History

A person I love, but who does not trust to even have his name mentioned in the blogosphere, recently taught a class on the historicity of the resurrrection of Jesus. I found a good article by one of the scholars at the forefront of this discussion today. Below is an excerpt and a link if you would like to read further.

'Man,' writes Loren Eisley,'is the Cosmic Orphan.' He is the only creature in the universe who asks, Why? Other animals have instincts to guide them, but man has learned to ask questions.'Who am I?' he asks.'Why am I here? Where am I going?'
Ever since the Enlightenment, when modern man threw off the shackles of religion, he has tried to answer these questions without reference to God. But the answers that came back were not exhilarating, but dark and terrible.'You are an accidental by-product of nature, the result of matter plus time plus chance. There is no reason for your existence. All you face is death. Your life is but a spark in the infinite darkness, a spark that appears, flickers, and dies forever.'
Modern man thought that in divesting himself of God, he had freed himself from all that stifled and repressed him. Instead, he discovered that in killing God, he had also killed himself.
Against this background of the modern predicament, the traditional Christian hope of the resurrection takes on an even greater brightness and significance. It tells man that he is no orphan after all, but the personal image of the Creator God of the universe; nor is his life doomed in death, for through the eschatological resurrection he may live in the presence of God forever.
This is a wonderful hope. But, of course, hope that is not founded in fact is not hope, but mere illusion.

http://bethinking.org/bible-jesus/advanced/contemporary-scholarship-and-the-resurrection-of-jesus.htm

Harry Potter

I found this great commentary on Harry Potter. It says a lot of things I have been thinking and saying in regard to one of the more embarrassing parts of "church life" I can remember over the past few years. I especially like the commentary about Calvin in the last paragraph (if you read nothing else...scroll down and read it).

Disclaimer: I am not a fan and certainly have not read all of the books...but this is primarily because I am not a huge fan of the fantasy genre. No philosophical or spiritual problems with it, I am just more interested in other genres.

This is and article written by Jerram Barrs at http://www.bethinking.org/.

A. Introduction

The Harry Potter books are an extraordinary success story in the publishing world. Over the past few years they have aroused much interest and excitement not only in the original English language editions, but also around the world as they have been translated into many other languages. Their translation into Chinese was reported to be the biggest publishing event in China’s history. The Harry Potter books strike a chord with both children and adults, and the Harry Potter movies have been released to packed theaters. The fourth book in the series had an initial print run in the U.S. of 3.8 million copies, 40 times as many as an average bestseller.
As well as being extraordinarily popular, the books have encouraged millions of children to start reading for the first time. Many parents are delighted to see their children eagerly reading these stories, and then moving on to read other books as well.

B. Attacks on Harry Potter

There have been passionate attacks on the Harry Potter series by many people and in particular by Christians. This has occurred especially in the United States — much more than in Britain or other places. In the U.S., Christians on the radio, in magazine articles, on television, on web sites, and in a growing number of books, have attacked this series very strongly. There are Christian schools where the books have been banned. I have had several telephone calls from confused parents saying, “My children love these books, I love these books — what is going on?”
Because the books bring readers into an imaginary world of magic and wizards, many Christians say they teach occult practice.
The second criticism leveled is that the books teach a rebellious attitude against authority. Critics cite the way Harry sometimes responds to his uncle and aunt who are raising him as proof of this — though it has to be said that the uncle and aunt treat him very poorly (to say the least, for they are abominably cruel guardians).
Thirdly, there are many Christians who simply say that fantasy is dangerous, and that to present this kind of fantasy world to children is automatically hazardous to them.

