Saturday, September 30, 2017

Spiritual Maturity - It Takes a Lifetime


A weed,
in my backyard.
The pears on our neighbor's pear tree have been falling onto the ground. It has taken a whole season of connectedness for the pear to mature from what began as a flower. The pear-as-flower-bud is immature. It is far from fully formed.

In the spiritual life things are the same. The new Jesus-follower is young and, ipso facto, immature. This is not a criticism, it is just a reality. Just as Mc-Pears don't exist, neither does Mc-Spirituality. Yes, they can know Christ and be known by Christ. No, they are not and cannot be, e.g., a "mature worshiper." 

As a pear-flower matures into an edible pear, so can a baby Christian mature into Christlikeness. This is a process, and it takes time. Praise God for Jesus-followers who are young adults. If they live lives that abide in Christ, like branches attached to Jesus the Vine, they will grow towards maturity. But they cannot, at their age, be "mature," because this takes time.

"Maturing" is not some "quality time" thing, as if a pear would decide to spend a few quality hours attached to the tree. One sign of spiritual maturity is that a person has been broken and re-broken by God, over time, so as to be more greatly formed in Christ. This is how spiritual oak trees are made.

The flower-blossom-pear is in it for the long haul. To mature spiritually requires a lifetime. 

Stay attached. Continue dwelling in Christ.

Be patient.

Slow-cook in the furnace of spiritual formation.

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Faithful Are the Wounds of a Friend

Beach, Warren Dunes State Park (Michigan)

Last night, as Linda and I were in our family room talking, she said something that made me laugh. No one can make me laugh like she does. To be honest, few people make me laugh. It is my Finnish, Scandinavian badge of honor that says, "you are not funny."

I laughed so long and so intensely that I had to leave the room. I could barely breathe. Linda was laughing, too. If laughter is good for the soul, then it is well with our souls today.

She is my best friend in life. My companion. Next to God, it is her. I can laugh with her. I am safe with her, and she with me. I can cry with her. We can tell truth to one another. We can say good things and beautiful things and hard things, to each other. She is my friend, and I, hers. We can wound each other, in love. That's what friends are for.

Eugene Peterson writes,

"To be a friend of God does not mean everything is cozy between you and the Almighty. To be a friend to someone does not mean you pamper or indulge him or her. Friendship also involves struggle and loss, tension and turbulence. One of my favorite proverbs is “Faithful are the wounds of a friend” (Proverbs 27:6). A friend, if honest and true, will tell you things you don’t want to hear. A friend, if deeply serious about you, will do things that feel painful. Friends do that because they respect our dignity and honor our uniqueness." (Eugene Peterson, As Kingfishers Catch Fire: A Conversation on the Ways of God Formed by the Words of God, pp. 17-18)

Friends speak the truth in love. Not love, without truth. And not truth, without love, because that annihilates friendships. How much truth can a friendship sustain? A lot, if there is love. How much disagreement can a friend bear to hear? A lot, if love accompanies it.

Love bears all things. Even disagreements. Love does not fear disagreeing.

This is what allows Linda and I to enjoy one another and, like last night, laugh. If there is no pain, there will be no laughter.


Tuesday, September 26, 2017

Spiritual Formation at Payne Theological Seminary - October 10-13


I'll soon travel to Payne Theological Seminary to teach another Spiritual Formation class to M.Div. students.

October 10-13.

Here are some of my former classes.







Monday, September 25, 2017

Friday, September 22, 2017

The World Will Not End Sept. 23, 2017

David Meade calls himself a "Christian numerologist." He predicted the world will end on Saturday, Sept. 23. 

Now, he's changed his mind - the world will not end on this day, but it will launch a series of catastrophic events. 

All this is nonsense.

I have paid no attention to this person. No one should pay any attention to "Christian numerology." Because a few people have asked me about this, I'm posting on it.

David Meade needs to come forth after nothing unusual happens and confess to everyone he has led astray, to everyone who has become afraid due to his false thinking.

That would be good. I hardly ever see this. Usually, false teachers predicting doomsdays revise their predictions, so as to fit their errors. 

As for you, there's nothing to fear tomorrow. Just stay close to Jesus, as always, trusting in him, and following as he leads.

(See Michael Brown's article HERE.)

Could There Be More Than One God?

Near Brasilia, Brazil

(In last night's Philosophy of Religion class at MCCC a student asked, "Why could there not be more than one God who created the universe?" I'm re-posting my response to this.)

Instead of there being one God who exists and created all that is, why could there not be multiple Gods? 

One answer sometimes given to this is Ockham's Razor, which states that causes should not be multiplied unnecessarily. For example, if I come home and discover a pan of freshly baked brownies on the table, I understand my wife Linda to have made them. But someone suggests, "Why could not the brownies have been made by several bakers? Why assume just one person made them?" Because, using Ockham's Razor, there is no need to multiply causes unnecessarily. That the cause of the pan of brownies is "my wife Linda" is enough explanation. Similarly, "one God" is enough explanation for the cause of the universe.

I'm thinking that one could employ German philosopher Leibniz's "Identity of Indiscernibles" to argue that the idea of multiple Gods is incoherent. This is an idea in process. Here we go!

Assume that "God" has essential attributes, which causally determine God's contingent attributes. For example, because God is essentially love, God's responses to unloving situations will be logically predictable. When God sees death, e.g., God respnds with comfort out of his loving compassion. God's particular manifestations of his loving compassion are not essential to the being of God, but contingent.

Now imagine there are two Gods, or even twenty-two Gods. If we define "God" as essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, then Gods One through Twenty-two are also essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Were they not, then they would not be God. Given these omni-attributes, such as omnibenevolent, each of the twenty-two Gods will respond in exactly the same ways to, e.g., a particular human death. Sharing all the needed knowledge, they each would choose the very best response to that death, which would be the same. This would mean that each of the twenty-two Gods would share not only the same essential attributes, but also the same contingent attributes.

What is called "Leibniz's Law," viz. the Identity of Indiscernibles, states that no two objects have exactly the same properties. But in our example we stated that twenty-two Gods share exactly the same essential and contingent properties. Using, therefore, Leibniz's Law, Gods 1-22 are "indiscernible"; namely, they are the same object, which is to say there is only one God.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy explains:


"The Identity of Indiscernibles (hereafter called the Principle) is usually formulated as follows: if, for every property F, object x has F if and only if object y has F, then x is identical to y. Or in the notation of symbolic logic:
F(Fx ↔ Fy) → x=y.
This formulation of the Principle is equivalent to the Dissimilarity of the Diverse as McTaggart called it, namely: if x and y are distinct then there is at least one property that x has and y does not, or vice versa."
If at least one of our twenty-two Gods had the requisite essential attributes, but each of the other twenty-one Gods had different essential attributes, then each of the other twenty-one Gods would not be God. The same applies to any varying contingent properties. Therefore, logically, there can only be one God, and the idea of multiple Gods is logically incoherent.

The Secret of Jesus' Ministry

Monroe, in the days when snow fell during winter

Why did Jesus pray? He prayed to find out what the Father wanted him to do. He prayed to receive strength and comfort. He and the Father were on a redemptive mission together. In times of prayer, Jesus received his marching orders.

Prayer brings us into the control room of the kingdom of heaven. In Scripture the "kingdom" means: the rule, or reign, of God. A praying person engages in God's kingdom activity. In prayer we gain discernment. We discern the important from the mundane. In praying we become relevant doers of the will of God.

I like this quote from Henri Nouwen, as he describes the place of prayer in Jesus' life.

"In the midst of a busy schedule of activities—healing suffering people, casting out devils, responding to impatient disciples, traveling from town to town, and preaching from synagogue to synagogue—we find these quiet words: “In the morning, long before dawn, he got up and left the house, and went off to a lonely place and prayed there.” The more I read this nearly silent sentence locked in between the loud words of action, the more I have the sense that the secret of Jesus’s ministry is hidden in that lonely place where he went to pray, early in the morning, long before dawn." (Nouwen, Spiritual Formation: Following the Movements of the Spirit, pp. 20-21)

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

Jim Carrey Goes Rogue

Image result for caesar flickerman before crowd
Caesar Flickerman

Comedian Jim Carrey has gone rogue. He was interviewed on the "red carpet" for an event called New York Fashion Week. The interviewer asked Carrey what he thought of the many "icons" that were at the event. Carrey responded by calling the whole event "meaningless." (Why, then, was he there?)

