Some Extrabiblical Evidence For The Existence Of The Historical Jesus Christ

Zaraka, Greece-trekearth

Listening to Gary Habermas lectures and interviews on his website the concept of this short post was created.

From Historian Earle E. Cairns:

In regard to extrabiblical evidence for the existence of the historical Jesus Christ.

Roman and related

Tacitus (55-117) a Roman historian connected the name and origin of Christians with 'Christus' who under Emperor Tiberius was put to death by Procurator Pontius Pilate. Cairns (1981: 45).

Pliny, the propraetor of Bithynia and Pontus in Asia Minor wrote a letter to Emperor Trajan at about 112 for guidance on how he should deal with the Christians. He noted that they 'sing a song to Christ as to a God'. Cairns (1981: 45).

Suetonius in 'Lives of the Twelve Caesars' writes that the Jews were expelled from Rome because of disturbances over 'Chrestos'. Cairns (1981: 45). He is noted to have mentioned the fire in Rome in 64 under Emperor Nero and that Nero inflicted punishment on Christians. McDowell (1999: 121).

Lucian (ca. 125-190) wrote a satirical review of Christians at about 170 and described Christ that was crucified in Palestine after he began 'a new cult'. Cairns (1981: 46). McDowell adds that he 'spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians'. McDowell (1999: 121).

Jewish

Josephus (37-ca 100) wrote of James the brother of Jesus the so called Christ. There is some debate in regard to the authenticity of Josephus writings. There may have been according to critics 'interpolation by Christians' but Cairns writes that most scholars accept the writing as from Josephus and as original text. What Josephus wrote demonstrates he was not an ally of Christians or Christianity. Cairns (1981: 46).

McDowell mentions that within the Babylonian Talmud it states 'In has been taught: On the of Passover they hanged Yeshu'. McDowell (1999: 123-124). Hanged being a crucifixion reference. McDowell (1999: 123). Jesus and his disciples, five of them are also mentioned. McDowell (1999: 124). In one section Jesus is also called 'Such-an-one is a bastard of an adulteress'. McDowell (1999: 124).

Interesting that McDowell used Gary Habermas as a major source.

Christian

Cairns mentions that there are many Christian 'apocryphal gospels, acts, letters and apocalypses' Cairns (1981: 46). These would depend as in predicate on an historical Christ existing. Cairns (1981: 46).

CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

MCDOWELL, JOSH (1999) The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Vancouver

Acts 17: 27 Brief

York, England, probably 1995

A well-known and fine Biblical scholar that teaches online and on radio appears to contend, on several occasions that Acts 17: 24-27, 27 in particular, is proof text for libertarian free will and incompatibilism.

I also dealt with this subject with some different content back in 2008:

Could They Become Christians Whenever

Definitions

Blackburn writes that some form of metaphysical libertarianism postulates that free choice is not causally determined, but is also not random. It is suggested that an agency situated outside of human nature, in regard to making human choice, is possible but likely ‘fantasy.’ Blackburn (1996: 218).

Libertarian free will is usually viewed as a form of indeterminism. The concept in libertarian free will is that a person is able to perform another action in the place of one that has been committed. This action cannot be predetermined by any circumstance or desire. Norman Geisler explains that indeterminism is defined as the idea that there are no antecedent (preceding conditions) or simultaneous (at the same time) causes of human actions. All human actions are free if a person could have done otherwise. Geisler (1996: 429).

Indeterminism is also equated with incompatibilism which states that God, or any other being, cannot cause by force or coercion any human action, nor can any action be simultaneously willed by God or any other being, for the human action to remain significantly free. Geisler (1996: 429).

John S. Feinberg explains that compatibilism does not allow for coercion or force, but holds that God, or some outside force, can simultaneously determine with the use of persuasion, that an action will or will not take place. Feinberg (1986: 24). Feinberg writes that certain nonconstraining conditions could strongly influence actions, in conjunction with human free will performing these actions. Feinberg (1994: 60). With this viewpoint, there will be no contradiction in stating that God would create human beings who were significantly free, unconstrained, and yet committed actions that God willed. Feinberg (2001: 637).

W.T. Stace (1952)(1976) explains that moral responsibility is consistent with determinism in the context of soft determinism and requires it. Stace (1952)(1976: 29). If human actions are uncaused then reward or punishment would be unjustified. Stace (1952)(1976: 29). Stace reasons that there must be at least some human cause within human actions to make them morally responsible acts. Stace (1952)(1976: 30).