C. Positive Remarks Regarding Harry Potter

These books are great fun (just consider a game like Quidditch!)
J.K. Rowling has created a delightful world of the imagination. She has constructed an alternative universe, another dimension (rather like C. S. Lewis’s Narnia or J. R. R. Tolkien’s Middle Earth), but, right within our world.For those who have a problem with the idea of fantasy and alternative universes - we need to recognize that almost all children play imaginative games in their minds starting at a very young age and have no difficulty whatsoever in distinguishing between fantasy and reality.
The books are well written. Try reading them aloud – this is the simplest test of good writing.
The multitude of characters in the books. J.K. Rowling has brought into being an entire portrait gallery of people, adults and also children who are growing up book by book.
Additionally, the Harry Potter books send a strong message about moral behavior.There are beautiful and enjoyable human relationships among the characters, and there is a depth of commitment and service among them.The characteristics celebrated in the relationships are friendship, loyalty, integrity, kindness, and self-sacrifice. Harry Potter himself is prepared to set aside his own success, in order to serve his friends. These are qualities in which we can all delight. There is also a very clear portrayal of the distinction between good and evil — Both the appalling destructiveness of evil to human life And the beneficial fruit of treating people with justice, kindness, mercy, faithfulness, and integrity. It is particularly significant that the books recognize that goodness and faithfulness in relationships have a cost. Virtue is rewarded primarily in terms of character development and the increasing depths of relationships among the characters, rather than through the attainment of popularity or success. J.K. Rowling also has a very deep understanding of the folly of those who turn their eyes blindly towards evil and of evil’s destructive consequences.
Finally, I see the books as valuable because they consistently include the three fundamental themes that can be found as a subtext in almost all good literature: -The beauty of creation -The appalling reality of evil -The universal human longing for redemption — for a better world -These themes touch the way the world truly is, the way God has made it

D. Themes from Harry Potter

As a Christian, I am fascinated by the fact that the stories show how a better life comes primarily through self-sacrifice. This is brought out unmistakably in the fourth book, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. In this book Harry is prepared to sacrifice himself on behalf of his friends whom he loves and to whom he has a deep loyalty.
At the heart of all four of the books is a reference back to Harry Potter’s mother, who died when he was a baby in order to save his life from a great force of evil. Rowling says the mother’s death on Harry’s behalf is an example of the most powerful act imaginable.
Recognizing that this theme of self-sacrifice is running all through the series, it is extraordinary to me that there has been such a violent and negative response by Christians. I think this negative response is a tragedy for all sorts of reasons.
The Word of God challenges us to be prepared to celebrate anything that is good and true, wherever it is found.
There is a deep misunderstanding and inappropriate suspicion of fantasy present in the negative accusations.
There is a misunderstanding in the response to the magic in the books. The same criticisms have been made of C.S. Lewis’s and Tolkien’s books, even though both of these authors were committed Christians.
It is said that because magic is a part of the Narnia books, they may have the effect of interesting children in the reality of the occult. The same charge is brought against Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings.
However none of these books are encouraging occult practice. The magic is simply a part of the imaginative worlds that Lewis, Tolkien, and Rowling have created. In such an imaginary world, people can become invisible; animals talk; mythical creatures like unicorns and centaurs exist; and rings and spells work wonders.
Watch a little child playing, and you will observe many such magical things. But this does not equal an interest in the occult.
Some people have gone on record as stating that they believe that J.K. Rowling is purposely and explicitly teaching occult and even Satanic practice.
As a Christian, I have to say I am profoundly ashamed of those who have responded with this kind of malicious gossip. Rowling has stated that she does not believe in the occult, and she certainly does not wish to promote it.

E. How are we to react to our culture?

Some 450 years ago John Calvin encouraged people to read books by the great writers from Greece and Rome. He wrote instructions for the teachers in the school system he designed in Geneva, Switzerland, asking that they have the students read the great classics of Greece and Rome that were pagan and non-Christian. And he asked that they not criticize them, but rather encourage the students to celebrate what is good in them, and to learn from the truth that they could find in them. Calvin said on another occasion that it is a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit to deny that pagan writers like Plato wrote many things that are true and helpful. We must be prepared to act similarly in our day when it comes to the Harry Potter series or any other product of our culture.

Is God Necessary for Morality

Obviously you know what I think. If you are interested in seeing the issue debated...well...enjoy.

More Questions / Spiritual Warfare

A New-Think reader e-mailed me the following question.

It has been said in many different ways, even by Jerry Garcia that “the first days are hardest days don’t you worry anymore, cause when life looks like easy street there is danger at your door”….
So, does the Bible suggest that when you try to grow closer to God and walk with him, the “transition” days are much harder than even what you experience when you are walking in sin? Basically, does the Bible say anything to support this common idea of spiritual warfare? And if so, does it say anything about being “attacked” by the enemy as you try to walk closer to the Lord? Or is it just life and when you are trying to do right it just “feels” like an attack? I mean, change is hard in general….so is it a spiritual attack by the enemy to keep us far from our Father or is it just life? And how much control do we have as man over this type of situation?

You have asked a lot of questions, some of them very closely related. I will answer them all in a rambling manner, but not necessarily in the order they were asked.

Spiritual warfare is very real. Before I get into this, however, let me address two common errors Christian’s make when considering spiritual warfare. The first is placing too much emphasis on it. The second is basically ignoring it. Like seemingly everything else in the Christian life there is error to the left and to the right, and in order to stay on the narrow path one must stay constantly focused on Christ.

Yes, spiritual warfare is real and should be taken seriously. Ephesians 6:12 says,

“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

Also Jesus (among others) drove demons out of people. Other times he simply healed people with no mention of demonic forces. Satan, demons, and the spiritual realm are real. Very real.

That being said, Christians are not to live in fear of evil spiritual forces. You are not possessed by Satan (as ALL unbelievers are), you are possessed by Jesus Christ. He bought you with his blood on the cross. Satan is a created being…like us. He is totally and completely under God’s thumb.

In 1st Peter we are told,

“Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith because you know that your brothers around the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings.”

We can resist the devil only when we are spiritually alert and standing firm in the faith. This does not happen by accident, we must discipline ourselves with the daily reading of scripture, pray without ceasing in order to put on the full armor of God (see Ephesians chapter 12).

Do you and/or members of your family (parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc.) have histories of mental illness, depression, suicide, addictions, pornography, physical abuse, mental abuse, sexual abuse, witchcraft, etc.? Patterns like this in families are often signs of generational curses (Exodus 20:5; 34:7; Numbers 14:18; Deuteronomy 5:9). Upon salvation Jesus Christ sets the believer free from these curses. He is the ONLY hope to break these bondages and chains. You cannot do it yourself or for anyone else. Although someone in a family like this may be free in themselves, they still must suffer as they watch their unregenerate family members suffering under this curse. But it will also serve as a constant reminder to be evangelizing lost family members.

There is much more to be said about spiritual warfare (so go STUDY your bible), but the overarching theme is, Jesus has defeated death and the grave (and thus Satan). Satan has a lot of authority (as much as God has given him) in this world. The only hope of man in this spiritual battle is to be saved by grace through faith.

I mentioned 2 errors earlier. If you are someone who does not take spiritual warfare seriously enough, then some of what I have said may seem shocking and even unwelcome. Oh well…if you believe I am in error please let me know and be prepared to discuss.

Some folks (in fact some entire "Christian" denominations), however, want to blame everything bad that happens in their lives on the devil. That is just not the case. In fact, I would argue that most of the time we cause ourselves more trouble than Satan does. Some mistake the righteous judgment of God for an attack of the enemy. Here are some examples.

Are you a believer who is still beset by iniquity (repeated sins in your life)? If so, you are in disobedience. Christ set you free from these sins and you have left your first love and wandered back in to your previous ways. Are you living in a way that honors the Lord? Have you separated yourself from the world? Many folks (and I do mean many) claim to be Christians, but they act like the world, talk like the world, and live like the world. They go to church and say, “Oh Lord bless me”, but out of their mouths the rest of the week comes cursing, gossip, slander, and strife. They watch things on television that grieve the Holy Spirit. They are drunkards. They live with a spirit of fear and uncertainty. The Lord has called us to repent of these things. If you are a believer who is still living like this, then you should be MUCH more concerned with the judgment of God than the attack of Satan. He will have patience with you for a season, but he will eventually turn you over to your sins. If you do not feel convicted to repent of these things, you have reason to doubt that you are saved at all.

I can not think of anywhere in the bible where it implies that Satan is any more active on new believers than he is more mature believers (if you find something, let me know). In fact, if you search it seems that God places an extra special protection around new believers. All believers are set free from the bondage of sin upon salvation. All believers are told to put on the armor of God and beware of the enemy. All believers must be prepared for battle. A believer is expected to grow in the faith through constant and sober bible study, prayer, repentance, and obedience. The fact is, a lot of people, get baptized, go to church a few times a month, give Jesus lip service, and call it good enough. Such people are luke warm and the Lord will spit them out of his mouth.