Carrey continued, sounding like an existentialist philosopher, or the book of Ecclesiastes.

“I don’t believe in icons, I don’t believe in personalities, I believe that peace lies beyond personality and invitation and disguise, beyond the red S on your chest that makes bullets bounce off,” he said. “I believe that it’s deeper than that. I believe we’re a field of energy dancing for itself, and I don’t care.”

Before walking away, Carrey concluded, “We don’t matter.”"

If we are but "a field of energy dancing for itself," then of course we don't matter. But we are not. And, we do.

Carrey went off the grid. That's good. Because the grid is absurd and meaningless. Humans? As icons? To be adulated? How stupid. How uncreative.

I cannot get the image from The Hunger Games out of my mind, where Caesar Flickerman stands before the crowded auditorium, twisting every moment into happiness before the brain dead crowd. The people are hungry. The Capitol gives them The Games. In the Capitol, life is a game; hence, what once was thought evil is served up with heaping bowls of sugar.

We are bored. Look at people. Can you not see this?

In response, to placate us, and to hide the inanity, our shallow culture dishes out entertainment.

We devour it and, for a moment, are sedated.

Upon awakening, we find ourselves bored.

Caesar Flickerman knocks on the door, and sells us his happy drug.

We ingest it, clueless, happy.

There is no life, no meaning.

That's what "boredom" is. It's not having nothing to do. In America we have so much to do that we have lost the ability to do nothing. Boredom is finding no meaning in our never-ceasing doing.

The author of Ecclesiastes saw this over two thousand years ago.


Everything's boring, utterly boring -

no one can find any meaning in it.

Ch. 1, The Message

The Pleasure of Solitude with God

Somewhere in Monroe County

Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed.
Luke 5:16

I spent time praying yesterday afternoon. I did not go outside, which is my preference, because a deluge of rain poured out from the heavens. 

I got alone with God, lifted requests to him as they came to me, meditated on Scripture (Ecclesiastes), listened for his voice, wrote some things he was saying to me, prayed for some people, and gave thanks to him.

I also deburdened. This creates a space in my heart to receive from God. When I am in that secret place that is my heart, my listening capacity rises.

I have done this for so many years (see here, for a record of this) that the attraction of God overwhelms the distractions of life. This has helped me live more focused.

The French theologian Pascal said we require things to distract us from ourselves. He wrote: "Hence it comes people so much love noise and stir; hence it comes that the prison is so horrible a punishment; hence it comes that the pleasure of solitude is a thing incomprehensible.” (In Dallas Willard, The Great Omission, Kindle Locations 2968-2969)

It took some time to learn aloneness with God, without distractions. To rest in the Lord, and not in the American sense of "rest" as "entertainment." The distracted life is the source of our miserable discontent. Willard writes:

"Solitude and silence are the most radical of the disciplines for the spiritual life because they most directly attack the sources of human misery and wrongdoing. To be in solitude is to choose to do nothing. For extensive periods of time. All accomplishment is given up. One learns “hands off.” Silence is required to complete solitude, for until we enter quietness, including not listening and speaking, the world still lays hold of us. When we go into solitude and silence, we even stop making demands upon God. It is enough that God is God and we are His. We learn we have a soul, that God is here, that this world is “my Father’s world.”" (Ib., Kindle Locations 2993-2997)

How different, how refreshing, how energizing and life-giving is the pleasure of solitude with God. No wonder Jesus did it!

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Freedom from Self-Abuse (Cutting) - Sermon


My sermon on freedom from self-abuse (e.g., cutting) can be listened to HERE. (7/23/17)

The handout I gave is below.


Monday, September 18, 2017

Numbers and the Church

I'm reading on our front porch, watching the rain.
"Numbers pave the road to obsession."
Adam Alter
P. 113

I've been reading Os Guinness's Renaissance: The Power of the Gospel No Matter How Dark the Times. Guinness's book is hopeful, even as he correctly identifies the indicators that the Western Church has conformed to secular culture.

