~The Geneva ReviewA Monthly Publication of Geneva Ministries

No. 37 ~ 1987 Geneva MinMrica Apfl 1987

Conspiracy, Rumor, andChristian Paranoia

Geome Grant

Tucked away in the back reaches of the OldTestament is an important but virtually unheededmessage for our day. “Do not call conspiracy every-thing these people call conspiracy, do not fear whatthey fear, and do not dread it” (Isaiah 8:12-13).

We are living in a day of Christian paranoiaSomehow we’ve gotten the notion that evil in ourday has had a whole new surge of power, popular-ity, and vitality. Every circumstance of more thanpassing interest has become for us ominous evi-dence of doomsday’s early arrival. We greet eachnew day with suspicious eyes. Daily reports ofIRS collusions, the meteoric rise of globtilist influe-nces, and pandemic hysterias fill our Christianmedia and occupy our Christian minds. As a result,the Church is in trouble.

Our appetite for cloak and dagger has made alaughing stock of many authentic Bible doctrines.In the last decade, evangelical have gained numeri-cally but lost credibility y. We’ve adopted the atti-tudes and techniques of gossip journalism, and as aresult, our prophetic mantle is threadbare indeed.

As its root, the rumor and conspiracy problemis one of irresponsibility: hermeneutical irresponsi-bility and moral irresponsibility.

First, we perpetuate hermeneutical irresponsi-bility. Because of the drought of Scriptural instruc-tion within the Local Church, it should not take usby surprise to see the spectacuktrization of half-truths. Rather than nurturing the flock of God inthe rich truths of practical Biblical instruction, weindulge in theological junk food. It is amazing towitness the fascinations many Christians entertaintoday. Demonology, angeology, and eschatologyhave been bloated beyond recognition by unveri-fiable horror stories of New Age compromises,trilateral conspiracies, and AIDS complicity andcomplacency.

TO be certain, we are living in a day ofunmitigated evil. Our culture is velvet-lined withcorruption. There is little doubt in the minds of

God’s people that we am seeing accelerated occul-tic activity, abandonment of traditional values, anddomination by systemic injustice. But our imbal-ance, imprecision, and inconsistency have deterredus from our tasks. We are called Christ’sambassadors, not investigative =porters. We areministm of a new covenant, not marshalls for awitch hunt. Until our preaching and teachingreflects a Biblical agenda, we will continue to beharassed by the tangential ravings of the fantastic.Rumor will prevail. Surely we can call sin “sin”,stand by our convictions, and sound propheticalarms without indulging in nonsense (Proverbs6:16-1% hOS 8:11-12).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .: ..,:...::,. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .,‘“Tabfe’ of ’”&ntenEs”” ~ ““ ““ ““” ‘., ...,.. . . . . . . , : . : ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,, .:..,., ,:, .ti~in+.qj; Ruiiiof;”*: ;“:.:, ; :: “:’: ,. ;.’ 1“Cht+sgfut”l?aiimia . :.. : “: . . . :.,”

&.@e Gmnf:. :.” “’ ~~ “.: , ,:, .: ., , . y.y,. : “:...,.. . . . . . .

. * ~&&a”~&” ;:..: :. - ‘:..,, :,., ::.:. ;....,, .::. !.:2~i~’:’:,’””’ ;,, :,.,,:: ‘“’, ”,: “.::” ‘::;.’:’””” ::,; ‘.:;:;;:.,,.:., .,.:..:. “ ,. ,

“: “Mi@@l:RG@iii,jj””,: “: : , : , : : ‘,,~;( .;.?: :. .. . . . . . . . . . ...” . .

TheJudikal Oper”adon”of. . .; ; 3t h e WOyxCPart *

PeterLeithurt

HolgRain. 4Studies in Genesis One

JhmesB. Jordun

Those Who Mourn(-timti~d

5

Ray R: Sutton

lhmds in Creation Science 6TheHeisenberg UhcertaintgRind k:A Causefor Concern

&Je eyJ. Meyem

The Ben@Its ofPsalm Singing 9James B. Jordan

Nw and Views 12

The Geneva Review p. 2 ApriI, 19MThe New

Geneva MinistriesMichael R. Gllsimp

Probably the most infamous announcement inAmerican corporate history was made on April 23,1985. On that April day, Robert Goizue~ thechairman and chief executive officer of Coca-Co~announced that the “best has been made evenbetter.” After one hundred years, Coke would haveanew taste.

The reaction of the American people wasimmediate and violent. One Coke enthusiastwarned Coca-Cola that it “had better not start push-ing some sugar-plum f* gag juice.” Another die-hard Coke fn poured liter afier liter of “new” Cokeinto the streeL A Nashville songwriter even cameup with a new corporate jingle: Coke Was h!.Thee months of unrelenting protest against theloss of the real thing brought this major Americancorporation to its knees. In July 1985 Coca-Colatold the American people that it was sorry and beg-ged them for forgiveness. Never had such a large,multinational corporation had to eat so muchhumble pie!

If there is anything to be learned fkom the Cokefiasco it is that change is unsettling to people. Mostof us don’t really like change. When we see theadjectives “new” or “improved” we are immediate-ly suspicious. The thought natundly occurs, “Whatwas wrong with it before?” That was the responseof most Coke drin.ke~ in the wake of the formulachange.

But there is another sense in which the word“new” is used. This sense carries with it the idea ofadvaracement or progress. To be “new” in thissense is to be the kztest, state-of-the-art, or currentproduct on the market. Instead of being improvedwith the accompanying comotation that there issomething wrong with the unimproved version,this sense of the word “new” emphasizes a progres-sion horn one good product to another good pro-

{ duct which is “new” only in the sense-of b&ng

[

, . .

New Address

2737 South Broadway, Suite 202Tyler, Texas 75701

Phone Number and P.O. Box have not\ changed .

more uptodate and I&warmItisinthis sense that Geneva Minimies is

“new.” Unlike Coca-Cola, which altered the veryessence of its Produa Geneva Mnistries issubstantially the same. Geneva Mnistries exists inorder to serve Christians who are vitally inmestedin faithfblIy developing a comprehensive C&stianworldview with which to dmild and restructureour increasingly anti-Chrk&n society. Throughthe publication of Tk Geneva Review and the vati-OUS bOOkS, ~rbdiCdS, and ~mium tape pack-ages, Geneva Ministries shall continue to examinein detail how Christianity relates to the world.There is, however, one main area that has changedin our desire to be more relevant and better able to.*mmlster to our supporters.

Structure and OrganhationAs many of you airewiy know, Geneva

Ministries has been since its beginning a minktryof Westminster Presbyterian Church, Tyler, Texas.As a ministry of this local Church, Geneva Minis-tries was under the direct oversight of the Session(bead of elders) of Westminster. As director, Iwas responsible to the Session for the work ofGeneva Mink&s.

