The shedding of innocent blood

"Help, Lord, for the godly man ceases!  For the faithful disappear from among the sons of men."
-Psalm 11, LXX

Hopefully, our first instinct after learning of the massacre on December 14, 2012 was to pray.

Within hours of the massacre in Connecticut, "journalists" throughout the news media marched in lockstep unto the anti-gun political bandwagon and called for more gun control as a solution to the problem of mass shootings (with stern faces and provocative language intended to project a strong image).  [We try not to get too political here at St. Justin Martyr's Blog, but sometimes a commentary is warranted due to an issue's spiritual implications.]  Their approach is indicative of the blindness of Post-Modern Western culture.  To them, the blame for such events seems to lie with legalities and material objects.  Tonight while attending Vespers, I contemplated the events of Friday in the quiet, prayerful space of the church.  I realized that the answer's to these kinds of issues lay within the building I was occupying.  Yes, we who celebrated Vespers had a gift given to us.  The solution to this problem was before our very eyes, in the air, and in us.

The Church teaches that all human life is sacred.  Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, the same God who became incarnate for our salvation.  We will soon be celebrating this incarnation and will recall the remarkable little child born two millennia ago.  Needless to say, several families will not have their precious babies with them this Christmas.  Their lives were taken as many others have been in similar events.

Evil is a real and present force in the world.  Evil, being that which is devoid of God's grace, is a creation of ours, not God's.  People are given the choice between good and evil, love or hate, God or Satan, Heaven or Hell.  According to Scripture the "prince of this world" is Satan, and we often find ourselves prostrate before him.  The fact that we are capable of feeling pain and suffering is evidence that something is wrong in our world.  The fact that wrongness itself exists is evidence that our world is fallen, and that God has been rejected.  The individual who took those lives at an elementary school chose evil; he chose hate, he chose Satan, he chose Hell. 

The sanctity of human life is a key element of the Christian ethic-despite what Atheist apologists might claim.  Human life is valued, respected, and loved.  In today's society, the sanctity of human life is threatened.  The general moral malaise that has overcome the Western World clouds the judgement of everyone, and devalues the valuable.  Each one of the mass shootings that has occurred in recent memory was committed by an individual who did not value human life.  The shooter in this case had 27 opportunities to spare human life.

In the end, the perpetrator even ended his own life.  This demonstrates beyond any doubt that life in general was devalued, maligned, and neglected in his mind.  He didn't even spare his own life.  What does this say about our culture?  What does this say in light of other similar massacres?  There have been murderers throughout history, but the mass shootings we have seen in recent memory seem to be an epidemic.  Perhaps we Americans ought to reassess our culture and what values we hold as a people.  The answers are within our reach.  If only we would take the opportunity to celebrate life and seek out true morals, we could eliminate such events.

Let us look to the Source of life for our answers about life.

"In Him [God] was life, and the life was the light of men."
-John 1:4

An Open Letter to Atheists

Dear Atheists,

I greet you not in a spirit of hostility, nor with an air of personal superiority, but with sincere questions.

Questions:

1.)  Do you think that it is impossible for spirituality to exist?

2.)  Do you think that existence itself precedes all things, and therefore anything that is, is dependent upon existence, including God?

3.)  Have you ever believed in God, and if so, why do you no longer?

4.)  Do you understand the tenets of the Christian faith as taught by the earliest teachers?

5.)  If you are willing to believe in historical records and think that you can study ancient history with objectivity, why do you deny the historical accounts of Jesus of Nazareth, or at least those particular accounts which ascribe miracles to Him, including His Resurrection?

6.)  If you once were a Christian, do you believe that the most objective, most traditional teachings of Christianity were actually articulated to you, or was your denomination a later development in history?
7.)  Have you made any attempts to uncover the roots of Christianity, or to uncover Jesus Christ Himself, separate from any Modern or Post-Modern religious paradigm or musing?

Please consider these questions.  It would be extremely constructive if you would make a response either by commenting on this post, or by emailing the author of these articles at st.justinmartyr@yahoo.com.