One indicator of world-conformation is the Church's quantification of Christianity. "Numbers" have become the measure of "success." This is not only about the heretical "prosperity gospel." Guinness writes:

"America as the lead society in the modern world is awash with numbers and metrics, and with statistics, opinion polls, surveys, targets, pie charts, scorecards, big data, game theory and measurable outcomes—all at the expense of the true, the good, the beautiful, the faithful and the significant—and at the expense of God too. Numbers and the mania for metrics are therefore a critical element of secularization." (Guinness, Renaissance, pp. 39-40)

In the Consumer Church matters of the heart have been displaced by the number of hearts, and concerns of the soul have lost out to size of the payroll. The big questions now are "How many?" and "How much?" (The Church as a metaphysical Fitbit.)

"Nineteenth-century thinkers foresaw the rising domination of numbers, quantity and majority opinion, and warned against it. They regarded it as the overspill of the age of democratic majorities and the triumph of technocratic technocratic rationalism, through which everything would be reduced to numbers, and big numbers would be valued most of all. The pressure would therefore be toward a false notion of explanation through numbers, a dangerous authority for numbers at the expense of the true and the good, and in the end toward a disastrous strengthening of the Leviathan of the state (for what else is “big” enough and “wise” enough to coordinate and manage everyone and everything but the government?)." (Ib., 40)

Number-crunching is not irrelevant to the Church. But in the kingdom of God numbers are not number 1.

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Suggested Books on Healing and Prayer

South Haven, Michgan


Someone asked me: 


What books do you recommend on healing and prayer???
I would like a deeper understanding on the ups and downs and whys...

My response to them is:


The two books I recommend to enter into this subject are:

Power Healing, by John Wimber 

Healing, by Francis MacNutt 


Also:

MacNutt, The Healing Reawakening: Reclaiming Our Lost Inheritance

Charles Kraft, Deep Wounds, Deep Healing

Neil Anderson, Freedom From Fear: Overcoming Worry and Anxiety

Henry Cloud and John Townshend, What to Do When You Don't Know What to Do: Overcoming Worry and Depression

Max Lucado, Fearless

David Seamands, Healing for Damaged Emotions

Everett Worthington, Moving Forward: Six Steps to Forgiving Yourself and Breaking Free from the Past

Randy Clark, Authority to Heal: Restoring the Lost Inheritance of God's Healing Power

Candy Gunther Brown, Testing Prayer: Science and Healing (the best empirical study on the connection between prayer and healing) 

Candy Gunther Brown, ed., Global Pentecostal and Charismatic Healing


HERE are some books that are not on healing, but God has used to heal to me.

C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces

Henri Nouwen, The Inner Voice of Love

Richard Foster, Celebration of Discipline

Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

Flannery O'Connor, Collected Works

The Four Gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John


***
For some of my thoughts on prayer and healing see my book Praying.





















Saturday, September 16, 2017

Missing - Jenna Verhille

Jenna Verhille is from our church.

Disciples, not "Decisions"


In line at Puerto Vallarta restaurant in Redding, California

"Most of evangelism today is obsessed with getting someone to make a decision; the apostles, however, were obsessed with making disciples.... Evangelism that focuses on decisions short circuits and — yes, the word is appropriate — aborts the design of the gospel, while evangelism that aims at disciples slows down to offer the full gospel of Jesus and the apostles."

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Playing at Christianity

Maumee Bay State Park, Ohio

I've been re-reading some Kierkegaard. He writes:

"Truly there is that which is more contrary to Christianity, and to the very nature of Christianity, than any heresy and schism, more contrary than all heresies and all schisms combined, and that is to play Christianity."


And what could "play Christianity" mean?

Perhaps "playing at Christianity" means...