As of March 5, 1987, Geneva Ministries is nolonger a minktry of Westminster. On March 5th,Geneva Ministries was officially incorporated as aseparate non-profit, tax exempt educational organi-zation devoted to research and publishing in theama of Christian worldview. Instead of being anoutreach arm of a local Church, Geneva Ministriesis a support ministry to CMstian churches andother ministn“es. As such we are a non-sectarian,nondenominational ministry wholly dedicated tooffering aid and support to Christians everywherewho share our vision of a world entirely submittedto our Lord Christ.

A a religious corporation, Geneva Ministriesis governed by a board consisting at this point ofmyself, James B. Jordan, and Mr. Thomas Single-ton of Nashville, Tennessee. Mr. Singleton hasbeen a faithfkd supporter of Geneva Ministries overthe years, and his wisdom and experience willundoubtedly prove to be a very valuable asset inthe years to come. I am also the president of Gen-eva Ministries, and as such am directly responsibleto the board for executing the mission of GenevaMinistries. We believe this new structure will betterenable us to reach more people with our message.

Instead of being the national ministry of a localpresbyterian Church, Geneva Ministries is now an

con(inued on page 11

Ad. 1987 D. 3 The Geneva Revtiw

I!

i

i

II

)

The Judicial Operationof the Word

Pm onePeter Leithti

The various Reformation traditions havealways viewed the Word as a primary means ofgrace. Under the heading of calling, the Westmins-ter Confession of Faith states that the elect are inhistory _ “by his WOId and Spirit, out of thatstate of sin and death in which they are by nature,to grace and salvation by Jesus Chrim” (X.1). TheLutheran dogmatician John Theodore Muellerdiscusses the same reality under the heading, “TheDivine Efficacy of Holy Scripture”: “The Word ofGod does not merely teach man the way ofsalvation and show him the means by which hemay attain i~ but by its truly divine power (vis venzdivina) it actually converts, qenerates, andnmews him” (Christiim Dogmatics,. 133).

Unfortunately, Reformed and Lutheranstatements of this Biblical truth have often appearedto oppose one another. Lutherans teach that theSpirit worksthrough the Wed, while the Reformedhave stressed that the Spirit workswith the Woni.Thus, Lutherans have understand the Reformedposition in a Bar@an sense, namely, that theScripture becomes the Word when the Spiritaccompanies it with the work of illumination. Re-formed theologians, on the other hand, are con-cerned to insist, first, that God is never bound tohis means, and, second, that the Word cannot beunderstood and grasped unless man is given a newheart.

The Lutheran position has clear Biblicalsupport. Paul implies in Remans 10:14-17 that thepreaching of the Word creates faith in its hearers.Peter described rebirth as coming from incorrup-tible seed, through the living and enduring Word ofGod (1 Pet. 1:23). Jesus claimed that his wordswere life-giving Spirit, not merely that His wordswere accompanied by the life-giving Spirit (Jn.

~ 6:63). During His temptation in the wilderness,Jesus quoted Moses’ statement that man lives bythe Word of God (Mt. 4:4; Dt. 8:3). Scriptureteaches that the Word has power to make alive. Thedifficulty, of course, lies in the fact that notevexyone who hears the Word is saved. Lutheransexplain this by claiming that the divine power ofthe Word is a resistible power. This leads to somefairly obvious paradoxes; Mueller states, “thesaving effects of the Word may be withstoodthough in itself the Word is omnipotent.” Lutherhimself explained that God’s power is resistible if

it operates through means, but hmsistible if itoperates apart tim means (Mueller, op.cit.; p.134).

One helpfil way to look at the issue is toexamine the judicial nature of the Woni’s opera-tion. The Word is an instrument of judgment,whether unto life or unto condemnation. The Bibli-cat images of the Word emphasize this aspect. Inseveral places, the Word is likened to a sword. Theswod is used throughout Scripture as a symbol ofjudgment. The prophets describe judgment as thecoming of sword, pestilence, and ftie. Christ’swork was a sword that divided (a judicial process)families (Mt. 10:34-36). This same image isapplied to the Word in Ephesians 6:17, Revelation1:16 and 19:15. This image is explained morefully in Hebrews 4:12-13. FirsL the Word isdescribed as living and active; it is never at rest.Second, the sword splits open the hearers, openingthe thoughts and attitudes of the heart to judgment.It leaves everything open to the judicial scrutiny ofGod. The Word is not merely the standard bywhich we are judged, but the Spirit’s instrument ofthat judgment.

The Word is an instrument ofjudgment, whether unto life or

unto condemnation.

Elsewhere, the Word is described as a fire.Jeremiah warns that false prophets of his day thatthe Word is like a hammer that breaks rocks inpieces and like a fire that will consume thatworthless straw of the false prophets (23:29). TheLord puts his Word in Jeremiah’s mouth to con-sume the prophets and people of Israel (5:14).Isaiah says that the tongue of the Lord is aconsuming fire (30:27). Even the human tongue isa fii with enormous destructive potential (Prov.16:27; Jas. 3:5- 6).

The Word, of course, does not always lead tocondemnation. But even the life-giving power ofthe word may be viewed as a judicial operation.That is, the life imparted to those who believe theWord is judicial life, life based on God’sdeclaration of justification. The point here is thatthe Word not only announces that those whobelieve will be justified, but in a certain sense theWord effects that judicial decision. Jesus impliesthis is John 5:24: “Whoever hears my Word andbelieves him who sent me has eternal life and willnot be condemned; he has crossed from death to

continued page I 1

The Geneva Review p. 4 April, 19$7

Holy Rain

James B. Jordan

And God ma&the_nt, and se~ratedthe waters that were below thejhamentj?om thewaters that were above the firmament. And it wasestablished (Genesis 1:7).

The Bible self-consciously distinguishes be-tween water from above and water horn below. Aswe have seen in previous essays, water from aboveis associated with heaven, while water from belowis associated with the earth. The dry land emergedout of water, and thus the lower waters are asso-ciated with the land (Gen. 1:9). As we shall see,the curse on the ground (Gen. 3:17) seems to havethe effect of disqualifying ground water iiomsymbolizing life.

We’re told in Genesis 2:5-6 that God had notyet sent rain upon the earth, but that water aroseout of the ground and watered the land. Here thedistinction between rain from above and watersfrom below is reiterated. These ground watersflowed out of Eden to water the whole earth. Thus,in the world as created by God, the water that cameup fium the ground gave life to the whole world.

After the fall of man, however, water fromabove seems to replace water fkom below as apicture of God’s grace. In Deuteronomy 11:10-11,Israel was told that God’s land was not like Egypt,watered horn below, but rather “drinks water tiomthe rain of heaven.” There is a contrast of source.Water out of the ground is associated with Egypqwater from above is associated with heaven.Accordingly, at the Flood, the wicked wereimmersed by waters out of the ground (Gen. 7:1 1).Similarly, at the Red Sea, the wicked wereimmersed in ground water, but God’s people weresprinkled by rain (Psahn 77: 16-20).

God’s holy rain consists of things other than

For Your Copy Write or CallGeneva Ministries

I o0 Oo 0 0 \ o

water. It includes fire and brimstone for the wicked(Ezk. 38:2~ IMe 17:29), and manna for theblessed (Psalm 78:24).

