Home » Posts tagged 'Isaac Newton'

Tag Archives: Isaac Newton

Pushing for and Not Apologizing for Bringing Back the Bible into the Public Square

At some point, the United States ejected from the Bible as several things:  evidence, truth, history, science, facts, objective moral reality, and authority.  Some might consider the Bible an authority for a church, but not anywhere else.  Even churches now find the Bible as passé or at least lacking in relevance as an authority.  At least true believers need to use scripture with confidence, trusting it as absolute truth.  It is absolute truth and believers need to talk that way.

Very often interlocutors will attempt to rely on peer reviewed research papers, statistics, apparent observations of the animal world, government studies, cultural and historical writings, and anecdotes.  If they even believe the Bible, they at least stay away from it, because it counts as equal to or perhaps something less than opinion.  However, as the song goes, the Bible stands:

The Bible stands like a rock undaunted ‘Mid the raging storms of time; Its pages burn with the truth eternal, And they glow with a light sublime. . . . The Bible stands like a mountain tow’ring Far above the works of man; Its truth by none ever was refuted, And destroy it they never can. . . . The Bible stands every test we give it, For its Author is divine.

Bible Final Authority

Not only is the Bible truth, like Jesus said (John 17:17), but it is the final and supreme authority for truth.  It doesn’t matter what other people say about the Bible and its authority, because it also stands over them as an authority.

The Bible is not the only authority.  There are others, but it is the final authority.  People can refer to other sources of truth, but the Bible is still superior to all those as an authority.  I’m saying that professing believers need to either start or continue relying on and then using the Bible in public forums like school classrooms, interviews, debates, podcasts, papers, books, speeches, and government assemblies, conferences, or congresses.  They shouldn’t budge when someone questions their reliance on and usage of scripture as a source for their presentation.

Foundational to Western Civilization

Law and Human Rights

The Bible has played a foundational role in shaping Western civilization, influencing its legal systems, moral values, cultural practices, and social structures. The roots of Western Civilization trace back to ancient Greece and Rome, but Christianity, which proceeds from its sacred text, significantly transformed these foundations.  Concepts such as “the rule of law,” asserting that no one is above the law arises from biblical teachings.

Deuteronomy 17:18-20 emphasize that kings must adhere to the law, promoting equality before it.  Leviticus 19:15 advocates for equal treatment under the law for both rich and poor individuals. These principles echo in foundational documents like the Magna Carta and the U.S. Constitution.  Belief in human dignity as created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27) established a foundation for human rights concepts that are integral to modern democratic societies.

Culture and Science

The Bible shaped Western culture through literature, art, music, and philosophy.  Artists and composers drew inspiration from biblical narratives.  The literary canon resulted from biblical themes as seen in works by authors such as John Milton and William Shakespeare, who reflected deep engagement with biblical texts.

Christian theology was the impetus for scientific inquiry.  Belief in a rational Creator who designed an orderly universe encouraged early scientists to explore natural laws through observation and experimentation.  A predominant scientist such as Isaac Newton exemplified this connection between faith and science; he viewed his scientific work as a means to understand God’s creation better.

Crucial to Meaning

The meaning of words in the English language spring from the King James Version of the Bible, where they first appear.  When someone says “love,” “mercy,” and “hope” among many other vital words, the Bible was the lingua franca for the culture.  The United States should revert back to the idea of a melting pot, where new citizens assimilate into a national identity.  The Bible was the centerpiece of that national identity.  Professing believers today should talk like that is true and not apologize.

Scripture provides the right view of history with its Old and New Testaments.  American society at least should keep that structure, if not everybody and every nation.  God created time and history revolves around redemption.  Mankind moves toward an irrepressible ending in the kingdom of Jesus Christ.  He is the most important figure in history and professing believers should keep Him there.

More to Come

Natural Laws Don’t Cause Origins or Existence

 

Natural Laws

When you look at the world and space around it, you are not seeing the result of natural laws.  The natural laws, such as the law of gravity, do not explain the origin of the universe.  When one football player flies out of bounds after a collision with another, a natural law did not cause that.  The second player caused the first one to move out of bounds.  You could say that a defender forced him out.  Natural laws didn’t bring about the event.

Force, as one player forcing another out of bounds, expresses Newton’s second law of motion, which says:

The acceleration of an object depends on the mass of the object and the amount of force applied.

