Religion to die out... (in nine nations)

I read this article the other day about a study that predicts religion will completely disappear in nine nations in which the study was conducted. The nine nations studied were: Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Switzerland. Incidentally, these are primarily European nations which have had a declining interest in religion for many decades now.

The article says that this study came to its conclusion by considering "the relative social and utilitarian merits of membership of the 'non-religious' category." Similar to peer pressure, people are more likely adapt to their society's consensus on broad topics. If this is the central factor used to develop this argument then it is rather weak, because many western societies prior to the twentieth century (but still in the Christian era) had placed tremendous social and utilitarian merits on Christian religious affiliation. So there are other factors or events that can fundamentally reverse these kinds of trends because we now see the reverse trend in many western societies. There is no model to explain how the counter cultural movements begin and why they are successful.

If you look at the "religious views" category on your friends' facebook profiles, you will find that most have not provided any information or some have even used some obscure or non-traditional religious category. I personally have not provided information in this category. I think that the researchers of this paper would have categorized me as not giving a religious category based on weighing the social and utilitarian benefits. I think there is some truth to their research, but for Christians - many of us have another reason for this "unreligion" that we exhibit.

This article reminds me of Voltaire's prediction: "One hundred years from my day there will not be a bible in the earth except one that is looked upon by an antiquarian curiosity seeker." Voltaire died in 1778 C.E.

For those who are interested in seeing another point of view on the topic, specifically on the trends of Christian religion world wide, I would highly recommend Philip Jenkins' book The Next Christendom.

"Christian" books found in Jordan dating the First Century

I just read a very interesting article. If proved authentic, these lead-leafed books might give us deeper understanding of the early church. I am very interested to continue to follow this story.


4/05/2011 - Just found some more info about this story. BiblicalArcheology.org has several links to other articles with more picture and information. Here is the link. It seems that understandable most experts are extremely skeptical at this point. 

Rob Bell on Hell

I am well aware (as I assume you are as well) that Rob Bell, his new book and this video which previews his book are highly controversial at the moment. I really don't want to get sucked into the debate but I think I am and should. I should preface that I have not read his book yet so I will try be fair in that regard. I have been to Bell's church (Mars Hill) and thought the experience was positive. He is a very charismatic leader and teacher, thus his book (and not to mention his ministry) has the opportunity to impact the church in a big way: to grow or to spread false teaching. I could see Rob's book going either way.

The fact that Rob is asking and spurring the church to think deeply about heaven and hell is great! His video seems to be implying that he has something new to say about the topic. And yes, Bell does imply that he is presenting a new or non-main stream gospel when he says, "... that whatever we've been told or taught - the good news is actually better than we could ever imagine."

I am skeptical whenever someone announces a new idea. Most often the latest and greatest spiritual growth book that everyone is reading in Christian circles, is re-digested literature from past Christian thinkers or church fathers. Many times the latest material (in my opinion) is inferior to the older "classics". Lets approach Rob Bells book with some skepticism in asking ourselves if his views can be represented by past Christian thinkers. I am open to new ideas, but I am not so naive to think that uniquely new concepts happen very often at all; and possibly in Bell's book he identifies where his views fit within historical theology. I would bet that Bell himself is not so naive to claim that his theology is radically new - non-mainstream, yes, but not new.

Do I agree with Rob Bell that the mainstream view of the gospel and theology is flawed and/or unbiblical? --- Yes and no. It depends on what you categorize as mainstream. Is it the majority of academic theologians? The answers you get from a survey from Gallop Poll of people who call themselves Christians? Or is it what you read from popular Christian writers? There are definitely some "mainstream" ideas out there that are very unbiblical and frankly lies.

I'd like to discuss some of the questions that Rob Bell raises. Lets try to pull out the main questions that Bell is asking in this video clip...

1. "Gandhi's in Hell? He is? Can someone know this for a fact?" --- Can you know for certain that a particular person is in Hell?
2. "Will only a few select people make it to Heaven?" --- How many people will be saved?
3. "Will billions and billions of people burn in hell?" --- How many people will go to Hell?
4. "How do you become one of the few?" --- How is someone saved?
5. "What is God like? Because millions and millions were taught that the primary message, the center of the gospel of Jesus is that God is going to send you to Hell unless you believe in Jesus. So what gets subtly caught and taught is that Jesus rescues you from God. But what kind of God is that that you would need to be rescued from this God? How could that God ever be good? How could that God ever be trusted?" --- What is God like? Is he a contradiction?
6. And how could that ever be good news?" --- How could the prospect of an eternal judgment ever be good news? 