In terms of what the Bible says about God’sglory cloud, and how it hovered over His people, iiis easy to see that God’s blessings are holy rainffom His glory cloud. Ordinary rain fkom ordinaryclouds reminds us of blessings fkom above-justas lightning and thunder remind us of judgmentfkom above.

The distinction between water from below andwater horn above, between immersion and sprink-ling, is important for the mode of baptism. On theone hand, it does not affect one’s eternal positionwith God whether one was baptized by immersionor by sprinkling. On the other hand, however, thedistinction is very important, 1 believe, for the over-all life and education of the people of God. Immer-sion runs in tie direction of incopr~”on into theold fd!en creatio% and is associated with death(Flood, Red Sea) for just that reason. S@nklingruns in the direction of holy rainj?om God’s glorycloud of heaven, and is associatd with incor-poration into the Kingdom of God. Do we want tobe incorporated into this fallen world (immersion inwater horn below), or into the fhture heavenlyworld (sprinkling with water horn above, and thus“immemion” into the cloud)?

Churches that practice immersion run the riskof putting an image into the minds of their peoplethat runs counter to the theology of the Bible, andpeople who have been trained by precept andexample to think in terms of immersion will have aharder time understanding the worldview set out inthe Bible. They will not understand the significanceof the difference between water above and waterbelow.

Water fkom below has to do with the firstAdam, who fell. Water fkom above has to do withthe last Adam, Who saves us. “The first man isfkom the earth, earthy; the second man is hornheaven. As is the earthy, so also are those who areearthy; and as is the Heavenly, so also are thosewho are heavenly. And just as we have borne theimage of the earthy, we shall also bear the image ofthe Heavenly” (1 Cor. 15:47-49).

It is true that the Bible pictures heavenly influ-ences in terms of rivers flowing from the Temple(Ezekiel 47), the throne of God (Revelation 22),and the Rock in the wilderness; but each of these isa symbol of heaven and the New Kingdom ofGod. The Temple, the City, and even the Rock arepermeated by the Cloud (cf. Ex. 17:16, “1 will

continued p. 11

April, 198’7 t). 5 The Geneva Revi&w

I1

I

Those Who MournSecond Beatitude

Rav R. Sutton

Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall becomj%rted. (Matthew 5:4)

“Mourning” is the hemt of the second beati-tude. It is a process of recovering from death, orthe loss of anything. It is specifically called a lamen-tti”on in the Bible,l a subject to which Holy Stip-tum devotes an entire book I call it a manuaf onmourru”rzg. A brief consideration of the Book ofLamentations sketches what is involved in thesecond beatitude.

Lamentations is a covenant. It clearly has a five-fold division, after the covenantal pattern in Deuter-onomy.z Granted the chapter divisions are notinspired, but Lamentations has five clear units.Each section (chapter) is organized around theHebrew alphabet: chapters one, two, four and fivehave twenty-two verses for the twenty-two lettersof the Hebrew alphabet, each verse beginning witha consecutive letter. Chapter three has sixty-sixverses, three times twenty-two. Only, the thirdchapter changes letters every three verses, eachtriplet beginning with the same letter. Its structure,therefore, is generally recognized, but the realvalue of seeing the five-fold division is tied to thecovenant.

The process of mourning is covenantal.Jeremiah laments the death of Israel’s covenantwith God. He realizes that he must die to this dyingcovenant, and that he must wait for a new one. Butas he laments, he himself engages in a process ofmourning that nmews his own covenant with God,so that at the end of the book he exclaims, “Thou,O Lord dost rule forever, Thy throne is fromgeneration to generation” (Lam. 5:19). Heagonizingly begins the book by praying a cove-nantal lamentation, and he concludes by rejoicingover God’s sovereign control of his circumstances.

( Whatever Jeremiah does is the key to dealing withgrief. Whatever he does is the answer to life’sdeepest struggles. Whatever he does is the powerof the covenant. There are five steps to Jeremiah’scovenantal mourning.—.. —. —-.

1 Scc Revelation 18:9 and 11 where the words “mourn-ing” and “lamming” arc juxtaposed with “weeping.”

2 For a fuller discussion of covcnang sce Ray R .Sutton, That You May Prosper: Dominwn by Covenant(Tyler, Texas: [.C.E., 1987).

Is Your Familyon a CollisionCourse with *Di~stefl

Our families am in danger. f?iwnx & at an a#f-tim h~h... “SaW sax b beiw taught b the publkschools... Uw collapse of the 15@p in Westerncivhlzation & a wy rwipossbiiity.

tnmedhtte, d e c i s i v e actfon is requfr-ed. Each of our families is on a colliiion coursewith disaster if we don’t take consktent, pasitiveaction to preserve, prote@ and strengthen ourfamily unit But what are we to do?

Renewing Your FamityCovenant

by Ray R. Sutton

Whether you’re a father, a mother, or simplythinking abut marriage or children, RenewhgYour Fami~ Covenant will be an invaluable aid toyou in building (or rebuilding) a solid foundationwith which to withstand the torrents of our time.

This all new premium tape package consists ofsix 60 minute cassette tapes along with a manu-Wvorkbook-all enclosed in a deluxe, looseleafbinder.

Rev. Sutton, an acknowledged expert onfamily matters, delivers his message in a clear,concise, easy to understand format aimed athelping you renew your t&ni& cowmr?~ndpresewe your family. Here’s what the set contains:

. Tape One: Renewing Your Purposec Tape Two: Ren~”ng Your Roles

● Tape Threw Righteousness in Your Home● Tape FOUR Rwwwing Discipline

c Tape Five. Renewing Your inheritance● Tape 9x: How to Have a 50,000 Mile Checkup

Regular Price: $39.95

GENEVA REVIEW SPECIAL!$29.95

CALL (21 4) 592-0620 to order or usethe Express Order CardIncluded with this Issue.

First, JeremiA fttces the fact of death. Hepaints a verbal picture of a widow who has lost hergroom (1: 1); the groom is Josiah and the widow is.Jerusalem (II Chron. 35:25). He p a s s i o n a t e l y

con~inued page 10

The Geneva Rev&w p. 6 April, 1987Trends In Creation Science- ~ U~~ PrlIwI@@: A

cau80f0r C0rmm

JelYtev J. Mevers

You’re sitting at the dinner tabie on a typicalsummer night, when out of the comer of your eye,you glimpse a fly. “Get it, Daddyfl shouts one ofyour kids. But by the time you’re up, the fly is nolonger there. Then someone else sees it. “There itis. Get it!” But again it has disappeared. Afterstalking around in search of the critter, catchingglimpses of it darting this way or that, but eachtime turning to find it gone, you retreat to yourchair and set the flyswatter at arms length mtdy foryour next opportunity. But it’s no use. For the nexthalf-hour you repeat the ritual, occasionally es-pying the beasq but never long enough to locateand S- it.

Illustrations similar to this are often used toexplain the Heisenberg uncertainty principle as itapplies to the difficulty of locating the preciseposition and velocity of an electron. Those elusiveelectrons move so fast that we can never be surewhere they are. We can only speak of the proba-bility of it’s being at any given location within theatom.

Experimental Limitations?All of this immediately makes people think that

Heisenbe@s principle is all about experimental /im-itutwns. We cannot measure the precise positionand velocity of an electron (or any subatomicparticle) because our experiments are not accurateenough. If we had a special technologically sophis-ticated flyscope at the dinner table, we’d be able tozero in on that darn fly and blast it out of the air. Ina similar way, using advanced technology,scientists will succeed one day in pinning downthose slippay electrons. Right?

Wrong! According to quantum physics,uncertainty is not the result of the physicallimitations of our equipment; it is a fundamentaltruth about the nature of the universe. Events at thesubatomic level are incapable of being measuredprecisely. Here is where most people, especiallycreationists, get the heeby-jeebies. Niels Bohr saidit nicely,

“Anyone who is not shocked by quantumtheoq has not understood it. ”

What is it about the Heisenberg uncertaintyprinciple that makes it so weird? How should

creationists interpret this principle, which isperhaps the central feature of quantum physics? 1would like to make some tentative suggestions inthis article. “

No Causality in NatureThe world according to classid Newtonian

physics has been likened to a universe of verysmall billiard balls. Classical physicists believedthat the universe was made up of a finite number oirigid particles which all interacted according toNewton’s three laws and his law of gravity. Cau-sality played a major role in this system of inter-acting rigid particles.

According to Newton’s laws, the behavior ofany particle could be exactly predicted given itsinteractions with other particles and the forcesacting upon it. Thus, it was thought possible,given the position and momentum of each particlein the univeme, to predict with utter precision thefiture of each particle. Not only could the Murebe predicted, but theoretically, a scientist couldtrace a causal chain back as far as his instruments(and the fhitude Of his mind) WOUki WOW him.

‘Ilms arose the familiar comparison of the uni-verse to a machine. ‘IMs was the mechanistic worldof classical physics, where a strict physical cau-sality linked the particles of the universe together.Each atomic event could be described in terms ofparticle collisions. Central to classical physics wasthe concept of causality and the search for causes.Using this model, deists could compare the worldto a clock that God wound up in the beginning andlet go.

Enter modem physics. Quantum physics hascleared the cosmic pool table of billiard balls,providing a different interpretation of subatomicentities — one that rejects the idea of rigid bodiedsubatomic particles. But that’s not all. Not contentwith banishing the billiard ball electron from phy-sics, quantum theory, as interpreted by Heisenbergand Bohr, radically breaks with classical physicsby denying causality at the subatomic level.

J. von Neumen, for example, claimed quantumphysics had proven that “there is at present nooccasion, and no reason to speak of causality innature.”

Heisenberg claimed that since there is no suchthing as a subatomic particle (an electron forexample) that possesses both a precise momentumand precise position, we cannot know what isreally happening at the subatomic level in all itsdetails. We can only deal in probabilities. This de-mands a clear break with classical ideas of deter-

Amil, 1987 n. 7 The Geneva Revkw

minism To quote Heisenberg himself, “.. .tkinvalidip of the lhw of causality is d@*elyproved by quantum mechanics.”

Uncertahky at theSubatomic Level

At first gkince, Heisenberg’s qunxmt &indeterminacy at the subatomic level appears to benothing more than a fallacy of equivocationBecause we cannot “determine” the exact positionand momentum of an electron, therefore the elec-tion is not “determined.” The word determined mthe sense of “ascertain” is used in the pmnise ofthe argument only to be replaced by the meaning“uncausd” in the conclusion.

To be honest, the uncertainty principle will notdisappear so easily. Them &es appear to be momto the uncertainty @Ki@#S chtillange to Causaiitythan just an equivocal argument. Some exper-imental data dbes suggest that the law of causalitybreaks down at the subatomic level. Sincesubatomic entities are not particles, the question ofwhat causes them to do what they do becormsacute. What causes the electron to move aroundinside the atom? What causes the nuclei of certainatoms to decay? For this reason creationists mustcome to grips with the uncertainty principle and itsontological significance.

Some modem physicists have suggested thatchance generates subatomic events. Heisenbergdismissed as meaningless all speculations about theexistence of a red, causally determined worldbehind the stadstically ndi?d world of quantumevents. Certain populmizm of qyantum physicsspeak of subatomic events being caused by chance!For instance, accmding to a recent PBS televisiondocumentary, chance caused the big bang.

There’s another basic fallacy here. How canstatistics rule over anything? Statistics is a descrip-tive sciena, which some quantum quacks haveelevated into a cause of certain events! We may beconfined to &scn”bing certain subatomic events sta-

/ tistically, but is it valid to infer that subatomicevents are governed by probabilities, as many quan-tum theorists demand?

Clearly chance cannot be elevated into the causeof subatomic events. But if chance can’t, and ifsubatomic events are no longer thought to be theresult of the collision of particles, what are we leftwith?

What explains the behavior of subatomicentities? How should creationists resolve the dilem-

con~inued next page

,, .,. :,. . ,.: .: ,.: .,. . . . . . . . % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .::.

... .+3:.?> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:.:.: :.:.:.:.:.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.,.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,..., . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . ...%..... ::.~.:.:.y..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

~$~,~;;t$@b@@,&’;@ggggf~m:#@[@~$zim.M.~pt:..QM2m$.wQw’*i.wd@fiw:chm

. . . . . . . . . . . .xifn-*~mmfti$m*MpxM&iO&. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:.:.: .,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ; : : . ; : ..::: ~ . : ; : : . : .$::>.., . . . . . . . ... .. . . .. ....:>::......::::.. j...> . ... . . . . . . . ....+.. . ::.: .. . .

ii imwM@k:m*:mmEfil.@fwmwE:.*.:.:. :.:,:..::.+.:::;...:.::..:.:y......y.::.~::::::.:.:.. :.:. .:3.::::?+::: . . . . . c ..::.: . . .. ..>y. . . . . . . .. :+. . ~ .~:MP.m@.*mp@P-6ti.&:&i fi#:w&M. . . . . .. . .+.; ==...{.: . . -.. .:.. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..M .“.”. . “ . ’

g~fw...:: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..x?.$ . . . . . ..y . . . . . . . . ..p . ...?.. ~ ..,. . ...* :.:.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

,.:,.. . . . . . . . ..i3-~’-f*~HM~’”b@.Nw@wnmfi. . . . k.:.:.. . . . . . . . . ..::,::., . . . . . . . . . . . ..,...: ~:t:. . ..+. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :.... # . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$$mtimK@w@%@%smw@~..:.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .;Zg@;gti$8E8E#@@ti@@@@&g#@@~~g$g::::. : : : : : : : . : . . . ...*.. . .;;.~;@q@~~~g&;$g&us@*~shou@~wl&oug;;::.GhM##~-Kw&&w3m~’. . . . . . . . . .BMwHdtidi&:Mq~q:~*;$we*,tQ;;may*t&f&}. . . . . . . ; : . . . . :. . . . . . . . . ...’{

‘... ... . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$!MMii#*~~tititiQ~ch:w::~.&.*isfim&Pm&i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . :::::::::. . . . . . . . y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . ..: . . .~::.@si@;.@aw3T@;~=iEEa&RPfE#Bg:~~:dg;aw~%%-mags. . . . . .. . . ...%..... %:.v...:..:.:~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..::.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

%wMwM*$w#fM:m&mw&i@ fewiww. . . . ...+ . , ? . . : .y:~~::::.!...: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ..:= ..: y . -.:...:.. ~...>:.:.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /.::.:.:.::::... . . . . . . .

