A Hebraic worldview must lead to a Hebraic lifestyle

Humanism: the fruit of a Greco-Roman worldview.

Basic assumptions of the Greek worldview

Reflections following the death of Stephen Hawking.

Following the death, last week, of Professor Stephen Hawking, many tributes have been flowing across the scientific world and surfacing in the media. One example comes from the University of Cambridge, where he spent most of his academic career (see here).

When I was at the University of Cambridge in the early 1970s, I would often see him being helped out of his disability vehicle at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics. There was already an aura surrounding him - perhaps a combination of respect and wonder at the perseverance of such a crippled young man and an acknowledgement of his sharp mind.

So, whilst agreeing with much that has been said following his death, I would like to add a word of caution concerning the exciting scientific theories of our day.

Taking Hypothesis as Fact

Despite all the hype, there is much speculation that requires us to have discernment in these days of growing deception. Are there really black holes? Is there really such a thing as Hawking Radiation? The popular press frequently takes as fact what the scientific world presents as hypothesis.

Furthermore, when we follow the trail of a theory through to its consequences, we often discover that a scientist is really trying to advance an agenda – perhaps trying to explain the origin of the universe or the nature of life. These experts are trying to find answers as much as the average citizen. The next step is to claim that their theories cancel out a need for a Creator God. This was the case with Hawking – which should be a prompt for us to suspect his entire hypotheses.

The popular press frequently takes as fact what the scientific world presents as hypothesis.

There is so much of this sort of thing rising to the surface today that we must see science as a potential tool for the powers of evil. When a humanistic media reports on scientific theories that feed a humanistic, atheistic mentality, we have to be careful that we are not drawn in to accept what is simply speculation, thinking it fact.

Popular Science

If I were to speak even more strongly, I would say that more and more, public presentations of science are far from good science. One reason for this has been a drive in recent years to popularise science. Richard Dawkins had this remit for some years and this resulted in an out-and-out attack on those of us whose faith is founded on biblical truth. With little opportunity for Christians to respond within a media biased towards his point of view, Christians have talked more among themselves than on a public platform.

Then there is David Attenborough, who for many years has brought to the television spectacular programmes on wildlife and pictures of our planet. With modern-day camera facilities what has been presented has been truly spectacular. Yet, there is a difference between spectacular photography and the validity of a scientific commentary that is more founded on unproven evolutionary theories than on hard science. And so, the truth about Creation is hidden from public view.

Now, another popular presenter, Professor Brian Cox, with his colleagues, has come centre-stage, feeding the public beguiling arguments about the origin of the universe as he presents spectacular images of outer space. Indeed, views about the so-called ‘Big Bang’ origin of the universe and Darwinian evolution are not so much argued as assumed, these days. For many scientists, it is not worth risking their career to argue otherwise.

Scientific Proof…or Faith?

Yet, science can never take us beyond conjecture when the instruments used to investigate theories of the origin of the universe are themselves part of Creation. Thus, all science must start with hypotheses and all proofs must be based on assumptions. Therefore, scientists who claim to have ‘proved’ theories such as the ‘Big Bang’ and evolution (and I might add to this the Theory of Relativity) must have based their ‘proofs’ on assumptions.

All science starts with hypotheses and all proofs are based on assumptions.

Any scientist knows this, but it is a fact that passes the general public by in popular presentations. It is when the assumptions become a sort of faith that we must be even more concerned, and that is where science is taking people today.

Among the basic assumptions of more and more scientists these days is that there is no need to believe in a Creator God. This is the strange ‘faith’ behind much science today, but it is as insecure as the sand on which Jesus warned his hearers that we should not build.

Writing God Out

Just as scientists must have a sort of ‘faith’ in order to claim proof of their theories, so have Christians - though in quite a different way. Secular science’s faith is that there is no God. Our faith is founded on the Rock that is Jesus, who was with the Father at the creation of the universe.

The tool for recognising error in the beguiling scientific atmosphere today is the gift of discernment. We must test all things and the beginning of our testing is to recognise the foundations on which ideas presented to us are built – foundations not of truth, but of belief.

Stephen Hawking was a remarkable man, but he was a man who did not believe in the God of Creation. With all due respect to his amazing life, his humour, his ability to communicate despite severe bodily limitations, he was, nevertheless, a man. We serve the God whom he chose to write out of his scientific theories.

Catharine Pakington reviews ‘The New Civic Religion’ by Patrick Sookhdeo (2016, Isaac Publishing)

In the aftermath of the election I would recommend this book as a valuable aid to evaluating the agendas and culture of our main political parties.

In a recent Prophecy Today editorial, Clifford Hill highlighted how humanist beliefs are driving party policies and defining so-called ‘British values’. In this book, author and speaker Patrick Sookhdeo uses straightforward, clear language to introduce humanism as the religion of our age, particularly in the USA and UK.

Historical Context

He outlines historical influences from ancient philosophies through to the scientific and social changes of the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the ‘Long 19th Century’ (1789-1914), all of which have culminated in a rejection of traditional Christianity.

The book is structured into 12 chapters, which take the reader through from the origins and content of humanism towards a Christian response. Bible studies and discussion questions on each chapter are provided, for individual or group use.

First, the core beliefs of humanists are presented along with their agenda to replace Christian morality. It is interesting to read the arguments for recognising humanism as a religion – something humanists themselves deny, since they oppose the teaching of religion in schools! How many Christians are aware of Tolerance, Equality, Reversal of Norms and then Aggressive Action as stages in a deliberate campaign to introduce humanistic values to education, the media, popular culture, government and law?

Sookhdeo uses straightforward, clear language to introduce humanism as the religion of our age.

The impact on education is particularly widespread. A time-line of the development of ‘hate speech’ law in the UK illustrates the growth of humanist influence up to now, and shows how biblical norms have been overturned.

Religion vs Science?

Turning to the relationship between Christianity and science, Sookhdeo demonstrates that though humanists would like to present faith and science as being incompatible, Christianity itself counters this with the Church’s history of promoting science. He highlights that far more scientists in the USA consider themselves to be Christian than humanist, atheist or agnostic. This is because Christians are encouraged to reason and think logically, whilst also being brought into the spiritual realm by a personal relationship with the triune God.

However, it is worth noting that in a related chapter on origins, there are times when the author does not uphold the authority of Scripture as consistently as on other issues.

Upholding Christian Identity

As the author compares humanist and Christian beliefs about God, Jesus and the Bible, we are challenged to review our own beliefs and then consider the identity and role of the Church in today’s culture.

A declaration of faith is suggested with the simplicity of the Jewish shema contrasted with historical creeds. All believers are urged to challenge today’s culture, just as the early Church stood against the Roman Empire (whose society shared many characteristics with our own).

Stirred to Respond

We are not left with a sense of helplessness after being presented with the extent of humanist influence today but are stirred to respond in our own areas of influence. If all of life is seen as worship, we can further the Kingdom of God wherever we are.

We are challenged to review our own beliefs and consider the role of the Church in today’s culture.

In addition to the helpful Bible study notes for each chapter, chapter 14 provides a useful summary of teaching about the authority of the Bible. As Christian creeds are quoted earlier in the book, two are given here in full and there is also a glossary, a list of references and sources including some key humanist documents.

Altogether this is a book that can be read quickly to introduce people to the extent of the influence of humanism in Britain (and possible responses to it), or it can be used as a more in-depth handbook for study, prayer and discussion. It is well worth reading as a primer, before other books that deal with related issues in greater depth, such as ‘What are They Teaching the Children?’ (ed. Lynda Rose), reviewed here.

‘The New Civic Religion: Humanism and the Future of Christianity’ (208 pages, paperback) is available from the Barnabas Fund for £10.05 (inc. P&P).
________________________________________________________________________
Patrick Sookhdeo has doctorates from London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies, Western Seminary and Nashotah House Episcopal Seminary. He is an author, lecturer and consultant.

How rediscovering the Hebraic roots of our faith can help protect us.

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘What Are They Teaching the Children?’, edited by Lynda Rose (Wilberforce Publications, 2016).

This very pertinent and important question for our age is thoroughly explored in this collection of 12 essays written by a wide-ranging group of well-qualified contributors and skilfully put together by Lynda Rose, CEO of Voice for Justice UK, who have published this volume in conjunction with Wilberforce Publications.

Much Food for Thought

Lynda herself has written a key chapter, entitled Battle for the Soul of our Nation. Other topics covered include the role of parents as primary educators, the relevance of Christian assemblies and the issue of indoctrination, especially in the areas of sexual morality and scientism (the way in which scientific investigation has been turned into a belief system). The collection concludes with a personal reflection by Baroness Cox, called Holding the Line.

If you are concerned about the ways in which state education has become a vehicle for promoting secular and liberal beliefs about religion, morality and the family, often overriding the wishes and values of parents, then this is a book that will give you much food for thought.

Vital Resource

It is not a book to be dipped into lightly. Every chapter has been thoroughly researched and is well-documented with many endnotes. The overall contention of the book is that education today has become an ideological battleground.

There has been a revolution, a bloodless coup that has been consciously planned and instigated by secular activists committed to the overthrow of the Judeo-Christian foundations on which our educational system was built. Given this scenario, this book is a vital resource for teachers, parents and all those concerned with the wellbeing of our nation’s children.

What Are They Teaching the Children? (352 pages) is available from Amazon for £12.

Prophecy Today UK's Managing Editor, Frances Rabbitts, left university two years ago. She looks back at university life and asks: how free are students to speak the truth today?

Last month, pro-life students at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow became the latest casualties of the free speech war raging in our universities.¹

Before them, it was the social science student from Sheffield who was expelled from his course after expressing views on his Facebook page in defence of the biblical definition of marriage.² Before that, it was exposure of 'institutional anti-Semitism' amongst left-wing students in Oxford.³ I could go on.

The New 'Progress'

Much has changed in British universities in the last few decades. Historically, they have had a reputation for being places of radicalism, open debate and free thinking, taking the lead in challenging the status quo. This has often (though not always) been cause for celebration, with student groups contributing to advances in women's educational rights in Britain, and racial civil liberties in America.

Today however, student radicalism is being bent in a new and more sinister direction. Our universities are now leading the way in clamping down on free speech. Left-wing student radicalism now means lashing out against anyone who dares to challenge the hallowed doctrines of secular humanism. They are the new racists, the new sexists, the new homophobes, the new fascists, deserving of being silenced, shunned - even attacked.

So, where once 'thinking outside the box' was championed and celebrated, now it is being demonised and excised, all in the name of progress. Of course, universities are not the only places where this is happening. They are part of a much bigger assault on Western freedoms – but a significant part, nonetheless.

British universities were once known for open debate and 'free thinking' – but now student radicalism is being bent in a more sinister direction.

Censorship Growing

Perceptive web magazine Spiked, which paradoxically boasts a strongly secular humanist philosophy, has long been critical of this growing culture of censorship and intolerance, last year launching the world's first Free Speech University Rankings, using a traffic light colour ranking system.⁴ It found that a staggering 80% of British universities in 2015 had been accused of censoring free speech in some way. Activities such as 'no platforming' (refusing particular speakers), banning specific speech, ideologies or group affiliations, and protesting potentially 'offensive' groups or meetings are all widespread.

This year, the percentage accused of censorship has risen to 90%, with over half of all university institutions in Britain receiving a 'Red' marking (i.e. most hostile to free speech).⁵

Spiked editor, Brendan O'Neill, has described today's student culture thus: "Where once students might have allowed their eyes and ears to be bombarded by everything from risqué political propaganda to raunchy rock, now they insulate themselves from anything that might dent their self-esteem and, crime of crimes, make them feel 'uncomfortable'."⁶ [emphasis added]

In the last year, 90% of British universities have been accused of censoring free speech in some way.

Selective Persecution

This growing culture of censoring the 'uncomfortable' often comes in the form of blanket bans on 'homophobic' speech, 'extremist' behaviour and any form of 'harassment', as well as generic official commitments to 'dignity', 'equal opportunities' and 'respect'.

What this translates to in real life, however, is highly selective – certain belief systems and perspectives are attacked whilst others are allowed to go free. For instance, the National Union of Students has been criticised for freely condemning both Israel and UKIP, but refusing to condemn Islamic State for fear of being branded Islamophobic.⁷

Unsurprisingly, a common theme of this selective outrage against the 'uncomfortable' is a large-scale attack on biblical values (especially on gender, abortion and marriage), Jewish groups (under the banner of anti-Israel sentiment) and Christian Unions.

In many institutions, Jewish students now experience harassment and bear the brunt of aggressive anti-Israel protests as a new norm.⁸ In April the NUS hit the news again, not least because of anti-Semitic remarks made by its new president.⁹ As regards pro-life, the latest incident in Glasgow is not the only recent example of anti-abortion groups experiencing censorship on campus – the same thing happened in Dundee in 2014.

Campus censorship is highly selective – and is frequently characterised by attacks on Jewish and Christian groups, and biblical values.

How the Tables Have Turned

Most Christian students are fully aware that living their faith out on campus is a battle. But it is more than just a battle for them as individuals (important though this is). They are part of a much larger and longer-standing war for the minds of British young people.

How did we get here? I want to suggest that the tables have turned in our universities because the enemy finally has them right where he wants them: by and large, they have become dedicated temples to secular humanism, churning out generation upon generation of converts trained to think, write and work accordingly.

Decades ago, when the status quo in Britain was broad adherence to Christianity (if only cultural) and most people had been brought up within a biblical value system, it was in the enemy's interests to challenge these widely held beliefs where possible – including in universities, through such vehicles as 'free thinking' and 'dissent'. Now it no longer works to his advantage to encourage thinking (or believing) outside the box – because Britain's cultural 'box' is no longer Christianity, but secular humanism.

It is no longer in the enemy's interested for universities to challenge the status quo in British culture – because the status quo is no longer Christianity, but secular humanism.

So, instead of universities being centres for challenging the status quo, they are now strategic hubs for its defence. The goal is to consolidate its hold, either by keeping God behind closed doors, a matter of private, individual significance not for public consumption, or by trying more overtly to silence biblical truth on campus.

The Truth is Uncomfortable

Perhaps all of this should be no surprise. With no apology to the campus police, the gospel is an uncomfortable message. We bear it on behalf of the Lord Jesus, who declared that it would naturally cause division between those who accepted it and those who did not (Matt 10:35-36). But those who are willing to be made uncomfortable by its truths will ultimately be blessed with the true comfort of the Holy Spirit.

So, this is not a time to be passive. If you know any Christian students, or have them in the family, I encourage you to pray with them and support them in their faith regularly – intercede for them, that God would empower them to live and speak in a truly counter-cultural way. Encourage them to stand with Jewish students experiencing persecution. And help them to petition the Lord for wisdom about how to rally together and speak out, that the truth might be heard.

They are on one of many front lines in this country – but this is an opportunity for witness as much as it is a threat of social martyrdom. Pray that their freedom in Jesus would be so attractive that every 'casualty' in this war would lead to many others finding life.

References

1 Pro-life students refused funding at Scottish university. The Christian Institute, 12 April 2016.

2 Christian student to seek further action after expulsion from university course. Christian Concern, 8 April 2016.

3 Simons, A. It's time we acknowledged that Oxford's student left is institutionally anti-Semitic. The Guardian, 18 February 2016.

4 Free Speech University Rankings, Spiked Online.

5 Ibid. See specific university rankings here.

6 O'Neill, B. Free speech is so last century. Today's students want the 'right to be comfortable'. The Spectator, 22 November 2014.

7 Rickman, D. NUS will condemn Israel and Ukip but not Isis. The Independent, 2014.

8 E.g. see Firsht, N. When Anti-Zionism Slips Into Anti-Semitism. Spiked, 19 February 2016.

9 University students threaten to split from NUS. BBC News, 22 April 2016.

'The Secular Terrorist: The Slow Suicide of Christian Britain', by Peter Mullen (RoperPenberthy, 2012, 189 pages, available from the publisher for £9.99)

This is an interesting if disturbing read on a familiar theme: the decline of Christianity and Christian values in Britain. The author's experience as rector of Anglican churches in London, together with his keen observation of society in general, means he is well informed. Moreover, he believes the situation is so dire that he is prepared to speak out strongly, in some cases very strongly, hence his choice of words for the title.

Moral reversal

Mullen examines all the usual areas of concern, starting with sexual morals, abortion, embryo research, and family breakdown. His main contention here, as elsewhere, is that over time, through a slow but steady series of incremental changes, humanistic values and secularism have transformed society until an almost complete reversal has occurred. Utilitarianism now dominates our thinking and consumerism our lifestyles.

He contends that the denial of our Christian roots has produced a slow suicide. We have been beaten by losing faith in what we believed. Secularisation is the hidden terrorist in our midst, creating impotence and encouraging self-doubt. Cultural and social defeat was "guaranteed once Christianity had died in the soul of Western man" (p119). The author maintains that only the re-discovery of our Judaeo-Christian heritage will save Western society. What is needed is "nothing less than a return to the practice of our faith" (p9).

Mullen contends that Britain's slow demise is due to our loss of faith, with secularisation the hidden terrorist in our midst.

Moreover, he believes that we "shall not turn again to God until we are overwhelmed and perhaps almost annihilated by some great catastrophe" (p180), and not one that we can blame upon God for: we will have brought it upon ourselves, as has happened repeatedly throughout history. Israel's desertion and repeated disobedience brought disasters. We cannot expect to be an exception to this pattern in the human/Divine story.

The problem with political correctness

In a strong section of the book full of good examples, Mullen vigorously attacks political correctness as a key component of the decline. He argues that "the secular gospel of Political-Correctness" creates a linguistic dictatorship and a form of social conditioning, deceiving many, especially into thinking that we have made moral progress. The claim that we are now much more advanced and enlightened has found an enthusiastic audience. We now feel superior to the primitive pre-PC era.

Mullen vigorously attacks political correctness as a linguistic dictatorship and a form of social conditioning that deceives us into thinking we have made moral progress.

In discussing science, creation and design, Mullen also makes many useful points, simply put but displaying good knowledge. The same is true when he examines literary trends and the history of reason and philosophy. Overall, he covers a wide range of intellectual ideas with skill and understanding.

Looking forward or backward?

The weaker points in the book come, first, when he attacks the press (tabloids and others) for crude reporting and dumbing down of information. His excessive examples add little to his overall argument and may be off-putting.

Second, Mullen rails against the Church of England for trying to be modern, correctly arguing that the Church has done little to stem the decline and has indeed contributed to it through situation ethics and de-mythologising Biblical truth. But his insistence that the only proper Bible translation is the Authorised Version and that the Book of Common Prayer is vastly superior to the Alternative Service book make him appear stuck in the past. He may be right that, in a typically memorable phrase, modern worship is merely a "third rate echo of recently abandoned fashions in pop culture" (p86) but to assert that the AV and BCP were meant to be preserved for all time suggests his only solution to modern trends is to retreat into a bygone age.

Nevertheless, the book overall is an important contribution to a vital debate. We do need to "wake up to the fact that there is a militantly anti-Christian elite in Britain today" (p41). But he ends with positive advice for Christians in such circumstances: be diligent in prayer and study, form strong church communities, and trust in God.