The Problem of Scripture

One can only wonder why there are some, Christian theologians perhaps being the foremost examples, who still care to defend the Christian scriptures on an intellectual level. In a time when Dawkins’ “The God Delusion” became an international bestseller and theology has been marginalized in the academy, and the Church marginalized in Western societies, why do we still care? Or, better, why do we still believe at all? The answer to that question always, to some degree, begins or at least falls back on those texts that were delivered to us; texts from ancient times, thousands of years old: texts written in a very different culture, from very different lands and cities than where, for the most part, people think and discuss and write about these texts in our time.

On the grassroots level, these texts are highly revered by enormously diverse groups of peoples, literally all over the planet. Mostly, all these groups also read the same texts differently, but for certain relatively stable notions. Where does this undying reverence and trust in these texts come from, so goes a common question of today’s society co-inhabitants. And the question is understandable; even more so, it is a question that most believers ask themselves as well, often on a regular basis. The question also often seems, unfortunately, unanswerable. The common answers do not satisfy—at least, they do not satisfy most people.

Geert Wilders and the Destruction of Democracy (Part II)

My last post suddenly became more relevant and acute, because the Dutch government resigned just a few days ago (20th of February, 2010), which means there will be new elections within three months. This also means there is, for the first time, a real possibility that Wilders’ political party (the PVV, Party For Freedom) will become the largest party. If he then manages to form a majority-coalition with 2 or more other parties, Wilders could very well become the next minister-president of the Netherlands. All the more reason, therefore, to write about the inherent dangers of his views.

Geert Wilders and the Destruction of Democracy

The Dutch politician Geert Wilders is becoming increasingly well-known the world over. Often, however, non-Dutch commentators do not realize what exactly his viewpoints and standpoints are. He is sometimes seen, especially by Christians, as some kind of (wanna-be) liberator of the West. A liberator of (supposed) growing Islamic influence, that is. Wilders thrives upon the spreading fear of Islam in Western countries. He speaks of the ‘Islamization’ of the Netherlands, and Europe in general. A while ago, an article in The Telegraph was cause for concern among many, and also Wilders jumped (here, article in Dutch; see also the document with the questions that were asked by his party in the ‘senate’) on the results of new research that was presented in the article. The article claimed that by 2050, 20% of the inhabitants of Europe would consist of Muslims. Holland was projected to reach that mark even sooner. Many repeat this claim uncritically—or often even more outrageous claims, some of which even speak of a projected majority of Muslims by 2050—without checking the numbers, and subsequently fear for the future of the Netherlands. There are two reasons why such explosive projections lack substance.

Israel, Theology and Politics: Some Questions and Remarks

The conflict in the Middle-East concerning Israel and the Palestinians is a difficult topic to discuss. The history of the conflict is so complex that it is hard to know what one must think; people often forget that and jump to conclusions. Then there are others that have intimate, first-hand experience of the situation, on either side, and this also forcefully informs their opinions. Something that is only natural. How to proceed? At minimum, we need to realize a couple of things.

From a theological perspective, a big problem is the mixing of theological and political arguments. Often it is assumed that the nation of Israel of today is theologically the same as the nation of Israel as described in the Old and New Testament. The nation of today is defended and justified with verses from the Old Testament. But is that really a correct decision? This question cannot be answered with a simple yes or no, for the problem is way more complicated. One issue that underlies this question is how one should, theologically, sort out the relationship between Israel and the Church. Or should we even speak of Israel and the Church? Maybe we should say ‘the Jewish people’ and the Church instead? And sorting out this relationship is not an easy thing! We must distinguish, however, between theology and politics. Or our vision will be blurred, and we defend political events with theological arguments.

Piper: Dear God, Evil God

John Piper is what they call a ‘New Calvinist.’ Someone, I guess, who defends and preaches the Calvinist dogma, which usually (and sadly, might I add) boils down to a strong insistence on the sovereignty of God. The five points of Calvinism, though a simplified scheme, can, according to some, function as a showcase of ‘true’ Calvinism. John Piper sometimes jokingly says that he adheres to the seven points of Calvinism. The sixth point follows naturally from the first five: double predestination. On his website we read, “By definition, the decision to elect some individuals to salvation necessarily implies the decision not to save those that were not chosen. God ordains not only that some will be rescued from his judgment, but that others will undergo that judgment.” At least Piper is consistent. And it is such consistency that gets him in trouble later on.