This post over at Scita > Scienda has me thinking of CS Lewis. How one pleasant morning, John was spurred to a Pilgrim’s Regress by an otherworldly musical call– a call that embodied his deepest, innermost desires. John soon discovered that while the world mimics this calls in various, multifaceted ways, it never fulfills them. Lewis henceforth postulated that we all have these unfilled desires, and that nature would not plant within us a desire that could not be satisfied. After all, how could it, naturally. Thus, the desire must derive from regions beyond, perhaps that great undiscovered country in which we must all ultimately find ourselves.

As a supplicant of the pentatonic minor, that bane of piano players throughout history, this intuition on the part of Lewis rings true.  Sure, we can scientifically explain the tonal qualities of sound, how the sound waves travel through space, how our inner ears receive the signal, process it, and transmit the signal to the brain. We can also describe wholly in terms of natural causation how the brain chemically and electrically interprets the signal and presents it to our minds. Alas, equations and engineering diagrams are not music, however.

To lapse into philosophy, music seems to present us with qualia. But even then, lapsing into philosophy does not seem to do our perception justice. There’s just nothing quite like the sensation produced by bending a G-string at the fifth fret. Ah yes, bending–another bane of piano players throughout the ages. Pianists of the world unite, though your keytars will not save you! There’s also nothing quite like power chords, the mixolydian, phrygian, for the minoric among us, 80’s glam band hair (huh?), or turning amps to 11, not to mention a thousand other deliverances of music. Pick the one that does it for you.

Philosophy, science, technology, engineering…they explain the physical, but not the experience. The experience of music, the way it feels to you, the way it moves you, the magic that is in your mind: that’s the real thing…the thing that somehow transcends the physical strike of the string and the sound wave it produces. We allow the skeptic to tell us it’s the sound wave that’s real, the rest is merely human, when all along we know it’s somehow more than that. Firsthand.

So we find ourselves again at that mystical crossroad where we are forced to choose a path if we wish to move forward. It’s a junction of the physical and the mystical, the natural and the supernatural, the mind and the body. Some of us will choose to turn and follow the austere path of the naturalist: a path paved with matter alone, where the sounds of joy are melded into ultimate nothingness. Others will choose a different path: one where the sounds of joy are somehow more real than the road of matter that brings them to us.

Choose the second road. it’s not a dead end, and the further you walk along, the clearer the sounds of joy become, for you are nearing their source.

Then I looked  and heard the voices of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled the throne and the living creatures and the elders. In a loud voice they sang:

Worthy is the lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise!”

Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them singing:

To Him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power for ever and ever!”

I recall passing a note to a friend when I was in fifth grade. The words of the text focused on a girl named Lisa who was upset by something or other that my friend had done to her. I don’t remember the specific cause of Lisa’s hurt emotions. What I do remember were these words of mine about Lisa in that note: “She’s so sensitive.”

In my mind, I was simply analyzing her reaction and comforting my friend who had caused the hurt. In God’s correct view, however, I was gossiping.

Aren’t we adept at defining our actions as different from what they really are? As different from how God sees them?

For women, we too often fail when it comes to gossip. We then misappropriate our actions for several reasons.

On the fringes

Curiosity. What a pleasant word to cloak what curiosity often really is: nosiness. For some reason, we want to know what’s going on. We want to be in the know.

Some women possess enough self-control to walk away after hearing juicy nuggets without contributing to the gossip. They believe that they’ve done no wrong since they’ve controlled their tongues. The words they hear do not always disappear, though.

7 A fool’s mouth is his ruin,

   and his lips are a snare to his soul.

8 The words of a whisperer are like delicious morsels;

   they go down into the inner parts of the body.  (Proverbs 18)

Ever eaten something loaded with sugar and/or fat? That large bowl of queso or an extra hefty slice of German Chocolate Cake? Those treats satisfy the taste buds as we consume them, but afterwards they frequently consume us, producing results such as stomachaches, weight gain, binger’s remorse, and even for some the occasional diabetic coma. Curiosity about someone else’s drama functions in the same manner. It enters the ears like a delicious, savory pizza, but then settles in our bellies. It establishes in us the foundation for potential future sin.

Like our food diets, it’s best to control what we intake rather than work afterward to remove the unwanted effects.

But there’s the problem. Unless we exercise our faith consciously upfront, we want to hear the latest news. It’s in our pre-Christ nature to desire it. Worse yet, we give approval to gossip when we listen to it.

28And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.  (Romans 1)

Knee Deep in the “Pick-a-little Talk-a-little”

Women talk. Women connect with each other through communication. It’s how we’re wired, even introverts like me. Given that, we should approach our communication with each other with obedience to God’s commands as our primary aim. We’re commanded to love God first above all else, even before loving others.