Pojman explains that hard determinism holds that every event is caused and no one is responsible for actions, whereas soft determinism holds that rational creatures can be held responsible for determined actions as long as they are done voluntarily and without force or coercion. Pojman (1996: 586).

Acts 17: 24-28

24 The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and [t]exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’

Calvin in his Acts commentary explains that it was the human duty to seek God, and that God will meet human beings and demonstrated clear signs of his existence in creation. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). Those who do not exert themselves to seek after God are not worthy to live on this earth. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). Through the creation of the world God has shown his glory. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). 

Calvin raises the important issue if whether this knowledge concerning God from nature allows persons such as the Athenians to gain true and clear knowledge about God by this nature. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). He reasons that persons choose not to pay attention to God, but that true knowledge about God is a special gift, which comes by faith and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). Our own human minds cannot penetrate this far if guided by human nature alone, Calvin (1552)(1995: 302).

In this Acts passage, Paul is not dealing with the human ability to believe in saving faith, but is only showing that persons have no excuse when God is not perceived, and Calvin mentions Romans 1:20, which concerns God revealing himself in creation. (1552)(1995: 302-303).

La Sor writes that human beings do not give to God (24-26), but that God gives to all nations breath, life and all things. La Sor (1978: 273). He further suggests that Paul was preaching to the Greeks in Athens, philosophically that God was at the centre of the universe as opposed to humanity. La Sor (1978: 273).

It was an offense to present God in the form of human made idols. La Sor (1978: 273).

Paul was appealing to the superiority of the Biblical God in philosophical terms over Greek concepts and stating that there were signs of the true God in creation that could be known.

27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;

Byzantine Majority--zhtein ton kurion ei ara ge yhlafhseian auton kai euroien kaige ou makran apo enoV ekastou hmwn uparconta

Alexandrian --zhtein ton qeon ei ara ge yhlafhseian auton kai euroien kai ge ou makran apo enoV ekastou hmwn uparconta

Hort and Westcott--zhtein ton qeon ei ara ge yhlafhseian auton kai euroien kai ge ou makran apo enoV ekastou hmwn uparconta

Some minor variations in the Greek manuscripts. A reminder that as far as known, the original texts are not in existence.

Original texts were copied by many scribes to keep overall and theological accuracy. Therefore manuscripts and translations are not representing dictated texts from God, but rather copies of original divinely inspired texts.

This is how God maintained his Scripture.

Marshall using a version that looks almost identical to the Alexandrian and Hort and Westcott versions translates:

to seek - God if perchance they might feel after him and might find though not far from one each of us being

The Greek New Testament, I own also offering a Hort and Westcott version. Noted Hort and Westcott is the basis of their text. The Greek New Testament (1993: viii).

ζητέω to seek (literally or figuratively); specially, (by Heb) to worship (God), or (in a bad sense) to plot (against life) Derivation: of uncertain affinity; Strong (1890)(1986: 44).

Bauer comments with the description for which 17: 27 is under. 'What one desires somehow to bring into relation w. oneself or to obtain without knowing where it is to be found'. Bauer (1979: 338).

εὑρίσκω to find (lit or fig), find, get, obtain, perceive, see. Strong (1890)(1986: 43).

Bauer comments in regard to 17: 27 and 'seeking and finding God', it is placed under the definition of fig. of intellectual discovery based on reflection, examination, or investigation, find. Bauer (1979: 325).

Conclusion

Taking a bit deeper look with this post than the previous one on the same subject, I see no reason from Scripture to conclude that the verse or passage is supporting, theologically or philosophically libertarian free will concepts or incompatibilism.

Calvin was correct, the type of knowledge of God discussed is in concert, in agreement, with what the Apostle Paul also taught in Romans 1, that being, humanity can and should have an intellectual knowledge of God based on nature.

This does not equate to a specific knowledge of the Biblical God in any soteriological sense, in any sense of salvation.

God would still be the initiator of Revelation knowledge that leads to one being born again (John 3) and chosen, predestined in Christ (Ephesians 1 and Romans 8).

As proof text it would work to some extent as a disproof of hard determinism, sometimes called 'determinism', but does not support libertarian free will and incompatibilism, or indeterminism.

The text does not work against the concepts of soft determinism and compatibilism because it could be stated that Paul was preaching to the Greeks in Athens because as human beings of sound mind they posses 'limited free wills' (my MPhil/PhD term) that even within a fallen nature have significant freedom to make actual choices, but importantly as secondary causes.

God when he wills and chooses as primary cause would be within the regeneration process persuading secondary causes to believe in sovereign certainty.

This would eliminate force or coercion.

BAUER, W (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books.

FEINBERG. JOHN S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

GEISLER, N.L. (1996) ‘Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

LA SOR, William Sanford (1978) Acts: Church Alive, Glendale, California, Regal Books Division.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

STACE, W.T. (1952)(1976) Religion and the Modern Mind, in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers.

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies.

York, England, 1995

York Minster-trekearth

Galatians 1:8-9 Brief

Belgium, I Eclaircie-trekearth

I have been listening to an audio version of Galatians lately...

Galatians 1: 6-10 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you [a]by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel [b]contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be [c]accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel [d]contrary to what you received, he is to be [e]accursed! 10 For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ.

Greek New Testament

Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus
wV proeirhkamen kai arti palin legw ei tiV umaV euaggelizetai par o parelabete anaqema estw

Byzantine Majority
wV proeirhkamen kai arti palin legw ei tiV umaV euaggelizetai par o parelabete anaqema estw

Brief Background Of Galatians

Commentator F. Roy Coad makes the quite clear observation from the context, statement that Galatians is free from authorship controversies as it is virtually unanimous that the Apostle Paul wrote the Book. Coad (1986: 1413). Paul is clearly identified as the author.

There are debates on the date of the letter and the location of churches intended. Coad (1986: 1413). Many American and British scholars conclude Paul established on his first missionary journey a church in the southern part of the Roman Province of Galatia. (1986: 1416).

The writer reasons that Galatians was likely the first New Testament text written, in 48-49 AD, and Paul's conversion was likely in approximately 33 AD. Coad (1986: 1416).

Galatians 1: 6-10

Commentators with different views ask 'Was Paul implying that the Judaizers' message was no gospel at all; or that it was not a different message, but merely a perversion of the true?' Coad (1986: 1418).

The Judaizers being those formerly of Hebrew Religion of the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible in the early Christian Church that were attempting to live under Old Covenant Law and influencing others to do so.

However the Scriptural context states a different gospel (verse 6), contrary to what you received (verse 9).

Marshall states 'another gospel': eteron euaggelion

Coad states one that preaches such as gospel is 'eternally condemned' -anathema. Coad (1986: 1418).

ἀνάθεμα: Is translated as 'a curse' 'let him be' estw in Alfred Marshall's Greek Lexicon.

Bauer documents ἀνάθεμα: it is the 'object of a curse' in Galatians 1: 8 forward. Bauer (1979: 54).

Strong's documents ἀνάθεμα: A religious ban or excommunicated thing or person-accursed, anathema, curse x great. Strong (1986: 10).

Concepts of being everlastingly condemned, being cursed/anathema seem stronger than simply a perversion of the true gospel, or aberrant theology. It appears from the level of Paul's critical critique it is quite possibly beyond legalistic religion that is actually being discussed.

It is presumptuous to assume that core orthodox doctrines were still held to, although this is a possibility based on scholarship.

Rather in being a different gospel means there is a reasonable possibility the particular Judaizers involved had fallen back into the Law to a point where they had theologically and practically rejected the atoning work and resurrection of Christ in soteriology.

Therefore they may have in fact had a different gospel, a different religion. Paul may not just be criticizing the Judaizers and then stating that those with a different gospel in a hypothetical sense are everlastingly condemned and cursed, but some of those mentioned were in fact in that position with God.

However, I can see from the text how there is some room for debate.

As application, any world religion and worldview regardless of how many or few adherents that seriously disagrees and alters itself from Scriptural views in regard to the Nature of God and soteriology would by implication find itself everlastingly condemned, and cursed as a false gospel by God.

This is true even of religions that claim to have post-New Testament angelic and divine origins, Galatians seemingly anticipating this type of attempt to alter the New Testament gospel, verse 8 forward.