Something applies force and it isn’t a law itself that does it.  Newton’s law, a natural law, explains the force, but it isn’t what sent the offensive out of bounds.  Someone pushed him.  The law explaining the momentum that carried a football out of bounds didn’t make him quickly and explosively leave the playing field.

Category Error

Before nature existed, the laws of nature did not exist.  Laws explain how nature operates, not what caused it to get here.  In his 2010 book The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking wrote that the universe can and will create itself from nothing because of the existence of laws like gravity.  He said:

Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.

In an accurate way, people call this mistake, a “category error.”  It is my normal practice to attempt to give someone the benefit of the doubt.  According to 1 Corinthians 13:7, this is ‘hoping all things.’  However, it is very hard to believe that these men really do think that the universe arose from laws that depend on an already existent universe.  Space and matter precede natural laws.  No one should believe or advocate for this deluded concept declared by Stephen Hawking.  It is so bad, this idea that laws actually do things, that it really should be a laughing-stock.

God the Cause for Everything

Every year, people fall from high elevation and die from hitting the ground below.  The news does not report that the law of gravity caused their death.  Again, there is a law of gravity, but the law itself doesn’t cause anything.

God both caused and sustains space, matter, and energy.  The laws that explain their function themselves proceed from His intelligence and design.  Assigning their cause to laws is just a futile attempt to eliminate God and man’s accountability and obligation to Him.

Perverting Beauty Perverting Truth and Perverting Truth Perverting Beauty

Part One     Part Two     Part Three     Part Four

God and Beauty

God is one.  All truth, goodness, and beauty proceed from God.  Since God is one, His truth, goodness, and beauty are one.  You can’t take away from one of these three without taking away from the other two.  Each of those relate to God, so their perversion perverts an understanding of God, creates a false god or false gods, and/or takes glory from the one and true God.

God is beautiful and beauty itself also issues from Him.  He defines beauty both in His essence, in His acts, and in His creation.  Man made in God’s image, functioning according to His likeness, produces or generates beauty and beautiful works.  Of course, sinful man operating in his flesh does not do that; only his performing according to the image of God.  This requires regeneration.  After conversion, he can, and should generate only beauty and beautiful works, but still must submit to God to do so.

The production of beauty and beautiful works means the skillful formation or formulation of what reflects God’s nature and achievement.  One judges the formation or formulation according to standards aligned with revealed truth about God and what He does.  A believer can know beauty.  He can know he forms or formulates it.  He can know when someone else does.  How does he know?  He knows based on the testimony and application of God’s Word.

How Do You Know Beauty?

Scripture states in a sufficient manner truth, goodness, and beauty.  A believer then applies these to the world.  God enables believers to do that.  I call this truth, goodness, and beauty in the real world.  Believers don’t just know these three in the Bible.  They know them also in the real world.

God’s Word says a truth such as “flee idolatry,” “flee fornication,” or “let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth.”  It assumes that you will understand the application of that truth in the real world.  You can’t say that you didn’t know that.  You can also understand and apply, “think on whatsoever things are lovely” or “worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.”

When Proverbs 7:10 says that a young man met a woman “with the attire of a harlot,” the passage doesn’t explain the attire of a harlot.  It assumes you know already.  People are still responsible for things that God does not explain.  Lack of explanation does not permit dressing like a harlot.

Like many other applications of the Bible, music and art require honesty and setting aside lust or self-will.  God gives the necessary capacity for judgment.  As is so often the case, the problem isn’t with intelligence, but volition.

Departure from Beauty

The Standard for Beauty

Does someone leave the truth when he departs from beauty?  Or does a departure from beauty stand alone, totally isolated, disconnected from the truth?  Does leaving beauty start with a flight from the truth?

The view that beauty was neither true nor false, that it made no pronouncements about the world, that it just reflected the mind or feelings of an artist was a completely novel view when it appeared with the origins of modernism in the late 18th to the early to mid 19th century.  Truth was true in itself, goodness, good in itself, and beauty, beautiful in itself, separate from the judgment of any man.  All of this came from God.  If someone can criticize beauty, it could only be because there is some objective standard outside of the object by which to judge it.

Absolute beauty requires principles by which to judge them.  If not, then beauty is meaningless.  Beauty must be beautiful in itself, not from a mind or feelings, Its judgment comes from external criteria.  The standard of beauty transcends the beautiful thing.  For something beautiful to exist, something not beautiful also must exist.

Kant and Mill and Beauty

Immanuel Kant in his 1790, Critique of Judgment, introduced the concept of subjective beauty, beauty in the eye of the beholder.  He said concerning beauty, that it was

a judgment of taste . . . not a cognitive judgment and so it is not a logical judgment but an aesthetic one, by which we mean a judgment whose determining basis cannot be other than subjective.

John Stuart Mill, English philosopher, later in the 19th century popularized the notion that art was nothing more than the intrinsic personal feelings of an artist.  Beauty was just an expression of subjective emotion.  An assertion of a thing as beautiful described the state of mind of the one asserting.  Beauty did reflect reality, but now only a person’s perception of reality.

You can see how that man dethrones God when he decides what is beautiful.  Man becomes final arbiter of beauty.  Value becomes subjective based on his thinking or feelings.

Beauty Doesn’t Care About Your Feelings

God and Science

Some might say subjective beauty is a matter of freedom.  You can say what you like or don’t like.  You’ve heard the phraseology, especially made popular by Ben Shapiro, “facts don’t care about your feelings.”  How does that relate to beauty?

Isaac Newton, believer in God, and others like him stand as the foundation of scientific progress of the last three hundred years, which started with God as the standard.  God’s Word inspired science.  It did not disregard man’s senses.  In accordance with God’s Word, Newton and his colleagues recognized the place scripture gave to man’s reason, his senses, and evidence.  This was different than elevating man’s thinking and his feelings to the only source of truth.  They must function in subjection to God within His world.

Empiricism:  Senses as the Source for Beauty First and then Science Second

Kant and Mill established a secular approach to beauty.  They elevated man’s senses as the sole source for beauty.  Empirical beauty. Not long after, empirical methods became the sole source for truth, a philosophy called empiricism.  A secular approach to knowledge and truth followed a secular approach to beauty.  Sensory experience formed the basis for both and it started with beauty.

Very often today, Christians say that truth is objective with the Bible as final authority, but they judge beauty with their feelings as the standard.  They might confuse the feelings with a mystical experience from God or the moving of the Holy Spirit.  Long ago many churches ejected to various degrees from objective beauty.  Today we see many of those churches capitulating in objective truth and goodness.  This follows along the pattern of the first effect of empiricism on the arts with Kant and Mills and the second with science.

View of Beauty Shapes View of God

When someone starts with God on beauty, he will have the right view of beauty.  He will produce, support, and endorse only the beautiful.  However, the opposite is also true.  Someone’s view of beauty shapes his view of God.  He might have God in his doctrinal statement, but his imagination of God will accord with his depiction of beauty.  The view of beauty and the view of God will both match.

Easily the world deceives on beauty to pervert the imagination of God.  The non-beautiful or what is ugly will draw someone away from the true God.  At the same time, he thinks he has or sees God.  The two views cannot coexist.

Two people might say they are Christians.  They should be similar, shaped by the transcendent view of truth, goodness, and beauty.  Their standard is the same.

If two professing Christians’ thinking on beauty is different, their Christianity will seem like two different religions.  They are.  One has the true God.  Very often, depending on the extent, the other does not.  He has God on his doctrinal statement, but he imagines a different God, not in fitting with the God of the Bible.  What I’m explaining occurs today by far more than it ever has in my lifetime.

So Which Is It, Truth or Beauty?  Authenticity

One can say that truth is beautiful and beauty is truthful.  When you look at beauty, actual beauty, it is true.  It is real.  If it is not beauty, it is not true or is in error.

If it is beauty, it is not just someone’s imagination or feelings.  Very often today, when it is feelings, people call that authentic.  They say it’s authentic, because from the perspective of the performer, it is how he feels.  However, it may not and probably does not represent the truth, which mean it is not authentic.

I think I can say the following is ironic.  Authenticity isn’t authentic anymore.  Authenticity is now a lie.

In the past, authenticity meant true.  It wasn’t leather.  Instead, it was naugahyde.  It wasn’t a diamond, but it was cubic zirconia.  If it is not beautiful according to the nature of God, then it is not authentic.  In this way, it is not true.

If the lie starts with beauty, treating the non-beautiful as beautiful, that spreads to the judgement of truth.  This is where our world is today.  You can’t say something is true, but that started with eliminating objective beauty.  Today your truth can be your truth, but for a longer time, your beauty is your beauty.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives