The Faulty Logic of Weak Kneed “pastors” Who Cower in Fear of the false god of “Science.” (All Capital Letters are Deliberate)

As the Church Age finds itself in the latter stages of the Laodicean apostasy, backslidden “pastors” are now, not only, compromising with science and evolutionism, they are actively attacking what the Bible clearly says about our origins.

Here is an article that will give a good example of their horrible logic.  These heretics will be exposed for what they really are, BIBLE REJECTORS.  They are free to believe what they want, but one day they will give an account to God (Rom 14:10).  These articles are written for any curious mind who might wonder if these clowns are right.  They are not.  The Bible is right.

As usual, my comments are in BOLD.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/megachurch-pastor-john-ortberg-christians-often-dismissive-of-science-for-no-good-reason.html?fbclid=IwAR2uTy_rOxo8Xt15EehnUJAW8-wpQZzPdh6wbQfDrgH7ZQXalv1BFauL-kM

 

Silicon Valley megachurch pastor and author John Ortberg is calling on Christians to be less dismissive of scientific discoveries, suggesting that passing uninformed judgments on scientific theory is not a way to love God with “all your mind.”

Bible Believers should love God with “all thy mind”.  (Matt 22:37)  But that should include looking at the evidence that is in the Bible seriously and looking at the “evidence” that the clowns of the “scientific community” rely on.  The main problem with Ortberg is that he ASSUMES that evolution is true (and its children like Evolutionary Psychology and Psychiatry).  There is no doubt, if you believe the Bible, you will not find macro-evolution in the Bible.  But be that as it may, the supposed evolution provided by the “scientists” is a joke.  Remember: Science’s favorite word is OOPS.  That is the history of science is a history of being wrong.  There is no reason to assume that this time (2019) they finally got it right and that we should compromise the Bible to accommodate their “theories”.  Rest assured, years from now even the “scientists” themselves will look at the theories of today and go “Oops…”

Ortberg, the pastor of the 4,000-member Menlo Church in Menlo Park, California, spoke before hundreds of pastors, scientists and scholars gathered last week in Baltimore, Maryland, for a conference marking the 10th anniversary of the BioLogos conference.

In the age of Laodicea (Rev 3 if you don’t read your Bible), if you have a church of 4,000 in California today then you are a COMPROMISER and you will have some serious questions asked of you at the Judgement Seat of Christ (if you even know what that is…)  That includes compromising hacks like Treiber and Chappell.

The 61-year-old Ortberg is a member of the advisory council of the BioLogos Foundation, an advocacy organization that promotes Evolutionary Creationism that was founded with the goal of ushering harmony between science and biblical faith.

The sad thing is that Ortberg doesn’t know enough history to understand that what passes for “scientific consensus” is a ploy to get people to reject the Bible.  These clowns have an agenda and if anyone doesn’t go with their materialistic atheistic agenda, they get blacklisted. 

The cycle goes like this.  If you find evidence that fits the modern, secular agenda, then you are hailed as a great mind.  If you find evidence that does not fit the agenda, then you are called a fraud or an idiot and you are blacklisted.  The scientific community learned their techniques from the medieval Inquisitors… But that connection is for another article.  The fact that this cycle has played out a hundred times over the last couple hundred years is proof that no one should think for a second that the “scientific community” is searching for the truth without bias.  They are some of the most bigoted people you’ll ever deal with.

With the theme of the conference being “Beyond Conflict,” the church leader outlined on Wednesday four gifts that he feels Christians should bring to the broader world.

None of his gifts (humility, curiosity, knowledge, and song) are really wrong, it’s just Ortberg’s application of those gifts to this debate that is ridiculous.

The first gift is “humility.” Ortberg’s talk comes at a time in which many Christians — particularly from a Young Earth Creation background  — can be dismissive of points of a scientific consensus and discovery if they somehow conflict with their literal interpretations of the Bible.

There is no reason to be humble in this situation.  If the Bible says something that contradicts “science” then there is no reason to be humble about it.  The truth is true whether anyone is humble or not.  He is misapplying the gift.  If you believe Genesis 1 then you reject evolution.  Are there conflicts between the two?  Yes, so then we reject what “science” says.  Humility has nothing to do with it.  It is not humility to act like something that is untrue is true.  That’s just living in fantasy land.

Ortberg, who studied clinical psychology at Fuller Seminary, explained that he grew up in a Baptist church where he experienced a kind of writing-off of scientific theories.

So the guy knows what the Bible says, but he rejects it in favor of his Seminary education.  There is nothing new about this story.  Fuller is a hot bed of higher criticism and faculty has no Final Authority on this earth greater than their own minds.  No wonder Ortberg wants to compromise with “science” they have the same final authority: themselves.

“A woman in our church asked me, ‘Why do you need to study [Sigmund] Freud when we have the Bible?’” he recalled. “I asked her, ‘Have you ever actually read Freud? Can you name something he has actually written? Do you know the difference between projection and reaction formation or how you distinguish between the conscience and the ego ideal, or the difference between suppression and repression?’ Whatever you think of [Freud], he is one of the dominant minds of the 20th Century.”

This is a great demonstration of a logical fallacy.  People can argue about which specific fallacy it is, but regardless, Ortberg is using a ridiculous illustration.  Is it absolutely necessary to be familiar with the titles of Freud in order to reject Freud?  No.  I would suppose that Ortberg doesn’t know all of the stories and books written by the Maori of New Zealand, but he still would dismiss their beliefs.  He has created a standard for the argument that only exists in his own mind.

You actually need to know very little to understand that Freud was a Bible rejecting fool and if you know that, then go on your merry way and do something for God.

The fact that Freud is “one of the dominant minds of the 20th Century” just proves that we live in the age of Laodicea.  Freud thought everyone was a sexual deviant but yet he couldn’t stop putting cigars in his mouth.  Talk about projection…  I say: Throw out the baby and the bathwater when it comes to Freud.

Ortberg stressed that Freud was a brilliant neurologist, doctor and follower of psychoanalysis.

Freud also committed suicide.  He was a nut that our world loves because it (the world) is insane.  Reject him like a bad piece of lettuce in a salad, brother.

“[Y]ou’re telling me you think he can be dismissed and you can’t even tell me the title of a single thing he wrote?” Ortberg recalled asking the woman.

What a fool. Even this poor, old, Baptist lady had enough sense to see there was a problem with Freud.  Ortberg, with all his education, doesn’t have that much sense.  Throw out Freud and go live for God.

Far too often, Christians pass judgments on statements from the scientific community “with no good reason at all.”

But just as often, Christians pass judgments on statements from the scientific community with tons of good reasons.  We reject macro-evolution because of the evidence and the Bible.  We reject Heliocentrism because of the evidence and the Bible.  We reject billions of years, uniformitarianism, psychology, psychiatry, the theory of relativity, abiogenesis, and whole books worth of “science”.  We reject them for the same reason that we reject whole books worth of Hindu thought, Buddhist thought, Muslim thought, and the teaching of Confucius.  We reject them because we know that God wrote the Bible and that anything in the world that contradicts that Book is not true.  “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;” Rom 3:4

“[Martin] Luther called [Nicolaus] Copernicus an upstart astrologer possibly because Copernicus dedicated his work to the pope,” Ortberg explained. “Within two generations — and Mark Noll writes about this in The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind — all the reformation churches accepted a new view of the solar system.”

This is where most Christians and even some Bible Believers will disagree with me.  Copernicus should be rejected for more than that reason.  Yes, there are some questionable connections between Copernicus and the Jesuits and Rome.  But the real question is “What Saith the Scriptures?”  Does the Bible say that the earth moves around the Sun?  No.  So we reject Copernicus because of the Bible. 

He warned that “moving slowly before passing theological judgments on scientific theory is one of the ways that we can love God with all of our minds.”

His warning should go unheeded.  Loving God with all your minds doesn’t mean just accepting whatever science says about a matter.  Ortberg would like you to believe that, but we don’t go by Ortberg, we go by the Bible. If the Bible says one thing, and “science” says something else, then reject “science.” You don’t even have to pray about it.

The second gift that Christians should bring the secular society is “curiosity.” Ortberg argued that too often, religious leaders “abuse their authority” and too many people are led to believe whatever religious authorities tell them to believe.

Here, Ortberg commits a cardinal sin in my book.  He has exposed himself as something other than a Bible Christian.  We are to go by the Bible and if a leader, be it “religious” or “scientific”, contradicts the Bible, then we reject that leader.  It seems that Ortberg’s “christianity” looks a lot like Roman Catholicism…

“I recently read a book about curiosity and the interpretation from the author on Genesis 3 was very interesting,” the pastor said. “[The argument] was the story of the fall and the Bible is actually anti-curiosity, that curiosity is what led to the fall and that people are supposed to believe whatever religious authorities tell them to believe.”

What saith the Scriptures?  Eve’s trouble was that he didn’t care as much as she should about the words of God.  That sounds like Ortberg’s problem.  Call that “anti-curiosity” if you want, if you go against God’s words, there will be trouble.  In the case of Eve, it caused a lot of problems.  And that is no one’s interpretation.

However, he detailed that human beings have a need to make sense of the world. It is a need that, he said, will never go away.

But the effort within some churches to stifle curiosity runs counter to the fact that science was largely historically inspired by spiritual and metaphysical questions.

Any scientific idea that has any value stemmed from the believe that the God who created everything was a God of order.  This came from the revelation of God in the Old and New Testament.  There is no way that the atheistic materialistic science can explain the order that is found in the universe.  Their models show that only chaos should exist.  Their models are wrong.  Throw them out to the curb.

“The work of historians of science will often tell us that to a very significant extent, that what helped for science to emerge in humanity was religious thought, in particular, Christianity,” Ortberg said.  “[It was] the view that the universe was the product of an orderly God, a reasonable God and yet a God who is also unpredictably creative so that it would require empirical research.”

He cited English mathematician and philosopher Alfred Whitehead who said that it was the “medieval insistence on the rationality of God” that made it possible for science to emerge.

Additionally, he stated that the explosion of technology in the Middle Ages happened largely in monastic communities.

“The explosion of technology”?  There was no explosion of technology in the DARK AGES when the Roman Catholic Pope ran Europe. 

“Mechanical clocks were invented by monks because they needed to know when to pray,” Ortberg said. “When we first read about the invention of eyeglasses in a sermon around 1300, [it was] because monks needed to pour over texts.”

The only problem is that neither of these “facts” are true.  Neither clocks nor sunglasses were invented by monks (monkeys).  Ortberg just made up information to make it seem like he knows what he talking about.  A simple Google search will prove this. 

Ortberg argued that a lack of curiosity is a “sin.”

Does the Bible say this?  Ortberg doesn’t care.  This is particularly frustrating considering he just blasted people for taking the word of their “religious leaders”.  What a hypocrite!

The gift that Ortberg spent the most time explaining was the gift of “knowledge.”

“The prophet, speaking for God, said that ‘my people will perish with lack of knowledge,’” he continued. “We live in a day, of course, when the question of who has knowledge is hotly contested because knowledge means authority and authority means power.”

There is no “contest”.  The Bible is right and everyone else is wrong.  Ortberg has purposefully misworded the question.  The authority and power are God’s. Nothing else even matters. 

Although many are led to believe that something has to be proven in a scientific or mathematical way in order to “constitute knowledge,” Ortberg noted that there are many questions in the world that science can’t answer.

Now Ortberg is trying to wiggle out of what he has said earlier.  Let us go a step further.  There are many millions of simple questions that “science” can’t answer.  So don’t worry about “science”.  And by all means, don’t waste your time with “Biologos” conferences.  What saith the Scriptures?

One such question is the classic line from William Shakespeare: “To be or not to be.”

“It is better for things to be than not to be. It is better for us to be than not to be. It is better for you to be. This is not a preference or an opinion. It is not cultural. It is not biologically programmed. It is knowledge,” Ortberg said. “It is true. But it is not scientific knowledge.

What?  This means nothing. Why is it better to “be” than “not to be”?  I can guarantee you that Ortberg himself doesn’t know what this means.

“People often assume that faith is opposed to knowledge in our day. It grew by inviting rational consideration often in opposition to authority.”

Today, people are urged to consider life’s most important questions as “matters of preference or tradition but not of knowledge,” he said.

“In other words, to a large extent, we live in a day where educated people teach us to believe that where knowledge is most desperately needed, it has become most apparently unavailable,” he explained.  “As a result, we are plagued by skepticism, cynicism, confusion, uncertainty, doubt and eventually despair.”

Rest assured, this is not the fault of people who believed the King James Bible is the word of God.  It is the fault of people who get in the pulpit and talk like Ortberg.

At the basic level, Ortberg said that knowing right from wrong is “essential to humanity.”

“Even in a secular age, I find it fascinating that the defining hallmark of sanity in the judicial system is the capacity to know right from wrong,” he stressed. “A conversation with faith and science has so much business to add to life’s knowledge.”

Pastors and church leaders need to be stewards of “moral and spiritual knowledge” rather than stewards of tradition, history and values because “people perish for lack of knowledge,” he added.

Or “stewards of the mysteries of God.” (I Cor 4:1)  Ortberg talks the way that he does because he isn’t a good steward of the actual mysteries like the Body of Christ, the Restoration of Israel, the Antichrist, and Mystery Babylon.  Those are what he should spend his time talking about.  In an effort to soothe his guilty conscience he takes up ridiculous causes like Biologos.  In so doing, he contributes to the people perishing because I doubt more than a few people in his 4,000 strong church could tell you where to find the mystery of the Rapture.  His people are perishing and he’s worried about “to be or not to be…”

Ortberg concluded by sharing his fourth and final gift that he believes Christians should bring to the larger society: song.

How this fits into the scheme of the rest of the sermon is anybody’s guess. 

But, if I had to guess, Ortberg’s church services are dead as a doornail and they probably sing songs that repeat the same line 20 times.  He has no idea about the gift of song that you can only find in the old hymns.  But that is not a hill for me to die on, just something I’ve observed over the years.

The pastor said that one way to communicate the great story and evoke wonder is through song because a good song has rich cognitive contents and expresses unity as well as joy that reaches the core of the human soul.

“That is why the beauty of creation and song often go together,” he said.

What a strange ending to a strange article.  How this man can call himself a pastor and not deal with the only question that matters (What saith the Scriptures?) is beyond me.  We are in Laodicea.  These are the weakest bunch of Christians who have ever existed on the Earth.  Don’t worry about “science”. They’ll change their mind tomorrow and they’ll go on pretending that they have some sense when they really don’t. 

But we should worry about people  like Ortberg who pretend that the represent Christianity and then go out and talk about their opinions like it matters and neglect to talk about God’s words.  Sadly, he probably got this attitude from Fuller Seminary.

Learn to be the type of Christian who starts by asking “What saith the Scriptures?”

Isaiah 66:2 “For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s