Sincerely, and with love of all mankind,

Admin

Approach to the Bible

This anti-Christian polemicist seems to be attacking newer ideas about Christianity, and not the faith and practice of the ancient Church.  This particular video appears to be a mirror of another video.

=================================================================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp4GmWg2xvo&feature=related

=================================================================

At 2:40 the polemicist uses a certain term that atheists often use which is false in its context and creates a logical fallacy in their argument: "religion."  As most atheist apologists do, this particular individual heaps everyone of faith together into the category of "religion," regardless of the doctrines they hold and subsequent disagreements they have with each other.  "Religion" is at fault for the ills of the world.  If one were to follow this flawed logic of course, one would arrive at the conclusion that Buddhists are at fault for the 911 Attacks just as much as Islamic militants.  The polemicist in question claims that "religion" is being defeated by modernity by calling to memory the example of the Virginia Tech' shooter, who supposedly underwent exorcisms to free him from mental problems, instead of seeking psychiatric help.  The polemicist is factually incorrect, in that the shooter did actually receive psychological therapy and did have a psychiatrist (LA Times).  Ultimately, the reason why humans have mental health problems, the root cause of that sickness is the existence of sin; for when sin entered into the world, so did death.  Every agony we suffer is due to the fallenness of this world.  So you see, the polemicist has actually skipped off to another unrelated point and created a false link between Christianity and the non-observance of mental health science.  God gave us the ability to remedy mental problems.  He gave us the power to heal one another, so that we might execute this healing as an act of love toward other human beings.  The veracity of "religion" is not disproved at this juncture.  Instead, the physical side of Christian ministry, of self-emptying love, is revealed in that we humans have the ability to heal mental ailments through physical means, just as we give alms of physical money to the poor.

At 4:27, the polemicist makes the statement: "...the universe did not come from religion, it came from science."  This particular statement was made in regards to a "wider understanding" of the universe that the polemicist claims he and those like him possess.  The quote in and of itself, actually makes no sense.  Is he referring to the creation of the universe/existence, or the revealing of truths about it?  One thing is certain: the weak-minded hear this quote, and subconsciously begin to see science as replacing God; for in the structure of the sentence, the term "science" has literally replaced the name "God."  Did "science" create the universe?  No.  Even Atheists would agree, since science is the empirical study of the universe, not an entity in and of itself.  However, this statement (perhaps made without the intention of playing a mind trick on the weak-minded) reveals that the polemicist views "God" in confrontation with "science."  This worldview is objectively false, since if God does exist, then science is simply the study of His creation, not an alternative to the knowledge that God exists as well as knowledge of righteousness.

At 4:40 in the video, the polemicist attacks another Protestant teaching: the idea that God Himself wrote the Bible.  He alleges: "...there is not a single line in the Bible or the Koran that could not have been authored by a first century person."  Orthodox Christianity does not believe that God wrote the Holy Bible word for word.  While the early Church (of which the Orthodox Church is the direct continuation, in doctrine and Apostolic Succession) taught that the books of the Bible were written with Divine Inspiration, the idea that God Himself wrote the text is a later Protestant creation. 

Furthermore, the polemicist asserts personal authority in judging the Scriptures.  He presents the presupposition that if there truly is a God, then the scriptures of God's human followers must contain various elements of physical, worldly knowledge.  This is the criterion that the polemicist sets fourth for the teachings of God to man.  The knowledge passed on to us by God, through Moses for example, was spiritual knowledge.  The Bible and other early Christian texts are not concerned with pure science, but with spirituality.  They are concerned with the fulfillment of the course of human affairs: re-connection with God. 

The polemicist even makes the statement at 5:43 in regards to the Bible: "There's nothing particularly useful, and there's a lot of, ahh, Iron Age barbarism in there and superstition.  Ahh, this is not a candidate book, I can go into any Barnes and Noble blindfolded and pull a book off a shelf which is going to have more relevance more wisdom, umm for the 21st Century than the Bible or the Koran..."  So, according to the polemicist, if he pulled the Communist Manifesto, or a trashy serial novel off of the shelf, it would have more relevance than the Bible.  Of course, his statement was still made in the context that the Bible is supposedly written by God.  But for the sake of discussion, let us continue knowing that he is critiquing the Bible regardless.  Another interesting bit: the ethics that oppose "barbarism" that this polemicist culturally inherited, were introduced to his ancestors by Christianity.  This wide-sweeping claim indeed illustrates the cosmological misunderstanding among Atheist polemicists, in that they presuppose what God is supposed to do for mankind if He exists.  In truth, God has given us spiritual knowledge through His servants who wrote the Holy Bible.  The fulfillment of this life, is found with God and in God.  God has given us truths much more valuable than physical knowledge: He has taught us the best way to live, and has taught us of His love and mercy both during the Old Testament, and most explicitly, in the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Referring to the sciences, at 6:12 the polemicist makes the assertion: "Every one of our specific sciences has superseded and surpassed the wisdom of scripture...we know more about ourselves than anyone writing the Bible or the Koran did..."  Do sciences grant us eternal life?  Did sciences create the universe, or existence for that matter?  The Christian disagrees with the assertion for one simple fact: God created us for love, knows us better than we know ourselves, and reveals our true identity as a race (of humans), as well as individuals.  Once again, we find our ultimate fulfillment in God, both in this life, and in the next.


Perhaps there are additional points that could be fleshed out from this video.  If you think so, please post a comment regarding the points.  For now, the author shall leave the discussion of this video.  Pray for the polemicist; do not despise him.

* LA Times article: Report weaves dark tale of gunman's past  <<http://articles.latimes.com/2007/aug/31/nation/na-vatech31>>

Pray for them

The author of the articles in this blog would like to share a brief thought with his readers.

The literary style of St. Justin Martyr's Blog is direct and perhaps a bit terse.  Information is condensed down, into concise articles, accusations are addressed, accusations are made, and claims to authority are issued (without bravado).  The matters which are dealt with here are of immense importance and are of a contentious nature.  There are multiple debates going on regarding Orthodox Christianity.  Some are from other religions and some are from Atheists.  These debates are engaged on this forum, and the attacks on the Christian God and on His Church are picked apart.

However, the author does not intend to communicate a message of hostility, self-righteousness, or anger.  Instead, the author's objective is to speak the truth, which is true regardless of his own shortcomings, as well as his personal feelings.

So I, the author send a message to my fellow Orthodox Christians: pray for those who attack the Orthodox Church, the Church of the first century.  Do not react with anger, but remain in a prayerful state, transforming the pernicious claims of the enemies of the Church into positive corrections and contemplations for both sides.  Pray for those who disagree, that God may guide them.  But also, pray for yourself, that you may not be caught up in a moment of righteous indignation, and be filled with pride perceiving of some superiority to those who disagree.  Remind yourself of your own faults by meditating on your sins.  Also be sure to remember that any truth that has been revealed to you was done so not to your credit; but you were blessed by being enlightened.

A new article is on the way.  It is expected to be posted by the end of the week.

7 points, 7 misconceptions

The subject of the following refutation is an Atheist apologist and anti-Christian Polemicist on Youtube.  In the opening statement, he likens Christianity to an organism.  He says: "...its the survival of the fittest, and the religion with the best defense mechanisms is best suited to increase its numbers and flourish..."  Well the author has some news for the polemicist: this "defense" is an inherent attribute of truth!  Truth is self-evident (if not immediately, then after a period of study and meditation), and therefore has the "best defense mechanism:" itself. It therefore can be defended and believed in.  I must warn you, this one is a little dry compared to some.  Far too often, Youtube posters take long breaths and pauses that extend the length of their videos.  But, the author shall thoughtfully consider the points brought up none-the-less in a spirit of patience and in love for fellow human beings.

======================================================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cB6sYnIDLdw

======================================================

This Youtube video is being refuted point by point.  The polemicist in question lists 7 points in his presentation.  He attacks Christianity in general.Therefore, this attack is more specifically on Orthodox Christianity, despite the fact that yet again, a Protestant straw-christ is attacked.  The Orthodox Christians know that their Church is the Church of the 1st Century A.D., and represents objectively true Christian doctrine, due to our direct maintenance of Holy Tradition for 2 millenia.

 

1.) Faith:

Whether we realize it or not, faith is not a concept exclusive to spiritual people and spiritual matters.  As a matter of fact, faith can be found within science.  Yes you read correctly, there is faith involved in scientific thought.  When an individual reads a physics textbook, they are putting their faith in the scientists and authors who provided the information within.  When one scientist utilizes the data published by another, they put their faith in the correctness of that data.  Who is to say, perhaps the information provided on the chemical/geologic composition of the moon isn't the product of some elaborate cabal, aimed at misguiding the general public's understanding of lunar science?

We know that stars are spheres of reacting gasses, yet no astronaut has ever been inside our own sun, let alone any other star.  An unmanned space module has never collected data inside of the sun either.  Yet we trust from what we do know that indeed certain specific reactions are occurring which emit visible light and radiation from stars.

Probably the majority of those who read this article have never seen a platypus up close.  They have never pet one, or witnessed one living in its natural environs.  Why do we who have never seen a platypus in person trust biologists and zoologists when they write scholarly documents regarding this peculiar species?  This furry, billed,venomous, web-footed little creature could be a fairy tale constructed by scientists complete with doctored photos, doctored videos, contrived taxidermic specimens, and animatronic models.  Yet we seem to have faith that this creature exists despite never having personally examined one.

So why is it such a stretch to put faith in a man who willingly died on a cross, in a death he could have avoided due to His insightful teachings which the corrupt could not bare; a man Whose life was documented by people who later suffered torture and death for their faith in Him, Whom they could/would have denied had their religion been connivery for the sake of material affluence (which is the reason for the synthesis of false religions)?  What about the historical account's of Jesus of Nazareth from those who were not His followers (Flavius Josephus, et al.)?  What is wrong with placing faith in the Christian God after hearing of those who say they have had their lives improved by this God, whether by embracing his teachings or through a Divine miracle?  Is it really that unreasonable?

Regarding what the polemicist says about those who question the Christian faith, he ought to investigate the "Doubting Thomas Incident" (John 20:24-29).

2.) Sent by Satan:

If indeed there is an unholy being, a father of evil, a great deceiver, then certainly all untruth would originate with him.  But of course if one does not believe in Satan, then they aren't going to believe that deceptions and spiritual delusions are a product of his rebellion against God, and thus, against all truth.

3.) We cannot know the mind of God:

A question to the polemicist: If divinity actually exists, if there is indeed true spirituality, do you honestly think that you would be able to comprehend it?  As for the "mind" of God, you can't even read your neighbor's mind, sir, let alone understand and visualize the essence of God!  You can't even comprehend the atoms that compose the Enter Key on your computer!

Also: the Orthodox Church does not believe in "Total Depravity," another Protestant teaching.

4.) Different Denominations:

Why are their different "denominations?"  The answer is simple; so simple that some may overlook it.  Each group which calls itself a church whether they be Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, Evangelical, or whatever "denomination," possesses different doctrines.  They believe different things, and are therefore in disagreement.  They are not 1 united group.  In some cases, like in many Protestant circles, there is a lack of preserved, guarded doctrine.  Sometimes, the concept of "doctrine" is even looked down upon.

One of the common logical fallacies that Atheist apologists propagate, is heaping everyone who calls themselves Christians into one contiguous, or in some cases homogeneous group.  In fact, this is not the case at all.  If you are going to attack Calvinists over the teaching of predestination, you cannot implicate Roman Catholics since they do not believe in this.  Likewise, when attacking Protestantism in general, often (perhaps the majority of the time) the Orthodox Faith itself is not being attacked, but rather, Protestant concepts such as the "blood atonement" come under fire.  But still, the Atheist apologist claims to attack "Christianity" by showing the inherent falsity of a Protestant doctrine, and therefore, sets fire to a straw-man wearing a name tag saying: "Orthodox Christianity."  If one really desires to critique Christianity, they ought to talk about Orthodox Christianity, not about Protestantism.