I hope this answers your concerns. Be noble like the Berean’s and search the scriptures to make sure I am telling you the truth.

Yet Another Questions / Please Send Yours

New-Think reader, Theresa, asks:

I am wondering though what do you think about arranged marriages? How do you plan to insure your daughters and now son marry men and women of faith?

Excellent questions. First let’s define “arranged marriage”. Since New-Think is a blog for the masses we will go with the modern popular definition of arranged marriage.

Arranged-marriage: A marital union between a man and a woman in which the neither the bride nor the groom have authority in selection of the marriage partner.

This type of marriage is still prevalent today in some cultures. From a parental point of view some parts of it are obviously appealing. However, I reject this methodology as unpleasing to God.

One of the mandates God has given me as a father and head of my household is to train up my children. I, along with all earthly fathers, will be judged in this area on that great and horrible day.

There is one fundamental biblical concern that really settles the issue in my mind…I can probably come up with more if you want to press me on it.

Here it is. God is primarily concerned with what goes on in the hearts of men. For instance, Jesus tells us if we hate, we have committed murder in our hearts. If I, as a husband, look at a woman other than my wife in lust, then I am an adulterer.

If my child is not a believer, forcing them to marry a believer will not save them.

If my child is a believer, then the point of arranged marriage is largely irrelevant.

Either way, if they are only marrying a believer because I forced them to, I fail to see how this could be pleasing to a God who is primarily concerned with motives.

Here is the logic. IF you are truly a believer you desire to honor God in all areas of your life. God has commanded that believers not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. THEREFORE if you marry an unbeliever it does not honor God. In fact, it is sin.

NOTE: If you have already done this, don’t fret, you can be forgiven…but now you are suffering the consequences of being married to an unbeliever. Pray that God will have mercy on you and save your spouse. You are not permitted divorce for this reason.

Furthermore I do not imagine that a believer, living in the spirit (as opposed to the flesh) would even have the desire to marry an unbeliever. Why would you desire to marry someone who does not even acknowledge what you believe to be the entire purpose of life? I contend that if that is your desire you are either a very immature Christian, not a Christian at all, or totally bowing to the desires of your flesh without regard to the Word of God.

Giving my children a firm understanding of this principle is the first part of my strategy in regard to my children and marriage.

The second part is more of a contingency plan. No matter how well Michelle and I do as parents God has not guaranteed that they will all be saved or if they are saved that they will always walk according to his will. It is a general principle that they have a much greater likelihood to be saved…but it is not a promise.

For the unregenerate child, I suppose we will have to eventually (and begrudgingly) release them to themselves and their sins (once they are adults) in hopes that God will save them through the fire.

For the saved child who is living in the flesh and who desires to marry an unbeliever or someone claiming to be a believer but having major character flaws, I will simply withhold my blessing from the union. That does not mean they cannot marry. But it does mean Dad won't be walking you down the aisle and your family will not be at your wedding. Why would a Christian father walk down the aisle and give his daughter away to an unbeliever? Why would a Christian father bless his son’s marriage to a contentious, ungodly woman?

So I hope my point is clear. Will I actively arrange and force marriage upon my children? No. Will I exercise my responsibility to raise them up with a biblical worldview? Yes. Will I exercise my responsibility as their protector to guard them from unwise decisions in this area? You can bet your life on it.

Reader's Asking the Tough Questions / Ask Your Questions Now

New-Think received 2 new questions regarding Christianity yesterday. They will be answered in the order they were received.

Michelle asks: How much control do we have over our own lives? If God knows and predetermines everything, do I really have a choice in what I do?

Great question Michelle! I like the way you think! If you weren’t married, I would snatch you right up….oh, wait.

Anyway the answer to your question is that ultimately we have no control over our lives and we are God’s robots. No, not really, but that is the conclusion of a lot of folks who haven’t studied and thought deeply enough about this topic.

You have begun your questions with the assumption that God knows and predetermines everything. This assumption is totally in line with scripture therefore I will begin at this point to answer your question. No doubt there are many New-Think readers who will balk at this assumption. If so…speak up and we can discuss this at length.