... liking the awesome music more than worshiping God from the heart (you don't need music to worship)

... spending more time, energy, and money on staging than on discipling and missions

... saying "I follow Jesus" on Sunday, but not following him Monday through Saturday

... taking no time to pray, while having time to text and tweet

... telling someone "I'll pray for you," and never doing it

... self-righteously judging others, while having a secret sin life

... "attending" church without serving as the church (many Christians come on Sunday mornings to be serviced)

... going after "decisions" for Christ while neglecting the Great Commission, which is the labor of disciple-making

... being kind and loving in public, while hateful and despising in your home

... focusing on appearance, rather than cultivating the heart

... wanting to be seen, more than wanting Christ to be magnified

... hating your enemies, rather than loving and praying for those who persecute you

How can we know what real Christianity is so we don't just play at it? I suggest going back to the four Gospels, and then the book of Acts. Meet Jesus again, as if for the first time. Of course, you have to want this more than anything else. Otherwise, you're just playing at Christianity.


***
If you want to go deeper, see my book Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God.


My next book, Leading the Presence-Driven Church, will be out Fall 2017.

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

The Lemonade-Twaddle of the Consumer Church

Maumee Bay State Park, Ohio

In my doctoral program at Northwestern University I served as a T.A. (teacher's assistant) to my philosophy and theology mentor, Dr. James Will. One of Dr. Will's interests was existentialism. One of his courses was on the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard. I sat in Dr. Will's class, and taught it a few times when he was out of town. (Dr. Will studied under Reinhold Niebuhr, and referred to him as "Reiny.")

Kierkegaard was a Christian theist (yes, there are plenty of theistic existentialists). One Kierkegaardian theme was his polemic against the banality of the Church of Denmark. It had become colonized by secular culture. It had taken on the shape of this world. This outraged Kierkegaard. He wrote against it. He called it out. Kierkegaard's attack on the secular church is prophetic, and speaks to us today.

He wrote:

The sort of men who now live cannot stand anything so strong as the Christianity of the New Testament (they would die of it or lose their minds), just in the same sense that children cannot stand drink, for which reason we prepare for them a little lemonade—and official Christianity is lemonade-twaddle for the sort of beings that are now called men, it is the strongest thing they stand, and this twaddle then is their language they call “Christianity,” just as children call their lemonade “wine.”
- Kierkegaard, Attack on Christendom, p. 277 (1854)

Apply this to the American Consumer Church.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Five Views On the Destiny of the Unevangelized




If Jesus Is the Only Way to God, What About Those Who Have Never Heard of Him?

FOUR  RESOURCES

Paul Copan, True for You, but Not for Me, Part 5.

John Sanders, ed. What About Those Who Have Never Heard: Three Views.

William Lane Craig, "No Other Name": A Middle Knowledge Perspective on the Exclusivity of Salvation Through Christ,” reasonablefaith.org.

William Lane Craig, On Guard, chapter 10.


***
THE QUESTION - What if someone has never had the opportunity to hear about Jesus?


THE POT OF STEW


GOD’S DESIRE IS THAT ALL BE SAVED.
2 Peter 3:9 - The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
2 Tim 2:4 – God wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.



SOME PERSONS HAVE “TRANSWORLD DEPRAVITY.”

Persons who have self-inflicted “transworld depravity” will not want God, or God in Christ.

So God is not unjust in applying eternal justice to them; viz., everlasting separation from his presence. (1 Thessalonians 1) Note: "transworld depravity" (from Alvin Plantinga) in this case means: in any possible world X will reject Christ if offered the opportunity.

God can’t make people freely choose to respond to the gospel. “Some might be like NYU philosopher Thomas Nagel, who said, ‘I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.’ Indeed, with every new indication of God’s reality, a person might come to resent or hate him even more.”

GOD HAS GIVEN PERSONS FREE WILL.

God has given persons free will. This is risky. Some will likely freely choose to reject God’s offer of salvation, and his revelation in creation and the moral law within (Romans 1 and 2).
As C.S. Lewis wrote, re. this, there are two kinds of persons: one who says to God “Thy will be done,” and one to whom God says “Thy will be done.”


WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO NEVER HEAR ABOUT JESUS?

ROMANS CHS. 1 & 2

Romans 1 says that, even without a knowledge of Christ, people have an opportunity to know God. We read: 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
Theologically, this is called "natural revelation."

8. Romans 2 says: (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares. 
So it seems likely that some persons will be saved by following the moral law within.