5.) That's Allegory:

The Bible stories are considered to be true events and not mere allegory.  Some particularly liberal Protestant ministers have claimed that the stories therein regarding "physical impossibilities" are allegory.  However, as stated before, their view of Biblical events is false.  Their view of ecclesiology and theology is not that of the 1st century Church, but rather of later invention.  Thank you for attacking a straw-christ once again.

The polemicist claims that the story of The 3 Little Pigs is more plausible than certain Biblical stories.  No supporting evidence or discussion is given for this fallacious claim.  It would be interesting to see him try to defend his reasoning on this one.

If an event is "physically impossible" given medical science or anything else, the logical conclusion is that there was some operation going on that was not of this world.  If indeed God exists, what is so hard about believing that He has power over physics and chemistry?

6.) Heaven and Hell:

As in the preceding article, the Orthodox understanding of Heaven and Hell is quite different from that of Protestantism, and a clarification is therefore required.  The angry "God" of Protestant thought is the one attacked by this polemicist.  He ought to educate himself about the Christian God: the God of the Orthodox Church.

7.) That's the Old Testament:

The polemicist needs to gain a better understanding of Old Testament violence.  God's "just retribution" or "punishment" is always corrective.  On a different note, in order to protect and preserve the Hebrew people, their unjust enemies had to be stopped from annihilating them.  

"I have no desire in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live..." (Ezek 33:11).

What is most interesting when it comes to atheist attacks on the Old Testament, is that they attempt to use Christian morals and ethics to attack specific, prescriptive acts in it! 

Conclusion:

Ultimately, what was described in the polemic video is not the Christian faith, but rather a nicely packaged set of misunderstandings; a category composed by the polemicist and labeled: "Christianity."  The Orthodox Church knows and upholds the doctrines of the Apostles, and unfortunately many people who believe in Jesus Christ do not have these truths.  May God have mercy on them and on the polemicist and guide them to truth.  Also: may the polemicist in question educate himself on the faith of the 1st Century Christian Church, which is present in its fullness in the Orthodox Church today.  

Falsity due to threats?

Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies is proved correct once again!  As with all of the refutations posted on St. Justin Martyr's Blog, I encourage you to view the item linked below first and then precede with reading the refutation.

================================================================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkHTyaARG4M&feature=channel_video_title

================================================================

Another common flawed argument was used against the Christian God by an anti-Christian polemicist on Youtube.  The approach employed by the poster was to speak of some god who is a general amalgamation of Protestant ideas about God.  Speaking generally about Christianity, he claimed that "the threat of punishment" was evidence against the veracity of Christianity.

The first image in the video was an image of the WBC.  No surprise, given that this video is of extremely low intellectual quality.  It is not surprising that an image of this false denomination, which follows heretical (Calvinistic), hateful teachings is propped up as "part of Christianity" as is implied by the argument.  The inherent falsity of WBC doctrines is used here by the polemicist as ammunition to attack "Christianity."

The polemicist claims that because "Christianity entails threats if you don't believe in it," it must be false.  He argues that arguments which imply punishment are false since they do not stand on their own.  So what is punishment?  Is punishment a material thing?  Punishment only serves to deter people from committing bad deeds.  The execution of a murder does not bring their victims back to life.  The caning of a thief does not in and of itself return lost goods that were fenced immediately following a robbery.