BAUER, W (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

La Campagna, Italy-trekearth

Sole, Portoferraio, Italy-trekearth

Thoughts On Educational And Cultural Trends

Loebau, Germany-trekearth

On Albert Mohler.com I listen often once a week to 'The Briefing'. I agree with many of his Reformed Baptist views although where we tend to differ is where I do not culturally identify with the American Evangelical movement on some of the very conservative assumptions associated in American culture. I admittedly, arriving from Canadian culture with Canadian and British education and moderate conservative positions.

In order I would view myself as Christian, Reformed, Evangelical.

I also listen to his less frequent and longer program 'Thinking In Public'. The last two years there have been two interviews posted in regard to education and the male role in American society which would also have some relevance to Western society in general.

I have listened to both of them more than once.

Where Have The Men Gone A Conversation With Kay Hymowitz 2011/04/11

More recently:

A Culture Increasingly Hostile To Men A Conversation With Psychologist Helen Smith 2013/09/16

Transcript from 2011/04/11

Selected Citations

'Mohler: This is “Thinking in Public”, a program dedicated to intelligent conversation about front line theological and cultural issues with the people who are shaping them. I’m Albert Mohler, your host, and President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. Something is happening when it comes to young men in America and for that matter around the world. It might be better stated as something is not happening. What is not happening is that boys are not moving into manhood at anything like what we might describe as on schedule. Instead we’ve entered a new very, very troubling period in American life in which the transition from boyhood to manhood is anything but clear and in many cases anything but happening. Kay Hymowitz is the William E. Simon Fellow at the Manhattan Institute one of the nation’s most important think tanks. She’s also a contributing editor of City Journal. She writes extensively on issues including childhood, family issues, poverty, and cultural change in America. You may know her well through her books including Marriage and Cast in America, Liberation’s Children, and now her newest book Manning Up: How the Rise of Women is Turning Men into Boys. Kay Hymowitz really launched an assault upon the contemporary idea of manhood and of adulthood in an article published in Wall Street Journal on February 10, 2011 entitled Where Have the Good Men Gone? Kay Hymowitz welcome to Thinking in Public.'

'Mohler: Well, in this process it is boys and young men who are particularly having difficulty. For instance right now as you’ve indicated and by the way since you’ve written your book the statistics are only more exaggerated. The displacement of young men on American college campuses and it is that by the way. It’s not just that there are more women it is actually that there are fewer young men on many of these campuses. It is now to the point that many campuses are marking a 60/40 split between the women and the men with far more young women than young men. And when it comes to graduates even more so and in an…this just means that young men are getting further and further behind.

Hymowitz: That is exactly right. So this is a big concern you know if you have 57% or 60% of college graduates are women what happens even if it takes a much longer time to settle down most people still want to get married and have children where are these women supposed to find their husbands. You know they’re either going to marry men who are less educated than they are or they’re going to remain single. And I think the former is unlikely from what I’ve seen. There are some more marrying down as it might be called among women over the last decade but I’m not an awful lot of those marriage tend to be much more fragile.

Mohler: Yeah and as a matter of fact there is no precedent in human history for women marrying men with less economic ability, and less education, and less social status and that working.

Hymowitz: Yes, that’s exactly right I just wrote a piece on this very topic. It’s something that people don’t like to talk about because we like to pretend that marriage really is just about love, finding your soul mate, and class has nothing to do with it. But of course it does a great deal. People are more likely to be attracted to people to whom they share their values and a mindset.'

'Mohler: Yeah and actually those numbers are, they’re not a small uptake here. We’re talking about a major demographic wave that is coming at us especially when it comes to the fewer young women who are getting married and even to a greater degree the fewer babies coming from those unions. Mark Regnerus at University of Texas and others have been doing work and there’s another side to this and that is that feminists had thought that getting women into these positions of college and university and becoming graduates moving into work force that it would empower women. But Regnerus and his colleagues are showing that something very interesting happening in this and something very unexpected and that is that for instance if you go to an elite university and you go into the academic programs where the women outnumber men by a 60-40 or sometimes even greater percentage the men are the ones who end up with the power because what happens is that every one of those young women by and large is looking for a husband and the pool is now very small which means the power differential has gone to the young men. And if they’re not willing right now to get married, well it turns out that well, as Regnerus puts it, they’re able to have all the sex they want without any demand for marriage because they hold the power.

