Christian Hedonism and Global Conjecture

While waiting for biographies of Augustine, Calvin and Tyndale to arrive from (it takes months!), I decided to spend time in John Piper’s best book, Desiring God, Meditations of a Christian Hedonist. In the introduction (of the 1996 edition), he published a poem that he wrote to his wife. Here is a sample:

Call it [Christian Hedonism] whatever name you may,
It is the truth. Shall God display
His great all-satisfying grace
In Joyless souls? And shall he trace
The outlines of his majesty
In hearts that neither taste nor see
Enough in him to comprehend
That here their quest is at an end?
No, God has made another way
To put his glory on display.


His goodness shines with brightest rays
When we delight in all his ways.
His glory overflows its rim
When we are satisfied in him.
His radiance will fill the earth
When people revel in his worth.
The beauty of God’s holy fire
Burns brightest in the heart’s desire.

Global Conjecture

On to another theme, I was disappointed to learn about the 85 evangelical leaders who decided to sign a global-warming pact. They are engaging on the wrong front, I believe, and this will surely distract those who look to them for guidance and vision.


Joe Carter, at the Evangelical Outpost wrote an excellent post about Global Cooling. In the article, he points out that global warming is merely “the scientific consensus”. It seems that the media blurs the lines between scientific method and scientific conjecture. He quotes Michael Crichton from a recent Caltech lecture:


I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it is not science. If it is science, it is not consensus. Period.

We do not know, with certainty, that GW is a real problem, and yet those 85 guys jumped onto the political bandwagon. I take my cue from Paul. I want to stay with that ‘one thing I do’ mentality (Phil 3:13), and avoid distractions; especially the silly ones.


2 Responses to “Christian Hedonism and Global Conjecture”

  1. 1 Bum February 13, 2006 at 4:56 pm

    I just found out about your blog… (and spending way too much time on it, cuz it’s now 3AM). Didn’t know you have a daughter now too! Good to catch up on all that’s happening in your world.

  2. 2 Bum February 13, 2006 at 5:02 pm

    oh, and by the way, Bato is here in SF now (not to visit this time, but to live here). I didn’t get to meet him yet, but hope to soon.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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

%d bloggers like this: