RE: [asa] Louie Giglio

Jon said:
"For those who might have a strong objection to his use of the "laminin parable", really I would have to ask whether they might object to the Lord's own use of such things as the mustard seed. "The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed...which indeed is the least of all seeds, but when it is grown it is the greatest of herbs". We know there are significant scientific objections to this analogy that literalists try to step around; yet the point was not to open Christ to accusations of scientific inaccuracy, but to inform the minds and move the hearts of His followers on the nature of the kingdom. Giglio's presentation is indeed spiritually moving and thus of value, considering the purpose and the audience for which it was intended - as long as the analogy isn't taken too much further."

My point is that if he would have used Laminin as Jesus did, as you say above, that would be fine (we agree totally). But he seems to go overboard in saying that it is a fulfillment of the scripture verse "Jesus holds all things together" as if God did this on purpose to give a hint to molecular biologists (just like placing a cross in the cosmos for those peering into space). The schematic drawing of Laminin does look like a cross- but you have to really cherry-pick to get the microscope image. The schematic diagram also would not look like a cross if it would have been drawn upside-down or sideways- as if there is such a thing as drawing upside-down, because there is no true "north" with these things. For example- a person into warfare could have drawn in sideways and said it represented a sword. In this way- it is like seeing the face of Mary on the side of a building. Seeing it and thinking nice things is one way, but setting up a shrine as some Catholics would is overboard. In the same way- these could be nice illustrations- but going overboard to saying God planted these as signs to scientists. When someone sees the face of Jesus on a sandwich, does that mean it is a sign from God? Notice the difference in use of illustrations with this and Jesus- Jesus didn't use examples of things that visually looked like things to explain heavenly things, he used everyday experiences to illustrate the heavenly kingdom. He didn't say the mustard seed looked like anything in heaven- his example was going from very small to huge- unbelievably huge from such a small beginning (a mustard seed is a small fraction of the size of a bird, but the plant from the seed is big enough to support several birds).

...Bernie

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Jon Tandy
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 9:53 AM
To: 'asa'
Subject: [asa] Louie Giglio

Watched Louie Giglio's two videos this weekend, with comments below.

Indescribable:
Great motivational sermon on considering the wonder of God's power and greatness as seen in the vastness of the cosmos. Aside from any mistakes in astronomical detail, which I wouldn't have been able to detect without some research, I didn't perceive any problematic theology on creation. He makes the statement several times, for instance after talking about the incredible power in the sun, that "God opened his mouth and light came streaming out at 186,000 miles per second". However, he doesn't take that any further to explain whether or not he is trying to say "instantaneous supernatural creation" - he is just restating Psalm 33:6. He talks about the millions of light years distance to these galaxies and makes no explanation or apology for this fact in relation to recent creationism. At the end, he shows a picture from NASA on the "egg structure" in the middle of the Whirlpool Galaxy, which has a shadowy image resembling a crooked cross. Yet he didn't say that it was a cross, but just that it reminded him of the cross and thus the forgiveness, greatness, etc., of God. If I wanted to be contrary, I could say it reminded me of a "surfer dude", but he used it simply as an object lesson to conclude his sermon with the power of the cross and of God's concern for us.

How Great Is Our God:
In this presentation, he repeats some of the astronomical wonders and the huge sizes of a few key stars compared to earth, to illustrate our nothingness (in size), while emphasizing our importance in God's sight. He then goes into his now-famous Laminin discussion. I'll admit that the electron microscope view of the laminin molecule also reminded me of a "surfer dude", although I'll defy anyone's attempt at Freudian analysis on that point. After hearing about the laminin presentation, reading some comments on this list and doing a little research myself, I'll admit that it provoked my already healthy skepticism toward bad YEC and other Christian apologetics arguments. However, after actually seeing the presentation, I don't have much of a problem with it. Yes, he probably overstated the case that "God has placed a cross in every molecule of our bodies," which could be argued from a scientific point of view that it really isn't a cross, that the similarity in shape is highly observer-biased, and there are examples in many other molecules. But the context was a sermon on God's reliability and our ability to depend on Him, since the "shadow of the cross" is over our entire lives in the most important sense (spiritually, not in the "egg structure" in the Whirlpool Galaxy, nor in the laminin molecule). God is "indescribably" capable of upholding us in our life's concerns and problems.

For those who might have a strong objection to his use of the "laminin parable", really I would have to ask whether they might object to the Lord's own use of such things as the mustard seed. "The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed...which indeed is the least of all seeds, but when it is grown it is the greatest of herbs". We know there are significant scientific objections to this analogy that literalists try to step around; yet the point was not to open Christ to accusations of scientific inaccuracy, but to inform the minds and move the hearts of His followers on the nature of the kingdom. Giglio's presentation is indeed spiritually moving and thus of value, considering the purpose and the audience for which it was intended - as long as the analogy isn't taken too much further.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

Jon Tandy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jan 26 13:26:42 2009