Hymowitz: I agree with Regnerus’ interpretation up to a point. What I think he leaves out is that it’s not all men who get the benefits of this new arrangement. Because women still are choosing, and they are choosy. And they tend to choose the more, for lack of a better term, we’ll call the alpha male, the more attractive, the more dominant, the more socially popular man on campus so that those men of course can have whatever they want and lots of women begging for their attention. It is actually not so true for what people call in the vernacular beta-male where the guys who are a little socially attuned who are maybe spending an awful lot of time in programming computers, and maybe don’t have a lot have of the moves that the big man on campus do. So I do think that it’s some ways even uglier than what Regnerus is implying because there are some guys who are losing out here.

Mohler: Well indeed and some of them are the ones who are counted on the success side by the educators and the employers but from a perspective of the life script or their development into assuming the full responsibility of adulthood, it’s not going well...'

Comments:

With a 60/40 between educated college and University educated males and females in the USA, this trend is likely to be similar in other Western nations. Hymowitz states 'You know they’re either going to marry men who are less educated than they are or they’re going to remain single. And I think the former is unlikely from what I’ve seen. There are some more marrying down as it might be called among women over the last decade but I’m not an awful lot of those marriage tend to be much more fragile.'

Rejecting secular and non-Biblical relationship models, a further difficulty would be for Christians because of fewer numbers within the cultural group. From my perspective it would appear that if what Hymowitz is stating from her educated researched secular perspective and Mohler is stating in agreement from a Christian one is true, then there would need for differing philosophical and practical approaches within worldview in regard to potential marriage for educated Christian women in light of the times.

In regard to men, the so called 'beta-males' in a Christian context need to learn to develop skills and to become more social. If there is more educated Christian women available in the United States and in the Western World, than at least there is opportunity.

I know from research in the area listening to secular relationship coaches that the 'classic software engineer', this is the stereotypical software engineer, not all in the field, is often considered to have the worst social skills.

This is the type of 'beta-male' Hymowitz is mentioning I reason; not men that have reasonable social skills but perhaps have not met someone relatable.

Transcript from 2013/09/16

Selected Citations:

'Mohler: This is Thinking in Public, a program dedicated to intelligent conversation about frontline theological and cultural issues with the people who are shaping them. I’m Albert Mohler, your host and President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. Dr. Helen Smith is a forensic psychologist, a well-known writer who has written for a variety of publications including the Los Angeles Times and the Christian Science Monitor. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Tennessee and Master’s Degrees from the New School for Social Research and The City University of New York. She’s a widely quoted commentator, a frequent spokesperson in the media, and she’s also a very active blogger. She’s also the author of a very important new book entitled Men on Strike: Why Men are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream – and Why It Matters. Dr. Helen Smith, welcome to Thinking in Public.

Mohler: We’re going to talk about the three strikes that you say men have declared: a strike on marriage, a strike on education, especially higher education, and a strike on work in the larger engagement with society. But I find the most revolutionary part of your argument, the part that you just mentioned, moral ethicists, philosophers, sociologists, looking at why people behave the way they do deploys several theories. One of them is called as you would well know Rational Choice Theory. You’re the first person I know to apply Rational Choice Theory to this equation, and I think it’s very important. In other words you’re arguing that men in showing these different and new patterns of behavior are actually making what is in their own minds a rational choice.

Smith: Well, that’s just human behavior. But I think as a society we have to realize that the more of the behavior we reward – you get more of the behavior you reward and less of the behaviors that you punish. And we’re rewarding men being marriage material or providers or anything we’re rewarding that less and less and punishing it more. When you think about even marriage like fifty years ago man was sort of the head of the household or looked up to and treated with respect. And now married men are seen as less of a man by society, by the media, and in event even if he has kids instead of being Ward Cleaver he’s seen more as kind of an idiot, especially in the media and that sort of thing. I agree that I don’t know why we don’t think that men have rational choice and that somehow even other men tell men just to “man up” and go ahead and keep doing the things that society expects of them. But this question becomes: why should they? Why should they be involved in a system that’s so stacked against them? It doesn’t make any sense. We wouldn’t say that if it was about women. If women were getting a raw deal somehow we’d say, “Oh, well of course they’re not going to do that.” But with men we’re just like, “Well, you better man up and do whatever society expects of you even if you are getting as much out of the deal.”