:::wg.m$Q.K:fiMmw~m@$&pf6m:sm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

;,,:~d6r:$k...:.:...:.:.:...:....:...:..:.*., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:.>!:.. ..,.:.:./ . .../..// , ..: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:.~~,,,,,,;,,,,: ~~~~~~~;g~~:=;g~<wg;.: ,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ...... .... :. ...... .+: :..:..::::.::.:.:.:.:.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+7..:.: .:+ :...: +:-:. :.+:.:.:.: .:-:.: :. . . . . . . . . . ..x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . - .. .’ . . . . ...’.. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... :.:.:.:.:.:+.:.:.: .:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.:.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ..-.-~.--. .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: :. :...:.:.:.:.:.:.: : :. . . . . :. : . :.:.:+:.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : :.:.:.:.: . . . . . . +.-::..:: ! :..,:.:.: .: .::::. *... . . . . : %+...:.:.:.:.:.:.:... % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,,..: . . . ...~...rn:-;.-.::D-wm~:rn;*:@*:@ 9;*:*%. . . . ,.:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,.,...,. /,...,...:.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:::;. :.:::.:.:.:.:.:.Y..:.:.:...:.:. ..:.:.. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:..: . . . . . . . . :.:.:. : : :.:-3:-: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:. .:.; . . . . . . . . . . . ..: : ..:.:.::::=,::::::::<.: l:, X.:.:., . . . . . . . . . . .,.,,. .,, ,.: . :, ,.., ,...,; ,., . . . . . . . . . :.~,:.::~ .::: .:::.: :.?... ::: :::,:.:..:... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$;amGatinisk&i&k%3@tiBs%@G*>E@%%R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:..,: . . . . . . . . . .: *.,.,::.:: :: : : - . . . . : . . . :. .:..:.. ..3: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;,. .:. . . .::.. . . . . . . . . . ....#fR;9iR@K1.31:wHN:%#M3*&MiMR;M:w&:;$=;m22m%E@z%2@&$s&iB3z%%23@

.: :.::.3:::: : “.’:” “.: “ : .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..: . ..: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..-.: :.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : ~ ; ; : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :.:.:.:.: ; ;$::: :::::::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: :.:.:.: : . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...+... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..::, :...:.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:.:.: .~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.>:.>:.:,:..,. . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : :. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . .:...: .:.:.:.: :.:.::.*.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:,..:.>>~.:.:.:.>*:.:,:.:.: :.:. >:..., . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :.< . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >.: :.:.: .:.: : .:.:.:.:.:.,. :.:.,. .:.:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:::. .::::::. x.;.:.:.:. x.;.:.:.:. ,.:.:.. .,. +:.:.:.:. x. :.:.. :+:.:.:...:.:.:. :.: :.: :.; .:.:.. :.:.:.:...:-:...:.:. w.. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .: :::::.:,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ ....... .............. ....................:.:.: .:.:.:,’,......... ........:.:. ..:.:.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :.:.:.:.:.:. ~.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.}:.:.:.:.:.:.y..:.: :.:.:.:.* .2:.:.::.:::::,:::::::::

~W;W.*nq~~~~~~~itiP*’of:*pn.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .::.: . . ...-.........:..::.::: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....$+................. ....... ...... ... .: :.x.:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. -.; ..,..,..‘i” ‘ G*w..ph.w%$ww~:. R!sw@@w?@4w:e if”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

~@@ “O(””R;?2::R~tiQOW:;~.S@t@8@,,::;:’ef,”;?tiW@itil@~”~*t~;4@~+!**(l!?!Q?%..~{*oo. . . . ~~~., ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:...:.:: x....:: :. .,:. . :,. . . . . . . . . :., .,, : ,:,. ., ,,:. 0, :””...” . . ...”... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ., : :.:. ::. .,. . . . . ,, : :. . . . . . ., ‘.’ . . . . . .: ... . . . . . . . . ,:,. ,,, ,. ., ,., . ...:’,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,, . . . . . ..Y. :,:,::: . . . . . . . .. :.:..:.. ,.. ..,. . ,., :,..,, . . . . . . . .

:<t””’’:”~ “ Ch&”C&h,’ti;ti.Oj~nd~w;%<”” ‘“ ‘:,.. . . ,,. , . . .,, . . . . . .. . .,.... . . . . . . . . ,. ,.:.,:, ,.. :, . . . .: : .: .:.,: ,,,..:., . . . . . .,., . . . . . . . . . .,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. .:, .

.< ,;~~. ~~. ] ,.. p[&e,*,~6rn~vi~0~:~~k- ~ .“;.. . . . . . . . .

CARD (&cle one} “;.: ‘,”,, ,,”’:;.:;:;.;j,:>} ~,.’, ,. “;. ..,. . . . . .. . . . . ..,. .:., . . . . ..,’:ca~N”m~’”:::”’ “ ,, ‘, “,

Expiration Date

Name

Address

State — zip-- . . .. —-—- —— _______________ ___ .~’

The Geneva Review p. 8 April, 19Sma posed by Heisenberg uncertainty principle? Letme suggest a few options.

Resolution of the DilemmaF= the creationist may opt out of quantum

physics altogether and return to the more comfort-able world of classical physics. In fact, many havedone precisely this. These creationists understandthe Heisenbergunceminty principle (if they believeit is valid at all) to be nothing more than a statementof the limitations of our cunent experimentaltechniques and ui men~

%/’Stanley L. J “ followtig Einstein’s criticismsof quantum physics) claims that the problem is epis-temological rather than metaphysical. He obsemesthat the notion of causality itself is ultimately onlyan aspect of the principle of suftlcient reason. Ifwe fail to have sufficient reason for certain events,dare we say they are uncaused? We may not beable to perceive any causal comection between twoevents, but does this imply that there is noconnection?

- On this view there am only apparent uncausedevents ~ the subatomic level. As our experimentalknowledge increases and as our instruments aremade more precise we can expect to find the causesfor certain subatomic events.

There’s no other option for a classicalphysicist. For him, an event is simply unintelligiblewithout a mechanical cause. If the idea of uncaus-ed events is absurd, in the eyes of a classical phy-sicist nonmechanical causes am worse. Nonmech-anistic connections border on the occult and harkback to pre-Newtonian days when the world wasunderstood not as a machine but as an organism.Uncaused events and nonmechanical causes-bothare unacceptable to the classical physicist.