Caring

Many women believe that they don’t exhibit a caring nature if they fail to lend an ear to a friend in need of counsel. I agree, yet it behooves us greatly to venture into that counsel with trepidation and caution. Some guiding questions:

• Is our friend authentically struggling or is she gossiping about someone else?
• Are we close enough with this friend that our relationship necessitates that we know our friend’s current trial?
• How deep into the details of the struggle do we actually need to plumb?
• Do we see the outcome of the counsel as leading to healing and closure or does the chat time encourage emotional reactions and intensify/prolong the situation?

At times, caring requires that we shun opportunities to fuel the gossip. At times, our sisters need to hear that we cannot discuss this or that because we want to honor God’s command to not gossip.

5 Better is open rebuke

   than hidden love.

6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend;

   profuse are the kisses of an enemy.

7One who is full loathes honey,

   but to one who is hungry everything bitter is sweet.  (Proverbs 27)

When we concern ourselves with God’s will and feed ourselves with his word and presence, we will not satisfy the flesh. Gossip will not taste sweet to our ears.

Fitting in

Most of us want to belong, to go where everybody knows our name, to know that we possess a group or place in which we feel secure and accepted. Once we’re comfortable, it can be all too easy to succumb to participating in chatter that dishonors God, disrespects our brothers and sisters, and stirs up unnecessary and meddlesome conflict. Proverbs and the Psalms abundantly reveal these truths to us.

17Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own

   is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.

18Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death 19is the man who deceives his neighbor

   and says, “I am only joking!”

20For lack of wood the fire goes out,

   and where there is no whisperer, quarreling ceases.

21As charcoal to hot embers and wood to fire,

   so is a quarrelsome man for kindling strife.

22 The words of a whisperer are like delicious morsels;

   they go down into the inner parts of the body.

23 Like the glaze covering an earthen vessel

   are fervent lips with an evil heart.  (Proverbs 26)

1O LORD, who shall sojourn in your tent?

   Who shall dwell on your holy hill?

 2He who walks blamelessly and does what is right

   and speaks truth in his heart;

3who does not slander with his tongue

   and does no evil to his neighbor,

   nor takes up a reproach against his friend;

4 in whose eyes a vile person is despised,

   but who honors those who fear the LORD;

who swears to his own hurt and does not change; 5who does not put out his money at interest

   and does not take a bribe against the innocent.

He who does these things shall never be moved.  (Psalm 15)

11 Come, O children, listen to me;

    I will teach you the fear of the LORD.

12 What man is there who desires life

   and loves many days, that he may see good?

13 Keep your tongue from evil

   and your lips from speaking deceit.

14 Turn away from evil and do good;

   seek peace and pursue it.  (Psalm 34)

30The mouth of the righteous utters wisdom,

   and his tongue speaks justice.

31 The law of his God is in his heart;

   his steps do not slip.  (Psalm 37)

19″You give your mouth free rein for evil,

    and your tongue frames deceit.

20You sit and speak against your brother;

   you slander your own mother’s son.  (Psalm 50)

13Whoever goes about slandering reveals secrets,

   but he who is trustworthy in spirit keeps a thing covered.  (Proverbs 11)

28 A dishonest man spreads strife,

   and a whisperer separates close friends. (Proverbs 16)

Read Proverbs 18 and you’ll notice it repeatedly speaks of the fool and his lips.

Additionally, we’re told to choose our friends carefully:

19Whoever goes about slandering reveals secrets;

   therefore do not associate with a simple babbler.  (Proverbs 20)

17Iron sharpens iron,

   and one man sharpens another. (Proverbs 27)

The wisdom of the Proverbs should guide our daily choices and behavior, not only with the brethren but also in the marketplace. Should our coworkers with vitriolic tongues diminish our joy and commitment to following God’s command to do everything for God’s glory? Aren’t we called to be light in the darkness? Aren’t we to live such good lives that the pagans see our good deeds and glorify God?

The Antidote

God, of course.

He will uphold and strengthen us. He will lead us in paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. He will work within us to conform us to his perfect and pleasing will.

Mary and Martha return to my mind yet again. Martha complained about Mary, and Jesus explained that Mary had chosen the best option: being at the foot of our Lord, listening and learning.

Focus on God. Learn from him. Trust him. Follow his ways. He will mold and improve us, revealing to us the motives of our hearts and also our errors.

23Search me, O God, and know my heart!

   Try me and know my thoughts!

24And see if there be any grievous way in me,

   and lead me in the way everlasting!  (Psalm 139)

James said that we cannot tame the tongue, but we can control the situations in which we place ourselves. We can walk out of a room. We can lovingly refrain from participating in conversations that border on slander. We can do all things through him who gives us strength.

Back to Lisa. She found the note that I had written. My best of intentions increased Lisa’s pain. How’s that for caring?

“Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the Lord in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. Numbers 31: 15-18

Most analytic varieties of atheism seem committed to experience, science, and reason as foundations of rational belief. Consider John Shook’s definition of Naturalism, as published on Naturalisms.org:

Naturalism is usually defined most briefly as the philosophical conclusion that the only reality is nature, as gradually discovered by our intelligence using the tools of experience, reason, and science.

As a Christian theist, I’m happily inclined to agree with experience, science, and reason (ESR) as foundations of rationality; ironically, were I an atheist, I might not so eagerly consent—continental philosophy beckons—but that’s another post. For present purposes, Quixote’s wondering why a perennial objection against Christian theism, a subset of the problem of evil which levies charges of wrongdoing against God Himself for ordering genocide, appears to be currently in the forefront of many atheists’s minds.

It’s all over the atheosphere in one form or another. Let’s take a brief look at the genocidal God objection (GGO) in the light of experience, science, and reason.

As far as I know, no one has direct experience of God committing genocide. I’ve never seen Him do it. I think it’s safe to assume no reader or commenter has either. If the objector is willing to grant the accounts of the Old Testament as historical, I say bravo. Let’s admit them as testimonial evidence. But once they’re admitted, let’s not de-admit them once we move on to other topics. At any rate, this does not represent direct experience and does not provide a rational foundation by means of direct experience for or against GGO under ESR.

Science appears to be of no assistance either. We do not appear to have an instrument or experiment capable of measuring the GGO, nor has science provided us with a time machine whereby we might directly observe this phenomenon.

What about reason? This must be the pillar of tripartite naturalistic thought the objection purportedly rests upon. But does it? Is this a logical objection?

I submit that it is not. This objection rests upon emotionalism. It’s an emotional plea, and as such, seems strange coming from the keyboards of atheists. Allow me to explain.

Christian doctrine clearly teaches that humankind in its entirety, save one notable exception, is deserving of death as a penalty for sin. Moreover, Christianity teaches that a holy and righteous God is justified in executing this judgment. From these two premises, and given Christian doctrine as true, logic requires deductively that God is not guilty of injustice, even to the extent of genocide, or in judgment in the form of a worldwide deluge:

P1 Sinners are deserving of judgment, including death.

P2 All humans are sinners.

P3 A righteous, morally blameless judge is justified in delivering judgment to sinners, including death.

P4 God is a righteous, morally blameless judge.

Therefore, God is justified in delivering judgment to sinners, including death.

It’s nearly tautological: If they deserve it, they deserve it. The logic appears impeccable, so given the truth of the premises, the conclusion necessarily follows. Here’s the point then: given the assumptions of Christian doctrine as revealed in the Bible, there’s no logical objection to God ordering genocide, and any rational observer is compelled by formal logic to acknowledge this conclusion, all emotionality aside. Considered purely from within the Christian worldview, the GGO fails logically, and is thus a purely emotional objection, one that does not square with experience, science, and reason.

I fully understand, however, that the Christian worldview is not the only game in town. Those of you who wish to argue that humans are not sinners who deserve death can do so, and create logical syllogisms that prove that the God of the Bible is a homicidal maniac. Fair enough, but that is not the objection I’m treating in this post. This post treats the objection that even from within the Christian’s own doctrine and holy book, God is a homicidal maniac. This is conclusively demonstrated above to be an emotional response, not a logical one, or at best a logical one founded on premises considered false by Christians. Hence, the notion that the Biblical accounts taken in isolation prove God morally culpable for genocide should be rejected by all atheists who wish to rely on experience, science, and reason to influence belief. We can argue later about whether Christianity is true, whether people are actually deserving of death and judgment, and so on, but let’s first settle the question of whether Christianity is internally consistent with regard to the GGO. I submit that it is.

I realize that even within my own argument above I need to address the issues of children, animals, and the means by which God delivers judgment to support the premises of this argument. I intend to do so in subsequent posts on this topic. Furthermore, it remains unexplicated above how God’s acts of ordering genocide are in actuality measures of grace and lovingness on his part—also reserved for a future post.

Now, let’s not shy away from the skeptic’s claim that Christianity is a bloody religion. Let’s not act as though their claim does not have merit. It does…it’s right there in our holy book. Christianity is a bloody religion that has as its cornerstone–its foundation–a bloody act performed by God through the actions of human agents: the crucifixion of Christ. Christian, this is the basis of your atonement: a blood sacrifice, given once and for all for your sin. If you can’t accept it, you can’t be a Christian.

Take a look around and ask yourself if this is a bloody world we live in. Clearly, it is, and non-bloody religions seem out of place in a bloody world, like a man trying to breathe water or a woman that only notices certain aspects of her face in a mirror. Only a bloody religion can make sense of a bloody world–that, or there’s no meaning to the world at all.