Yes, you are accountable for what you do. Let’s take the account of Pharaoh during the time preceding the exodus. If you read Exodus 9:8-17 you will see that the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart then a few verses later he brings judgment upon Pharaoh for what he did while his heart was hardened. This passage is special because God tells us why he did it….he usually does not reveal his ends. In verse 16 the Lord says to Pharaoh, “I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” The Lord’s means are allowing the disobedience of Pharaoh. The Lord’s end is that he is glorified. In fact this is God’s primary purpose in everything he does. God’s primary purpose in all of human history is to glorify himself. He even does so in man’s disobedience.

From Pharaohs perspective, he had a choice to make. In fact in other similar passages it says, “Pharaoh hardened his heart.” So did the Lord harden his heart or did Pharaoh do it? The answer is yes. Both.

This makes sense only when you view humans as the means to God’s ends. Take prayer for instance. The great scientist, mathematician, and Christian, Blaise Pascal has said of prayer, “Prayer is God’s bestowal upon human beings of the dignity of causality.” You see it is only hard to understand how God can be in control and man can still be accountable for his actions if you assume that everything works the way you see it working in the natural world. The bible tells us our prayer is effective. Jesus even said that the reason we don’t have a lot of things is that we do not ask for them. God uses our prayer to bring our needs before himself. Could he do it without our prayer…YES. But, he has chosen to enter into communion with man. That is why prayer is so important, it is where natural man TRULY interfaces with a supernatural God. And it is only this way because that is the way God designed prayer. People who don’t think prayer is important do not grasp this fact. A Christian, praying in good faith, is serving as the conduit between the supernatural world and the natural world. AMAZING!

The fact that he knows what we will pray before we pray it does not contradict the effectiveness of our prayers. God is in control and he is using us as means to his ends. The same principle applies to missions. If God is in control and preordains all things as scripture says he does, then why bother telling others about Christ? God will save whom he will save, right? Well, for one thing, the same God who claims to preordain everything told us to go forth and make disciples of all nations. You can either claim the bible is internally contradictory and reject it, or you can confess, as Job did,

1 Then Job replied to the LORD :
2 "I know that you can do all things;
no plan of yours can be thwarted.
3 You asked, 'Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?'
Surely I spoke of things I did not understand,
things too wonderful for me to know.
4 "You said, 'Listen now, and I will speak;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.'
5 My ears had heard of you
but now my eyes have seen you.
6 Therefore I despise myself
and repent in dust and ashes."

The Lord’s ways are high, oh so high, above man’s. The Lord’s knowledge and wisdom are high, oh so high, above man’s. We must take the Lord at his word and confess, God you are in control AND I am accountable for my actions.

I have not exhausted this topic..not even close…if you have more questions, please ask.

Objections to Christianity...Please Send Your Objections/Question

Here is the first question I received.

Since there is so much evil in the world how can a good "god" be in control. If god exists, he is either not "almighty" or he is a monster.

Here is the reply.

This is not a new objection to Christianity or to theism in general. It is popularly know as The Problem of Evil.

Volumes have been written and said about the problem of evil. In fact, there exists today a philosophical consensus that the objection has been disproved as a logical attack against theism. That being said, this has not yet trickled down to the popular culture or into the layman’s understanding….so I will say a few things about it here on New-Think.

Most people’s objections to the existence of evil are emotional rather than logical. How can a good God allow the rape of little children?…This is not a logic based objection, rather an emotional one. How can a good God have allowed the holocaust?

I submit that we do not sit in a position to be able to pass such judgments on God. Using the Christian presupposition, God knows the end of all things. How can we then sit in judgment on the means he uses to his ends if we do not know the ends?

Here’s an illustration: Suppose I can see into the future. I know that at 4 o’clock tomorrow afternoon you will be struck by a car at the corner of 5th and Vine. My first plan is to meet you at 3:59 at the corner of 5th and Vine and try to persuade you to leave the area immediately. Since I can see into the future I know you will laugh at me and ignore me if I approach you like this. So instead I grab you and drag you down the sidewalk for 100 feet and at 4:01 I let you go. You may think I am crazy and you will probably call the cops. Had you known my motives, however, you would be grateful. You only saw the mean, not the end.