So does Christianity entail threats of punishment?  If one examines the Orthodox understanding of Hell and of any sort of Divine punishment, one shall conclude that the punishments issued by God are always of a corrective nature.  Hell is not a tool of manipulation, it is rather the state of broken communion with God.  Hell is the direct result of one's actions, not a legalistic prison-status with literal earthly fire as it has been categorized in Western Christendom.  It has been said before that Hell is "God's last mercy," in that He will not force someone to spend eternity with Him if they do not want to.  Christ said of our Father in Heaven: "...He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust" (Matt 5:45).  God bestows mercy to all people, regardless of their deeds.  This is in His nature.  However, as a parent chastises a child for being mischievous, so too does our God guide us toward truth.  Again, the only real accomplishment from punishment is deterrence.  The reason a parent may spank a child, thus causing momentary discomfort, is to get them out of the habit of doing bad things.  At a later time, as the child gains intelligence, they will gain the ability to recognize that which is bad and that which is good.  The punishment in and of itself does not restore that which was lost through evil deeds.

The punishments issued by God in the Old Testament, the type that Atheist apologists jump at so frequently, were all aimed at correcting humanity's iniquities, as well as preserving and enriching the nation of Israel.  Now, what Protestant groups may say about the "anger" or "vengeance" of God, do not agree with the ancient teachings of the Orthodox Church, nor is it consistent with Divine mercy.  A straw-christ is being attacked, as usual.  

The polemicist claims that there is a threat in the Christian faith, intentionally placed in order to coerce people into belief.  In fact, the situation is quite different.  The message about the dangers on non-conformance is this: that Christ is the way to salvation, and that there is no other way other than through Him. This is a warning concerning reality.  The polemicist in the video would have his viewers believe that Christian doctrine is like a mother telling her child, "...don't make faces: your face is going to stick that way!"  This statement is of course a lie.  But Christian doctrine tells us something quite different, it reveals truth much like a mother telling her child, "...don't bash your head against the floor: you'll get brain damage!"  Unlike many Protestant churches, and the Medieval Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church does not claim that all non-adherents are categorically damned.  We simply do not believe this.  However, the harsh warnings given in the New Testament and in the patristic writings concerning those outside of the Church still stand.  Those who know of the truth of Christ, and subsequently of His Church, yet refrain from participation, damn themselves.  Those who sin in ignorance are in a different situation.  In any case, it was Christ that created salvation, and all who will be saved, irrespective of their background, will be saved through Christ, and Christ alone.

Concerning the matters discussed in the last paragraph, a response from St. Theophan the Recluse to an inquirer explains the Orthodox position on the un-Churched.  Theophan said the Lord would take care of those outside of The Church, and that they had a savior who became incarnate and died for them just as those in The Church do.  But the Orthodox Church teaches that those who are not united to the Church are in spiritual danger.  It is best for all people to embrace Christ and to be incorporated into the Orthodox Church: the body of which Christ is the head.

The polemicist says that Christians "don't have logical or objective evidence on their side," and therefore resort to coercion.  This brings us to another subject, one that hopefully the author can elaborate on in a future article.  The "objective evidence" on the side of the Christian faith is in the writings about Jesus Christ, both inside and outside of the New Testament.  He was indeed a real historical figure.  Both Christians and non-Christians wrote about him.  And if one is so bold as to declare Jesus of Nazareth never existed, they can just as easily claim that Julius Cesar never existed.  We Christians believe in Christ, and the Orthodox Church, as an institution, preserves the method of being Christian, and the ontological truths concerning God and man. 

The argument presented in the above linked video simply falls apart when confronting the doctrines of the Orthodox Church.  The message of the Orthodox Church is that we should love Christ, in whom we find ultimate fulfillment as human beings, not that we should simply fear being cast into literal, earthly fire.

2012

I hope that everyone enjoyed another blessed Nativity season, in which the Orthodox Church celebrated the incarnation of our Lord for the sake of our salvation.  To all non-Orthodox Christians, I hope you had a blessed Nativity season as well, and that you celebrated in the spirit of the incarnation of the one true God.  To all non-Christians, I wish you well, and for the blessings of our Lord to be bestowed upon you.

I have not posted in quite some time, as I have been exceedingly busy with other affairs.  Please forgive me if you were waiting in bated breath for the next apologetic post.  I must confess that it is still in the works. 

As always, I encourage you, whether you are Orthodox or not, to comment and/or send me messages. 

May God bless you and guide you.