force.

Your heart is still capable of showing you where the treasure is.

God has prepared a path for everyone to follow. You just have to read the omens that he left for you.

But, unfortunately, very few follow the path laid out for them — the path to their Personal Legends, and to happiness.

These quotes from Coelho make my head hurt. One might think that there is something beneficial in exposing modern secular readers to such spiritual notions, no matter what underlies them. Perhaps. In my humble opinion, however, this pseudo-theistic New Age cud fills the vacuum in people's souls just enough to entertain them, at best. It feeds nothing more than good old individualistic religion of Self, romanticized in order to give it some semblance of humanity's greatest spiritual achievement.

Sight matters

2008-11-21T13:09:00.000-08:00

Ok, why is it that after fifty bazillion-something years of evolution, natural selection and survival of the fittest a member of a highly-adapted species such as Homo Sapiens cannot walk 20 feet in the darkness without stubbing his toe or suffering some other life-threatening accident, all that on the way to the bathroom? Why is is that cats, on the other hand, are capable of running in the same darkness-covered house at nearly supersonic speeds, when the spirit moves them? Would it not be convenient for all species to be able to see in the dark as well as cats do?

It may be suggested that possessing such valuable qualities as night vision inevitably causes one to experience poor sight in more favorable conditions. A desirable trait requires making some compromises. In my opinion, this is very weak reasoning. Who is to say that the same evolutionary process that supposedly granted sight to a great number of species on this Earth was so flawed that it could not make some adjustments along the way, in order to provide us all with the ability to see in the dark at least as well as felines do?

Given the Intelligent Design perspective, it would appear that, just as a character in a good story, every creature has its strengths and its weaknesses, and this allows the entire world to function. To put it bluntly, your shortcomings allow others to feast on you. But how come, you might ask, the great Designer failed to equip the crown and glory of creation (that'd be us) with something so crucial and yet attainable as night vision?

According the the Bible, the creation of light was the first act of God during the creation of the Universe. The distinction betwenn light and darkness is fundamental to the understanding of this world, both in terms of physics and ethics. Is is possible that our poor night vision is actually an instrument of discerning between right and wrong?