But even if we accept the view that theHeisenberg uncertainty principle is all aboutexperimental limitations, is it proper to presupposemechanical causes for aff subatomic events? Ourcausal search must stop somewhere. It may be thatwith quantum mechanics we have reached thethreshold of mecharu”caf causal relationships withinthe physical world.

Supraphysical CausesHere lies a second, more interesting option for

the creationist. Maybe there are nonmechanicalcauses for certain fimdamental subatomic events.Could there be events at the subatomic level that arethe result of supraphysical causes? [n classicalphysics this suggestion would be preposterous, but

need the Christian scientist fear? Is the fhte ofChristianity tied up with the classical mechanisticworldview? I think not. The possibility of non=mechanical causes would lead to one of twaconclusions.

First, we might propose that for everysubatomic event there are nonmechanical causesoriginating horn within the created world. Thisdoes not necessarily have to lead to somethingoccultic, as it did in pre-Newtonian science. Itwould simply imply some form of “action at adistance,” a nonmechanistic account for certainsubatomic events.

“Of course there’s only onePerson outside creation whocould be the cause of every

subatomic event. Isn’t it possiblethat God, who ‘upholds all thingsby the word of His power’ (Heb.1:3), is directIy responsible for

subatomic events?”

Must everything in the created world bereduced to mechanistic interactions betweenparticles? In rejecting Heisenberg’s interpretationof quantum mechanics is the Christian forced toreturn to the billiard ball world of Newtonianphysics? Need nonmechanical causes be identifiedwith the occult? These are all questions Christianscientists must answer if they accept the Hei-senberg principle, and yet still wish to avoid theabsurdity of uncaused events.

Now for the final and most provocativealternative. Might there be nonmechanical causesfor subatomic events that originate outside the crea-ted order? Maybe the atomic pie cannot be slicedany fbrther. There’s only so far man can go in hissearch for causes. According to Ecclesiastes 3:11,“No man can find out the work that God does ffombeginning to end.” Could the uncertainty principlebe telling us that we have really reached the limit ofthe physical, created causal chain?

Of course there’s only one Person outsidecreation who could be the cause of every subatomicevent. Isn ‘t it possible that God, who “upholds allthings by the word of his power” (Heb. 1:3) isdirectly responsible for subatomic events? ~

April, 19$7 p. 9 The Genew Review

MUSIC and We

u

The Benefits of Psalm Singing

One of the sad&r aspects of much Christianeducation today is the lack of emphasis on music.In the Bible, music is very much a part of life, andmusic is the God-ordained means of praise inworship. The Books of Chronicles, especially 1Chronicles 25, show how important music is to theworship of God. How wonderful it would be ifour congregational singing could be accompaniedby a brass choir, or even a W orchestra! Not forevery hymn, of course, but for some of them,allowing the instrumentalists to sing along with therest of the congregation on some of the hymns.Some churches, such as the Moravians, havealways had this.

It would be a fine thing if Christian schoolscould provide orchestra and brass choir training,but it would be somewhat expensive. One thingthat any school (Christian day school or churchSunday School) can do, however, is to teach sing-ing. First and foremost among the songs the child-ren should be taught is, of course, the psalter.There are a number of reasons for singing Psalmsand other portions of the Bible. I can only give afew here.

First, the Psalter was given to train us in ourprayer and praise. Thus, when we learn, sing, andpray the Psalms, we m laying the foundation for acloser walk with God.

Second, the Bible teaches us that wisdom andChristian maturity come through meditation uponScripture. We are told to meditate day and night(Ps. 1:2), iind to talk about God’s truth when wewalk by the way, when we lie down, when we riseup, and when we sit in our houses (Deut. 6:7). Ob-viously, we cannot meditate on Scripture at these

{ times unless we have some of it memorized.Singing Psalms and other Scripture portions willgive us many sections of Scripture to meditate onduring the day. If the children were to sing threePsalms every day, at morning prayer, lunch, and atthe close of the school day, they would have theentire Psalter memorized by the time they graduatedfrom school.

Third, Scripture commands us to meditate uponthe Psalms and to sprinkle our conversation withthem (Eph. 5:19). While this verse does not

command us to sing Psalms in church, obviously ithints in that direction, although it does not excludesinging hymns as well.

Fourth, Psalm singing will improve our wor-ship in many direct ways. In the time of the Refor-mation, many beautifhl hymns wem written. Thesehymns were written by men who were steeped inthe _ and thus reflect a profound under-standing of God and man. When the PsaIms go outof the church, the hymns decline in quality andstrength.

Which psalms should we teach our children?All of them, of come, even those that seemstrange to us. If we only sing the ones we partic-ularly like, we will be cutting ourselves off hornthe opportunity to grow and expand ourappreciation for God’s truth. AU Scripture is God-breathed and profitable . . . .

ResourcesThere am a variety of Psalters available, but no

one of them unfortunately is ideal. Of those Psal-ters that are easiest to sing fkom, all but one areincomplete. These books are the easiest to usebecause they are printed like regular hymn-books,with the words printed inside the music.Examples are the United Presbyterian ChurchPsatter (published by Eerdmans) and the Chri@mRef~d Psaker–Hynzna/ (published by the Chris-tian Reformed Church). Both of these contain allthe Ps~ but some of the Psalms are not com-plete: whole sections are omitted. ‘Ilms, if we wantto learn the entire Book of Psalms, these will notdo.

There are three absolutely complete Psalters wecan choose among. Fii there is the ScottishPsalter (Oxford Univemity Pmss)e You can get thiswith the music, or with the words only. The mus-ical edition has the pages literally split in half, withthe words on the bottom pages and music on top.If you order one, be sure to specify you want“notation” rather than “sol-fan, because you won’tbe able to read the “sol-fa” edition. Advantage: thePsalms are in simple meter, and can be sung tofamiliar tunes. Disadvantages: virtually all thePsalms are in common meter (8 syllables, 6syllables, 8 syllables, 6 syllables). There is notmuch diversity. Also, the verification is so literalthat some very peculiar grammar and syntaxresults, which interferes with the meaning of thetext. The language is often archaic and weird tomodem ears. Also, the music is not very good.

continued next page

The Geneva Revbw p. 10 April, 1987

>

Second, them is the Covenanted Psalter (Boardof Education and Publication, RPCNA, 7418Penn. Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15208). The music isgenerally much better in this Psalter, though someof the songs are really bad musically. Again, anoverly-literal verification has occasionally pro-duced strange language and WeiId ~.

My preference is far and away for the thirdalternative, the GeneVan Psafter or as it is currentlytitled The Book of Praise. (available tim GenevaMinkries for $10.35 phs $1.00 postage andhandling). The music of the Genevan Psalms is ex-cellent. The Psalms are exciting to sing and have arhythmical beat that children and adults reallyenjoy, once they learn them. The translations areaccurate but freer than the Scottish and Covenanted,so that there is no odd language. The music isunfamiliar, but no harder than gospel hymns. Agood song leader is required to teach them. Manyof the Genevan tunes were used by Bach, and thusfind their way into the great music of all time.