I admit this illustration only works if you presuppose the existence of God. Something I realize an atheist is not about to do (at least consciously…they/you do it all the time in daily life though). So let’s have a look at the presuppositions of atheism.

If there is no God then there are no moral absolutes (good or evil). So really, it is absurd for an atheist to bring up the problem of evil….since in the atheist worldview there is no such thing as objective evil. True, you may say you do not like it when children are raped. But on what basis can you say that it is “evil”? Sure you didn’t like Hitler, but what objective standard can’t you point to that shows you are better than him? Just because you don’t like something or even a lot of people don’t like something doesn’t make it evil. Hardly anyone likes root canals, but they are not evil. Hitler presupposed that Jews were subhuman and that exterminating them would bring us to a glorious future. Imagine a pack of wild dogs was roaming your town devouring who they could…that is how Hitler saw the Jews. Based upon those presuppositions the holocaust was good. So you see, without an objective standard anyone can define good or evil as he or she pleases AND (this is the important part) no one is any more correct or incorrect than anyone else in their assertions.

When non-theists talk about good and/or evil they are shooting themselves in the feet and showing their own ignorance since they have to borrow a theistic frame of reference in order to even come up with an objection to theism. How embarrassing for them.

Submit Your Questions...This Means YOU!

Are you a skeptic, agnostic or athiest? Are you a Christian with unanswered questions? Do you find hard or impossible intellectual or emotional obstacles that prevent your from believing in the Christian God? Please submit your questions!

Also, if you would like to attempt to throw down a challenge in this arena that you think cannot be overcome...go for it.

I will attempt to answer all questions and/or assertions submitted. Thanks for playing.

Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam

Michelle and I spent some time in Oklahoma City this weekend. On the way out of town a black gentleman in a suit approached my window selling a newspaper with an interesting headline….so I bought the paper. Turns out it was a copy of “The Final Call”. Evidently it is a mouthpiece for Louis Farrakhan black American Muslims. There are so many things I could tell you about what I read….I will leave you with some of the demands of black American Muslims as portrayed in this publication.

1. Full and complete freedom.

Good so far right?

2. Equal justice regardless of race, color, or creed. Equal membership in society.

Preach on…we are with you!

3. People in America who are descendants of slaves should be allowed to establish a separate territory of their own on this continent or elsewhere. Former slave masters are obligated to provide the land (must be fertile and minerally rich). Former slave masters are obligated to supply their needs for the next 20 to 25 years-until they are able to supply their own needs.

Ummmmm….what!?!?!?! I thought all of the slave masters were dead. If we find any maybe they will pay up. Is this the society you want equal membership in….or the one you are currently in? How can you want equal membership in a society and then say you don’t want to be part of the society?

4. Freedom for all believers of Islam now held in federal prisons. Freedom for all black men and women now under death sentence.

Are you serious????

5. We do not believe that after 400 years of free labor that so many black people should have to subsist on relief, charity, or live in poor houses.

Who in America HAS to subsist on those things? Many, however, choose to. So I guess the free land and quarter century of support they demand in point number 3 are not considered relief or charity. Good thing….because that would be a contradiction.

6. Separate schools for boys and girls (black kids only please). The U.S government should provide, free all necessary text books and equipment, schools and college buildings. Muslim teachers shall be left free to teach and train their people in the ways of decency, righteousness, and self respect.

I thought they didn’t want charity…..what would a person with this mindset do if they no longer had anyone to blame for their problems.

7. Intermarriage and race mixing should be prohibited.

See demand number 1. Makes you wonder what other items will be left out of their definition of "free and complete freedom". Sounds like they are asking to be set free from slavery...but it appears they are willingly stepping into another form of it. Ask the women in militant Muslim countries how free they are.

Vaccines and Autism: New-Think Responds

This post is an ongoing conversation with a reader of New-Think. You may wish to read the previous 2 posts to bring yourself up to speed. Note: The reader chose the name "Geezer" for himself/herself, it is not an attempt by New-Think to disparage him/her.