Their salvation is still in Christ. The cross of Christ is the bridge over the gap that separates us from God.



WE CAN TRUST THAT GOD IS LOVING AND JUST. 

This is an argument from authority.

We can trust that the eternal outcome of every person is in the hands of a loving and just God.

We can trust that God has the question of the unevangelized figured out.

Further, God has done so much to reach us all, even to suffer with us in a world filled with evil and misery, that we have good reason to believe the unevangelized are in excellent hands.

We can trust that God is loving and just. So God won’t condemn anyone for being born at the wrong time and place (viz., in a time and place where the message of the Gospel of Jesus was not known).

God is able to reach people in ways we don’t expect. For example, he can reveal himself – and has done so – through visions or angelic messengers. Copan cites examples of Jesus appearing to Muslims who had never heard of him.

In the end we can trust in a good God to do no wrong. “We should not think about the unevangelized apart from God’s character, motives, and good purposes.” (Copan)

 All who desire to be saved will have the opportunity to be saved.



NEXT ONE-HOUR SEMINARY – ANDY GRIFFITH, ON "WHAT IS EVANGELISM?"

The Kalam Cosmological Argument - Video





For my Philosophy of Religion students.

Did God Harden Pharaoh's Heart?

Trees in my backyard

The plagues God sent upon Pharaoh and the Egyptians were not merely for punishment, but also for redemption. God was trying to save Pharaoh and the Egyptians.

On first glance, it doesn't appear that way, given Exodus 10:20, which reads, "the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart." It appears Pharaoh didn't have a chance to repent.

But John Sanders points out that "the Hebrew word for "hardening" means "to strengthen," so hardening does not render a person unable to repent. This is easily seen by the fact that God hardens the hearts of Pharaoh's servants (Ex 10:1), yet they understand what God is doing and implore their master to release the Israelites (10:7)." (Sanders, What About Those Who Have Never Heard?: Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, Kindle Locations 239-240)

God uses conditional language with Pharaoh, which implies Pharaoh has a choice. For example, Exodus 8:2: "If you refuse to let them go, I will plague your whole country with frogs." The conditional word "if" makes no sense if Pharaoh was rendered incapable of making a choice.

For example, what if a professor had to power to harden your heart so you could not and would not complete your assignments. It would make no sense for the professor to say, "If you don't complete your assignments, you'll fail this course." It would make sense if you could choose to turn in your work.

Sanders concludes,

"Evidently the divine strengthening of Pharaoh did not override Pharaoh's decision-making powers. The plagues were for redemptive and not merely retributive purposes. Truly God has never delighted in the death of the wicked. Punishment came to the Egyptians, but not before God did all he could to bring redemption into the situation." (Ib., Kindle Locations 241-243)

Monday, September 11, 2017

ONE-HOUR SEMINARY - What About People Who Have Never Heard of Jesus?



TUESDAY

SEPT. 12

9-10 PM  EST

Rawls' Rejection of Utilitarianism



If you were an atheist, what kind of ethical system would you appeal to? One possibility is utilitarianism. But utilitarianism has some problems.

See, e.g., this article on John Rawls' attack on utilitarianism.


Utilitarianism seeks to answer the question: how can we maximize people's preferences. How can we achieve the most satisfaction possible for everyone. But utilitarian theory, claims Rawls, "has some odd consequences." Why, e.g., is rape "wrong?" The article states: 

"A utilitarian would have to answer that the pain to the victim outweighs the pleasure to the rapist. Surely, though, this is not why rape is wrong; the pleasure the rapist gets shouldn’t be counted at all, and the whole thing sounds ridiculous. (By the way, Judge Richard Posner, who might be called Jeremy Bentham redivivus, accepts just this view of rape in his Sex and Reason.)"


Consider this. Executing a few Danish cartoonists may bring pleasure to a Muslim mob. Doing this would achieve greater satisfaction for a greater number of people. "A utilitarian would have to endorse the execution." Herein lies the problem. "As Rawls says, “there is a sense in which classical utilitarianism fails to take seriously the distinction between persons.”"


Rawls rejects utilitarianism, and puts forth his own theory in his famous A Theory of Justice