Wednesday’s Column: Third’s Words


Gary Pollard

We exist and interact with our reality. We drive cars, fly planes, take rockets to space, and use information technology. We study language arts and sciences. We have economies. We have feelings and opinions. We get incredible images from satellites that blow us away. We attempt to understand the complexities of life on this incredible rock. The more we learn, the more we are blown away.

We have stuff, so where did all this stuff come from? Something had to put it there. That something is clearly intelligent beyond our wildest imaginations. It would take an enormous amount of energy to fabricate all this stuff. Studying stars and galaxies leaves us dumbfounded at their sheer size and raw power. Naturalism is a comforting worldview because it removes the necessity for an entity powerful enough to create what we still don’t fully understand. Accepting the existence of such an entity forces us to admit that we’re powerless. That’s scary.

Anyways, stuff exists. We can’t do anything about that.

We have to assume that whoever’s responsible for reality is very advanced. When we research and develop incredible technologies, we’re just using extant material. Metals, power sources, polymers, silicones, electricity, all of this already exists. We just rearrange it into rockets or robots or ring lights. Whoever put everything here is, therefore, way ahead of us.

A handful of theories attempt to explain how everything got here. Many believe an explosion is responsible for reality, but cannot identify its origin. Some believe ancient aliens were responsible for life on earth, but cannot identify the origin of those aliens. Christians believe an intelligent being who exists without limitations of any kind was responsible. Of all the origin theories, this one is the most logical.

Unlike explosions or little gray men, our creator is deeply invested in his creation. He ensures our physical survival (Heb. 1.3). He gave humanity a way to live forever in a perfect world (1.3). Reality is one of the strongest evidences of a sentient, infinitely powerful being (Rom. 1.20). Once we face that reality, we have some choices to make. The choice we make determines our fate, and no choice is more critical.

(Free to use from Pixabay)
What Does “Mean” Mean?

What Does “Mean” Mean?

Neal Pollard

Does that question seem strange to you? Mean is a verb defined as “intend to convey, indicate, or refer to” (Apple Dictionary, Version 2.2.2). Postmodernism claims that there is no purely objective knowledge, truth, or norms. Therefore, meaning is what you make it mean. Several years ago, James Sire gave the framework for what we see in ever-increasing, ever-encroaching ways in our society when he wrote that the postmodernist believes “human beings make themselves who they are by the languages they construct about themselves” (181). He continues, “In postmodernism the self is indeed a slippery concept” (182). How does this play out? Science is what scientists say it is. History is what historians say it is. But, morality, law, and so many other pillars of society are influenced by this approach to truth and reality. Abortion, euthanasia, sexual ethics, gender issues, and the like are subject to what institutions and individuals determine about them. Even religion, down to New Testament Christianity, has felt the pervasive tentacles of this worldview. Where does this philosophical mindset end? What’s out of bounds, if truth is whatever you and I each say it is for ourselves? Ultimately, there can be no values, standards, or absolutes. And no one wants to live in a society where those are the “rules,” if you can call them that.  And no one can for long. It’s a system destined to collapse.

Winfried Corduan worse, “Relativism plays the role of Zorro in the world of knowledge. It stays in concealment for long periods of time only to suddenly appear at crucial moments, conquer the day, and go back into hiding” (37). In other words, we don’t want relativism on the operating table, when it’s a choice of saline or strychnine in the I.V. (i.e., “What’s ‘saline’ to you is ‘strychnine’ to me”). We don’t want it at our banking institution, when it’s a choice of debit or credit. We believe in absolutes…until we don’t. What’s right or wrong? Again, Corduan helps by defining truth as what corresponds to reality (39). We may have to explore, investigate, evaluate, and test, but we can ascertain it!

We don’t want to live in a world without a transcendent way to determine truth and meaning. We cannot. Meaning is meaningful! Amidst all the wild experimentation of our postmodern world, there is a trustworthy source of truth. It in internally cohesive and universally applicable. It has been successfully tried for thousands of years. But it makes expectations of us. It asks commitments of us. It involves sacrifice, self-denial, and submission. But it is right and it works! It is Divine Revelation. The Bible. May we have the courage to follow it and share it.

Works cited:

Corduan, Winfried. No Doubt About It: The Case For Christianity (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1997).
Sire, James W. The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog (Leicester: InterVarsity, 1997).




Neal Pollard

A child was sent to school one day,
By parents walking the narrow way,
The child learned many a concrete rule,
On Math and English in that school.
The history class did pretty well,
Spelling and language arts were swell,
But right before lunch, to science class,
Biology lessons one needed to pass.
Talk was made of ironclad “fact,”
“Evolution!” Of course.  The talk was packed
With tales of geology billions of years old,
And transformations a wonder to behold.
Every smart person, any rational mind
Accepts this “fact,” oh who’d be so blind,
So Neanderthalish to speak of design—
Intelligent purpose, such talk unbenign!
‘Tis a danger, the courts should never allow
A nod up to heaven or a teacher to bow
To the concept of design purposefully forged
Such poisonous food for a young mind to be gorged.
What’s next? Talk of accountability?
A Creator in heaven? Judgment? Eternity?
Outrageous that Bible thumpers insist
To include in school teaching such mythical mist.
Let’s stick to the concrete, from our father of faith
Brother Darwin’s didactics, so sacred and safe.
“Amen!” to Precambrian. Naturalism? “Preach on!”
Such humanistic glory, let God talk be gone!
We got here by purposeless, meaningless oops,
Universal precision via primordial soups.
So close up your Bible, turn off your mind,
Away with your dangerous, intelligent design.
Content yourself wholly with invertebrate grandmothers,
And bask in the beauty of babboonish brothers.
Any questions, young minds?  No?  Class is dismissed!
Go out into a world of designless abyss.

Ignore clues from systems both solar and lunar,
Or circular or vascular, far better the sooner,
The opposite of intelligent? Slow-minded and shallow
Of design? Confusion, a mess, a fog, or fallow.
How many a little mind, trusting and bright?
Are being led blindly minus logical light?
By teaching unintelligent, but doubtless by design,
To eternal unreadiness via moral decline?