Adam to Noah Genealogy

A few weeks back my pastor shared an interesting observation during his sermon from the Genesis genealogy of Adam to Noah (Genesis 5:1-32).

 "¹This is the list of the descendants of Adam. When God created humankind, he made them in the likeness of God. ²Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them "Humankind" when they were created.

³ When Adam had lived one hundred thirty years, he became the father of a son in his likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. ⁴The days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years; and he had other sons and daughters. ⁵Thus all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred thirty years; and he died.

⁶ When Seth had lived one hundred five years, he became the father of Enosh. ⁷Seth lived after the birth of Enosh eight hundred seven years, and had other sons and daughters. ⁸Thus all the days of Seth were nine hundred twelve years; and he died.

⁹ When Enosh had lived ninety years, he became the father of Kenan. ¹⁰Enosh lived after the birth of Kenan eight hundred fifteen years, and had other sons and daughters. ¹¹Thus all the days of Enosh were nine hundred five years; and he died.

¹² When Kenan had lived seventy years, he became the father of Mahalalel. ¹³Kenan lived after the birth of Mahalalel eight hundred and forty years, and had other sons and daughters. ¹⁴Thus all the days of Kenan were nine hundred and ten years; and he died.

¹⁵ When Mahalalel had lived sixty-five years, he became the father of Jared. ¹⁶Mahalalel lived after the birth of Jared eight hundred thirty years, and had other sons and daughters. ¹⁷Thus all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred ninety-five years; and he died.

¹⁸ When Jared had lived one hundred sixty-two years he became the father of Enoch. ¹⁹Jared lived after the birth of Enoch eight hundred years, and had other sons and daughters. ²⁰Thus all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty-two years; and he died.

²¹ When Enoch had lived sixty-five years, he became the father of Methuselah. ²²Enoch walked with God after the birth of Methuselah three hundred years, and had other sons and daughters. ²³Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty-five years. ²⁴Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him.

²⁵ When Methuselah had lived one hundred eighty-seven years, he became the father of Lamech. ²⁶Methuselah lived after the birth of Lamech seven hundred eighty-two years, and had other sons and daughters. ²⁷Thus all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty-nine years; and he died.

²⁸ When Lamech had lived one hundred eighty-two years, he became the father of a son; ²⁹he named him Noah, saying, "Out of the ground that the LORD has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands." ³⁰Lamech lived after the birth of Noah five hundred ninety-five years, and had other sons and daughters. ³¹Thus all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy-seven years; and he died.

³² After Noah was five hundred years old, Noah became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth." (Genesis 5:1-32)

The descendents of Adam are Seth, Enosh, Kenan,  Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Mathuselah, Lamech, and Noah in order of ancestory. Now if you were to translate the meanings of the names from Hebrew you would have the following,

• Adam = "man"
• Seth = "appointed"
• Enosh = "mortal"
• Kenan = "sorrow"
• Mahalalel = "The Blessed God"
• Jared = "shall come down"
• Enoch = "teaching"
• Mathuselah = "his death shall bring"
• Lamech = "the despairing"
• Noah = "rest" or "comfort"

Now if you read the names in order then you have: "Man appointed mortal sorrow - The Blessed God shall come down teaching, his death shall bring the despairing rest." This is possibly a very powerful prophecy of the coming salvation through Jesus the Christ.

I would like to check the translations of these names with other sources. So far from Hitchcock's Bible Names Dictionary the following definitions are given,

• Adam = "Earthly"
• Seth = "Put, who puts; fixed"
• Enos = "mortal man; sick; despaired of; forgetful"
• Kenan = "buyer, owner"
• Mahaleleel = "praising God"
• Jared = "a ruling; commanding; coming down"
• Enoch = "dedicated, disciplined"
• Mathuselah = "he has sent his death"
• Lamech = "poor, made low"
• Noah = "repose, consolation"

Bear in mind that the Hitchcock's Bible Names Dictionary was completed in the late 1800s so these definitions are most positively outdated by current scholarship. Unfortunately this is the best I could find online right now. Anyone have any better sources available online?

As well has anyone seen any other genealogies used in such a way?

"I know the meaning of the Cross"

This is a short video of Shahbaz Bhatti who had this footage made so that in the even of his own death the public could hear his testimony. The movie was sent to the BBC a few months ago. Sadly, Bhatti was killed by Taliban operatives just this past week. In his testimony he says he knows "the meaning of the cross"  therefore he cannot surrender his convictions in the face of death threats. This is a powerful challenge to others that the cross isn't just meant for Jesus Christ, but for every follower of him.