The disadvantage of the Book of Praise is thatit only gives the melody, so the pianist or organisthiis to get a book giving the parts. At present theonly one available is J. Worp, Rhythmical Pszdter~t may be purchased fkom the Family ChristianBookstore, 750 Guelph Line, Burlington, OntarioL7R 3NS, (416) 637-9151].

I suggest you get as many of these as possibleand look them over. Keep in mind that a little effortnow will pay off in the future. I believe the extraeffort involved in learning the rhythmical GenevanPsalms, called “Geneva jigs” in the old days, iswell worth it! You will be teaching your childrengood music, along with teaching them the Bible.

How to Teach the PsalterIntroduce Psalms into your church, so that the

children can sing them there as well. I suggest thefollowing: have a Psalm of the month for bothmorning and evening services. In six years youwill know them all. When learning, perhaps at aweekly prayer meeting or Bible study, go through

{ these steps:1)

2)

3)

4)

Piano plays all the way through (use apiano for learning, since it is easier to hearthe fiythm on a piano than on an organ).Song leader sings all the way throughto piano accompaniment.Song leader sings one phrase at a time,congregation repeating after.Song leader sings one half of the Psalmat a time, congregation repeating.

5) Congregation sings through the firstverse a couple of -

6) Congregation sings the whole Psalm.Teach the Psalms at a relatively slow tempo,

Speedln“ g up when the Psalm has been learned.Break up long Psalms into shorter sections, basedon the natural divisions in the Psalter. ~

(Thk essay j?rst appeared in the Bib/id EdUUUOr, Vol.1, No. 3, December 1979)

Sutton, continuedfrom page 5etches her tears in our minds when he says, “Sheweeps bitterly in the night” (1:2). She was awoman who knew that death had come, and Jere-miah translates her suffering to mean that he knowsthat the king has died and that there is no one totake his place.

Mourning begins by facing the reality that aloss has occurred. This is easier said than done. Ionce counseled a woman who lost her husband.She had a mannequin made to look like him, sothat she could keep him in her presence. Shecouldn’t let him go. Jeremiah let Josiah go becausehe knew that another groom would come, JesusChrist, just as certainly as Jesus will come to anyamong His bride who are hurting.

Second, Jeremiah faces the loss of an old struc-ture. He names the loss of the role of several keyfigures in the hierarchical structure of Israel:princes (2:9), elders (2:10), prophets (2:14), andeven the tabernacle itself (2:6). He realizes thatJerusalem is left unguarded, therefore, and that thepeople of the city need a new structure to protectthem.

Biblical mouming should initiate a Mlizationthat the loss of something restructures life, becauseany death creates certain vulnerability; a rela-tionship is gone that provided structure to life andso forth. Anxiety is caused, and a gnawing fearsets in that C.S. Lewis described as butterflies inthe stomach. A new structure is needed. For theJews of Jesus day, the replacement of the Templewould be Jesus and the Church. For any whosuffer loss today, it is still Jesus and His Body.

Third, Jeremiah sees that his fears of God’sretribution are offset by God’s faithfulness. Hebegins the chapter by describing a person whothinks that he has been cast off by God because ofsomething he has done wrong, because of someoffense against God’s law. But as he progressesthrough this lengthy chapter, he turns to the Lord,saying, “Great is Thy faithfidness . . . . Let us exa-

continued page 12

April, 19$7 p. 11 The Geneva Revkm

Grant, ~f~ ~ 1Sem@ we perpetuate moral irresponsibility.

Our addiction to mediocre scholarship and preach-ing has proven itself a spawning ground for a“devil-made-me-do-it” generation. As long as wecan lay off on someone or something else the re-sponsibility for sin, we f~l we can escape its con-sequences. This wholesale denial of basic Biblicalprinciples has short-circuited the very efkctivenessand productivity of our dnistries.

Scripture lays upon &&vers the awesome taskof introducing help, hope, and healing in a hurtingland. When a culture fails morally — or is strickenin wholesale judgment — Scripture looks to theimpotent witness of the Church as the first cause,according to 2 Chronicles 7:14. Judgment befalls apeople when the sati m- to humble them-selves. Society deteriorates when Christ&zns mnfivm their responsibilities, seeking “salvation” ineducation, legislation, or isolation. Sickness in asociety is not measured by conspiracies, manifesta-tions, or political orientation but by the dearth ofcostly discipleship among God’s own (Galatians6:% James 1:14-15).

So what now? Our shallow imprecision andplastic prophetic piffle has caught our evangelicalimpact short. Our apologetics, before a watchingworld, is suspect, and our influence is compart-mentalized. We must say this with tears.

Let us now roll back the results of ourunfortunate sloppiness and Slothfulness.

“Do not call conspiracy everything these peoplecall Conspimcy.” ~Gilstrap, awtinuedfrom pqge 2independent minktry endeavoring to tmnscenddenominational boundaries with the world trans-forming message of the gospel of Christ. Our latestbrochure which more filly explains Geneva Minis-tries purpose and mission is enclosed with thisnewsletter.

Although Geneva Ministries has made a changein the way we are organized, we have not changedthe fimdamental reason for our existence in the tlmt

/ place. With Paul, we must confess that in Christ allthings must be reconciled to the Father (Colossians1:20). It is through Christ and His cross that theentire universe is brought back or restored to itsproper relationship to God. This world can only berightly viewed from this perspective. BiblicalChristianity is determinative of all of life.

It is Geneva Ministries’ calling to examine asfully as possible the depth and practical ramifica-tions of this confession. It is our job (youn andmine) to do our part in bringing this confession to areality. ~

~U-y:’’’><<y”:<: ::,..,,,.. ..,. ,, . ..., , :,: ,,,

me B&k “v~ati?g~:~.>::;;jiikiuam ~=.~~~~~:~:iiii:::.. . . . . . . . . . ; :,. ;::. ”.... . . . .. . . . ..:;...,;<:., .:.u*’~~wFw “’.;”{:?.:g:’s:::~... , . . . . . . . . . . . . .: : >... . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ::, . . . . .

Leithart, continuedfrom pnge 3life.” JeSUS texk, fht, that eternal Me tom= tothose who respond to the preached Word in faith.Second, he contrasts “eternal life” not with deathbut with “condemnation.” ‘h& we may concludethat “life here implies ‘acquittal.’” Putting thesetwo obsmations together, we conclude that thosewho respond in faith to the Word are acquitted,justified. When one responds in faith to the Word,he crosses, judicially, from death to life. The Wordapplies God’s judgment to the hearer. If heresponds in faith, he will Iiv% if he rejects theW@ he is condemned already. ~

Jordan, continuedfiom puge 4

stand on the rock”). Thus, these waters am flowingfrom heaven also. Heavenly water does not removeus from this world. On the contrary, it works to re-store this world. In a sense the good water drivesout the bad. Ground water is defiled unless m-renewed by heavenly influences (Ex. 15:23-25).Notice the language of Deuteronomy 11:10-11,“For the land, into which you are entering topossess it, is not like the land of Egypt nom whichyou came, where you used to sow your seed andwater it with your foot like a vegetable garden. Butthe land into which you are about to cross topossess it, and hind of hills and valleys, drinkswater from the rain of heaven.” This heavenlywater produces new ground water “For the LORDyour God is bringing you into a good land, a landof brooks of water, of fountains and spMgs,flowing forth in valleys and hills” (IX 8:7).