Cheers,

JJ

Random Debating Skeletons

Geezer: I have a few comments about the autism article: Regarding vaccines and autism: Most of the "government required" vaccines have been administered widely to children since the 1950's--when the baby boomers were children. Why was the spike in autism not seen in their generation?

New-Think: New-Think does not claim that vaccines (and or thimerasol) are or are not the reason for the spike in autism. New-Think has merely pointed out that this has been a controversial issue for a while that is now getting its day in court.

Geezer: Regarding using material from aborted fetuses as a vaccine ingredient: This claim is fascinatingly similar to one that was going around 20 years ago that cosmetic companies were using collagen from aborted fetuses in their products. Since cattle, hogs, and chickens also contain collagen, and millions of them are slaughtered yearly it would seem to make a lot more sense that collagen from animals would be a lot more plentiful (as well as a lot cheaper) than the supply available in whatever "market" that might be in aborted fetuses. Turns out this was an urban legend widely circulated among some well meaning people. I suspect this may be one as well.

New-Think: There is a logic problem here…..Allow New-Think to paraphrase: I once heard a similar claim. It turned out not to be true. Therefore, this is not true.

I guess you would like resources to back up the claim. Fair enough. See the links at the bottom of this post.

Geezer: The post contained some seemingly propagandistic language. When I see blame being ascribed broadly to "big oil" or "big pharmaceutical companies" or whoever, red flags immediately go up in my brain. I go into "on guard" mode.

New-Think: My friend. Perhaps you have been a victim of propaganda, but not from New-Think. First, New-Think assigned blame to no one. Furthermore we did not claim that there was anything to be blamed on anyone. We agree that making generalist arguments against big entities (big oil, big pharmaceuticals, big tobacco) is typically a mark of those who cannot be bothered to think through their positions and are just looking for someone to blame for something they do not like.

Our problem with your statement above is that you seem to equate New-Think’s call to not blindly vaccinate with having a grudge against “big pharmaceuticals”. Quite the contrary. We concede that many vaccines have done a great deal of good for mankind. Our point is that does not mean we should assume that all vaccines will benefit every child. This conclusion goes back to the type of logic you seemed to use earlier. Again, let us paraphrase this logical fallacy: Some vaccines have done a great deal of good for a lot of people. Therefore all vaccines are good for people.

So let’s grab the bull by the horns. Even if we assume that pharmaceutical companies and the larger medical establishment have our best interests in mind or are at least neutral…there are some facts we cannot ignore. These are the same groups who originally thought it was safe to use x-ray machines in shoe stores, gave pregnant women Thalidomide for morning sickness and once allowed mercury in medicines. They assured us Vioxx and Duract were safe painkillers, prescribed Rezulin for diabetics and then denied any of them were responsible for patient deaths. If we never questioned these groups, we might not have discovered that Fen-phen and the dietary supplement Ephedra are not safe weight loss products, that antidepressants in kids can lead to suicidality and Viagra can cause blindness. The list goes on.

We are not assigning blame. Our position, which evidently was not clear, is that we should take the responsibility of our children’s safety into our own hands in the matter of vaccine administration…..and everything else.

Geezer: The writer is either assuming something about my beliefs or subliminally trying to influence them without discussion. While these large entities certainly have their interests, there is always another side to the story. I would gently urge Newthink to foster careful examination of all sides (or at least more than one side)of topics like this, and also to use more neutral language.

New-Think: The above collection of sentences is perplexing. It implies that New-Think has an agenda other than urging parental responsibility. Nothing was assumed about the readership of New-Think. It was mentioned that some are suspicious of drug companies. It was also mentioned that sometimes it seems folks who sue drug companies are on witch hunts. Which one of those statements should have been left out to make the language more “neutral”?

At the end of the original post 2 links were provided. One of the links better represents the government/CDC position. The other link is more skeptical. Again, which of these links should have been omitted to make the post more “neutral”?

New-Think thanks it’s readership for thoughtful responses and encourages participation is discussions like this. Even if we do not reach similar conclusions we do know that, “As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another”. Thank you brother for sharpening us.

http://www.whale.to/m/aborted.htm
http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/1296/2/
http://www.dgwsoft.co.uk/homepages/vaccines/alternatives.htm