Mohler: Well, to show how this works let’s go to that first issue you address which is the marriage strike. You quote Glenn Sacks and Diana Thompson who have written that American men are now subconsciously launching what they call a marriage strike.

Smith: Yes, and they say that it is mainly for reasons of family ___ because of the divorce issues. But actually I think it’s even more than that. I wrote a blog post over at the Huffington Post and it’s called “8 Reasons Straight Men Don’t Want To Get Married” and some of the things I looked at is that men, basically the summary of what I found just from talking to men and from getting men on my blog and from just the thousands of men I’ve talked to over the years in therapy that some of the things they say about getting married is: Number one reason they don’t’ want to get married is they’ll lose respect. They just feel like they don’t have the kind of respect, and I think going back to the culture I think we treat men in a way that says that they’re not important and that trickles down to the greater community. One of the things that James Macnamara, he is a communications professor in Sydney, Australia, and he did research and he found that 69% of mass media reporting and commentary on men was unfavorable. And that’s compared with 12% favorable and 19% neutral. And I think when you think about that, when you’re looking at it and saying almost 70% of the time when men are portrayed in the media they’re portrayed as a predator, a goofball, a deadbeat, and that just sends a very negative message about how men are to be treated. So I think this loss of respect is a big aspect of why men feel that they don’t want to be involved in marriage as often.'

'Mohler: And of course that’s kind of the back side of the equation here. And as many younger men, especially in a secular frame of mind, are looking at what you describe as a cost/benefit analysis I can see as your book makes very clear that for many of them the cost seem higher than the benefits in their analysis of not only marriage but of growing up. But of course marriage as important as that is, and we’ll get back to that in a moment, is only one of the issues you address in your book. And now to others we want to turn as well including the strike on education. You’re talking about the fact that men are striking from college.

Smith: Well, it’s almost like they just never make it there. I have a chapter in the book called “The College Strike.” And maybe that’s almost beyond what’s happening. Because what’s happening is men are just not making it into college. Right now it’s about 57% women, 43% men, and that’s growing where they think in the next ten years it could be as many as 60% women going to college. One of the reasons for that is younger men in the elementary school grades often having failing grades, they often don’t do well, a lot of boys can’t read or don’t do well in those areas. And they’re disconnected from schools because schools in some sense over the last forty to fifty years have become places that are much more suitable for girls than they are for boys. And we worry so much about what girls need and how we make that happen. Like if we see that girls are lagging behind in science we immediately say okay we have to do something; we have to find books that girls like to read; we have to find a way to teach girls that will make them want to go into science or make them want to understand math better.'

Comments:

In regard to Rational Choice Theory, Blackburn defines rationality as pieces of behaviour, beliefs arguments, policies and other exercises of the human mind that are described as rational. Rational meaning making sense or is in accordance with for example, aiming at truth or at what is good. Blackburn (1996: 319).

'Smith: Well, that’s just human behavior. But I think as a society we have to realize that the more of the behavior we reward – you get more of the behavior you reward and less of the behaviors that you punish. And we’re rewarding men being marriage material or providers or anything we’re rewarding that less and less and punishing it more.'

That is a secular way of looking a marriage which I personally reject.

That is not state that I reason there is no truth to the Rational Choice Theory. Within Christ there would still need to be spiritual, intellectual and romantic mutual attraction with someone or else the rational choice as a theologian and philosopher is to remain single.

Obviously, I would not favour any kind of strike or boycotting on education, or as I may coin the phrase 'a vacation on education'. I think dropping out of society is an intellectual cop-out and that is what Dr. Smith states that many men in the United States are presently doing and I would not agree with it.

From a Christian perspective, difficult times require prayer, Biblical, theological and related study, meaningful fellowship with encouragement and critique. Innovation, flexibility and adaptability are needed even when cultural trends in society, secular and/or Christian can be difficult. Biblically, if single, especially if struggling with the 'burn' one is to seek marriage unless one is content (1 Corinthians 7). Improving oneself for employment and for use by God would be required. How could one, for example. obey the Great Commission of Matthew 28 by not being able to rightly and properly teach (v.20)? This would be an example of education, formal or not.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Rocamadour-France-trekearth

Rocamadour-France-trekearth

Najac-France-trekearth

Najac-France-trekearth

Paris-trekearth