Water symbolism in the Bible is rich, complex,and often hard for modems to come to grips with.As we make the attempt, however, we must makesure we incorporate the distinction between watersabove and waters below. The holy rain of baptismplaces us into the heavenly environment of theglory cloud of God, the waters above. But,because these heavenly influences shower downupon the earth, the fallen earth is restored. The fmcreation was corrupted, and water fkom the cursedearth cannot restore the world. There is a newcreation, however, and water from above willrejuvenate the world. Holy baptism means nothingless.

(For a Biblical defense of sprinkling and what it means,see Duane Spencer, Holy fkzpfisrn, published by Gcnev~Ministric$ price: S9.95.) m

The Geneva Revi&w p. 12 April, 1987

nNewsWld Vlewa

April 1987

The AIDS Plagueoo.“Be&et hediseaseh asrunits~

world public health officials estima@about one hundred mU&m peopkwiU die from AIDS worUwi& . . . .

“Other epidemics could be controlledby quarantine. They came f- and theywent fast. The exception was tuber-culosis. Now, horrifyingly, this dread di-sease is retutning as a side-effect ofAIDS*

“How can you quarantine a hundredmillion people? You can’t executethem yet this is the only means ofremoving the fmt cousin of the AIDS?entivirus which attdcs sheep.

“YOU SiII@y wait. And PI%ly. Andtake steps to reduce the likelihood ofyour family’s contracting the disease.But the problem @ pandemics reach astage called critical nws. At somepoin~ the* leaps the nomlal trans-mission barriers and spreads far beyond.This may not happen with AIDS. Yet itmay.

“In TexaA there have been 2,000people with full-blown AIDS. So far,1,300 have died (62%). By 1991, statehealth officials estimate there will be16,000. It will be 60,000 by 1996. Theplague is here. The world willeventually panic. When it does, whowill be redy with answers? Whichgroup will pick up the pieces?” (GaryNorth, Remmnt Revkw, 3fi/87, P.O.BOX 8204, Ft . worth, TX 761X,$951year)

The AIDS/AbortionConnection...

‘The issue of AIDS was subject to a! new twist in the news last month, as it

was linked with the issue of abortion.“According to the Associated Press,

health officials in Los Angeles are nowcounseling pregnant women who havebeen exposed to the AIDS virus toconsider abortion.

‘This comes after a study by the Cen-ters for Disease Control reDorted that a

wornan who &sts positivo for MIXantibodies hasa30%to 50%-ofpassing the inkction on to her unbornchildren even though there is CuKentlyno way of knowing whether the unbornchild has been infected

“Rolikrs are describing this latestattack on the unborn as ‘reckless,’ since50% to 70% of the children born toAIDS infected mothers don’t have thevirus.

“Says Curtis Young, ExecutiveDirector of the Christian Action Coun-cil, ‘There’s no agony of spirit amongofficials over randomly destroying sevennormal human beings in order to destroythree Whh the virus.” @ion Line,3/15/87, 701 W. Broal Street, Suite405, Falls Ch~ VA 22046)

Aborted Fetuses to be“Harvested’’...

Ytwasmportedt hatinthenearfuturethe brains of aborted fetuses will be‘hawested’ and !heir cells trampkmtedinto the brains of people suffering se-vere memory loss to help correct thecondition.

“According to Dr. Robert MOITCII ofthe Neuroscience Research Foundation,this would not be an immoral pmtice.‘It’s a situation in which you mustdetermine if the potential benefits to apatient sufftig memory loss outweighthe concerns about taking tissue from abody that’s going to be thrown awayanyway,’ he said.

“Although MorTcll expects fetal braintransplants to become common, heanticipates the fwst procedures to beperformed outside the U.S., due to~ mm the pmlife movement.

‘The use of fetal organs is welldocumen@ but the notion of brain celltransplants is new. It is a sick societythat jus~les ending the lives of unbornchildren, and then uses what remains ofthem to prolong or enhance their owmlives.

“This certainly guts the primeargument of abortion proponents thatthe fetus is unwanted. He’s wantedalrigh~ just like slaves were wanted,without rights and subject to the mostoutrageous abuse imaginable.” (ActwnLine 3/15/87)

Trillion DoUar Federal Budget...The United States Government now

hasatrillion dollar budg~~hatrillion? If some tooth f@ left a $100bill under your pillow every -every day and every nigh$ in 317 yearsyou’d be a trillionaire.

“It’s a Musand billions. And abfllion is a thousand millions. Amillion seconds is a mere 11 1/2 days.But a billion seconds is 31.7 years. Atrillion seconds? lhat’s a mere 31,700yearn.” (Straight T* 3/26/87, PO Box60 Pigeon Forge TN 37863, $47/@r).

Little Support f6r PatRobertson’s presidential bid...

“Inapollt akenatthe. March3-5amvention of * National Asmciadonof Evangelical (NAE), Pat Robertsonplaced fourth among republicanpresidential hopefids . . . . 34% said theGOP would do well to nominate BobDole...Jack Kemp came in second with23%...Bush was close behind with21%... and Robertson fourth with 13%.”(Natwnaf a n t i Intermtwml ReligwnReport, 3/20/87, 5007 Carriage Dr.,SW, Roano@ VA M018, $39/year).

Sutton, mnhuedjiom page 10mine and probe our ways, and let usreturn to the Lord” (3:23,40). Man inev-itably thinks that God is punishing himwhen something goes wrong, especiallya great loss. But Jeremiah reminds usthat a time of crisis is a time to turn toChrist with renewed, soul-searchingCommitnwm

Four, Jeremiah finds a new sense ofthe judgment of God. He understandsthat Jerustdern is under some kind ofpunishment, and he concludes that herpunishment is complete. Mourningshould remind one of God’s awful judg-men~ after all, there would have neverbeen sickness and death if man had notfallen. But mourning should also chan-nel one’s life to the completion of judg-ment in Jesus Christ.

Fifth, Jeremiah realizes a change ofnew leadership. He describes the loss ofthe old leaders — fathers and elders —and the rise of slaves who rule overthem (5:8). But beyond all of this, hesees the rule of God (5:19). He knowsthat he is secure in God’s control. He isassured that everything will work out.J=tia fiis COtiOrt mtte 5:40!

The Gateva Review (MN~WM3)u~Miti-y by GmvaMfitia KwishingtodveitstKxM~rw pstsmOcmve.h4iddM#.o.Box 131300, ~kr,Texes7S713. Admetkm, mcdc&ctib~ isquested. Odcs$MIUtdbemu katto GmevaMhdstda. PermisslonIofepldcelhesea=Y%rnwhokos inperg isgrti pmvi&i Uwmmmumfa&asof The Gkneva Revtewis inctuti