I have been re-reading the Chronicles of Narnia lately and am currently on The Silver Chair. Last night I read a passage that particularly jumped out at me. It is a speech by everyones favorite Marshwiggle, Puddleglum. He is countering a spell that the villain of the book, an enchantress and self-proclaimed Queen of “Underland”, has been trying to work on him and his companions. The enchantress has been trying to convince them that “Underland” is all that exists and that “Overland” (everything above ground), is either a figment of their imagination or a lie.

All you’ve been saying is quite right, I shouldn’t wonder. I’m a chap who always liked to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it. So I won’t deny any of what you said. But there’s one thing more to be said, even so. Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things — trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. And that’s a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We’re just babies making up a game, if you’re right. But four babies playing a game can make a play-world which licks your real world hollow. That’s why I’m going to stand by the play world. I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it. I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia. So, thanking you kindly for the supper, if these two gentlemen and the young lady are ready, we’re leaving your court at once and setting out in the dark to spend out lives looking for Overland. Not that our lives will be very long, I should think; but that’s small loss if the world’s as dull a place as you say.

There has been considerable conversation in the comments of this post on the blog of our Pastor and his brother regarding death before sin. Not content to let sleeping dogs lie, David has tried to draw the controversy into a new post, but so far no one has taken the bait.

Yesterday I received the devotional below from The Institute for Creation Research which illustrates perfectly the problems with reinterpreting Genesis to fit an evolutionist worldview. If you reject the notion that only sin leads to death then, eventually, the entire message of the Gospel becomes irrelevant. Now this may not come immediately nor may it affect the faith of the one who believes in such things, but think of those they are passing those beliefs on to — why should they believe the message of the Gospel when the foundation of the Gospel is seen as being mere myth.

I encourage you to read the original posts and comments for a bit more background.

Death by Sin January 13, 2006

“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned” (Romans 5:12).

This very important verse conveys several vital truths. First of all, death came into the world only when sin came into the world. Suffering and death of conscious life, whether animal or human, were not a part of God’s “finished” and “very good” creation (Genesis 1:31, 2:1-3). There was an abundance of food and all other provisions for both people and animals. There was certainly no “struggle for existence” or “survival of the fittest,” for every creature was created “fit” for its own environment.

When Adam sinned, however, it became necessary for God to bring the curse of decay and death not only upon Adam but also upon all his dominion (Genesis 3:17-20; see also Romans 8:20-22; I Corinthians 15:21-22).

Furthermore, there remains no warrant fo r the notion that “Adam” is simply a generic term representing the human race. He was “one man.” In fact, he was “the first man” (I Corinthians 15:45), and Eve was “the mother of all living” (Genesis 3:20). There was certainly no population of evolving hominids becoming “Adam.” In fact, Christ Himself made it clear that Adam and Eve were there “from the beginning of the creation” (Mark 10:6, quoting Genesis 1:27).

The entire argument here in Romans 5:12-21 becomes irrelevant if the Genesis record of the Creation and Fall of Adam did not happen precisely as recorded in Genesis 1-3, and this would mean that there is no reality in the saving work of Christ, either.

Such a rejection of the Christian faith is hardly warranted by the fragmentary fossils that have been alleged to support the notion of human evolution. No one should stake his eternal soul on such a will-o’-the-wisp as that! HMM

As you may have noticed there’s been a bit of change here. For a couple of reasons which I will soon go into, I have decided to change the name of my blog from “gods.geek” to “Foolish Things”. You can still access the blog at the same address and nothing else will change, just the name.

As I said, I have a couple of reasons for making this change. The first is basically an administrative reason more than anything. There are a few different projects that I have wanted to start for a while now, and I decided that the “gods.geek” name would better serve as an overarching theme for them all. I hope to fill you in on at least one of these projects in the coming weeks.

The second reason is related to recent events and discussions in which I have taken part that have cemented something that I have long believed to be true. I am a fool — at least in the eyes of the world. People look at my beliefs and can’t fathom why or how I could possible hold to them. 1 Corinthians 1:26-29 is one of my favorite sections of the Bible and one that I have vowed to live my life by. This hasn’t always been the case. There was a time when I subscribed more to the beliefs of this world than the ones I now hold and I looked for approval of others. The transformation has been a long, gradual and hard one, but however difficult it has been at times, it has been well worth the trip so far.

So, it is with joy that I now wear the label of “fool” and re-name this blog “Foolish Things”, of which I am one.