C.L. Shaffer's Blog, page 2
September 3, 2016
The Daily Christian – Nice vs. Kind
Zola Levitt once said on his T.V. program that the concept of being nice was not part of the culture of the ancient Jews. I inferred at that time that he also meant that the Bible itself had no such notion either. I remember being rather agitated by this. You see I was a bit prideful about being nice. It was the one thing that I could do quite well, so it rubbed me the wrong way to be told that it wasn’t even a biblical concept.
Just so we are all on the same page, to me, being nice is equivalent to conducting oneself in a pleasant and courteous manner. I do believe that was probably how Zola had seen it too. However, there is an amenable factor to nice that often goes unnoticed. This aspect of nice is what gets those who do recognize this component all up in arms about it. They feel that you’ll never get anywhere demonstrating it. Linda Kaplan Thaler and Robin Koval, two successful women in the advertising world, who, in their book The Power of Nice, explain how to advance in your career all the while being nice, would probably disagree with this.
There are, of course, some who go to extremes in showing this characteristic of nice. We have a name for them. We call them doormats. Leaving these extremists to the side, the truth is that without nice the world would simply fall into complete disarray—even more so than it already has. For we’ve all met that person; the one who shows absolutely no interest in being agreeable. For this person, it is their way or no way at all. They are easily spotted. They are the ones with the single digit friend count on “the Facebook.” It should not come as a surprise that this is not the way a believer should behave. Unbeknownst perhaps to Zola this aspect of nice is biblical.
In Ephesians 5:21, Paul tells us to submit to one another. The word, submit or submitting (KJV) here means “to subordinate; reflex. to obey.”[1] In other words, there should be some desire to be accommodating to the other members of the community of Christ. We should not always be looking out for what we want. We should look to the cares, needs, and wants of the other person.
Obviously, we should object if the other person desires us to do something sinful, foolish, illegal, etc. If we don’t object, we are isolating this command from the rest of the Bible. Some women, for example, take the idea of submitting to one’s husband (Ephesians 5:22) to such extremes that they in effect turn their husbands into idols. Submitting to ones husband becomes their religion. But again these are the extremes where most of us don’t live.
And this brings us to a place where I wish I spent more time. This place is called being kind. Most people throw “being kind” in with the definition of nice. However, kindness has a moral attribute to it that nice never quite achieves. Sitting with a grieving person on a Saturday afternoon when you have a million other things that you could and should be doing, giving a pair of broke college kids a free serving of fries, or pulling over to help an elderly couple with car trouble are all examples of kindness that I have witnessed in my own life. Unlike being nice, showing kindness takes a bit more effort—more time. In other words, it takes a bit more of ourselves. It is unselfish. When Paul tells us “be ye kind one to another,”[2] this is what he means. It is what I would like to show more of, because for me, nice comes easy, but kind is much harder. But both are biblical concepts of which we should strive.
[1] James Strong, Strong’s New Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible(Iowa Falls, Iowa: Word Bible Publishers, Inc., 1986), hupŏtassō, 5293
[2] Ephesians 4:32 (Old King James Version)
Just so we are all on the same page, to me, being nice is equivalent to conducting oneself in a pleasant and courteous manner. I do believe that was probably how Zola had seen it too. However, there is an amenable factor to nice that often goes unnoticed. This aspect of nice is what gets those who do recognize this component all up in arms about it. They feel that you’ll never get anywhere demonstrating it. Linda Kaplan Thaler and Robin Koval, two successful women in the advertising world, who, in their book The Power of Nice, explain how to advance in your career all the while being nice, would probably disagree with this.
There are, of course, some who go to extremes in showing this characteristic of nice. We have a name for them. We call them doormats. Leaving these extremists to the side, the truth is that without nice the world would simply fall into complete disarray—even more so than it already has. For we’ve all met that person; the one who shows absolutely no interest in being agreeable. For this person, it is their way or no way at all. They are easily spotted. They are the ones with the single digit friend count on “the Facebook.” It should not come as a surprise that this is not the way a believer should behave. Unbeknownst perhaps to Zola this aspect of nice is biblical.
In Ephesians 5:21, Paul tells us to submit to one another. The word, submit or submitting (KJV) here means “to subordinate; reflex. to obey.”[1] In other words, there should be some desire to be accommodating to the other members of the community of Christ. We should not always be looking out for what we want. We should look to the cares, needs, and wants of the other person.
Obviously, we should object if the other person desires us to do something sinful, foolish, illegal, etc. If we don’t object, we are isolating this command from the rest of the Bible. Some women, for example, take the idea of submitting to one’s husband (Ephesians 5:22) to such extremes that they in effect turn their husbands into idols. Submitting to ones husband becomes their religion. But again these are the extremes where most of us don’t live.
And this brings us to a place where I wish I spent more time. This place is called being kind. Most people throw “being kind” in with the definition of nice. However, kindness has a moral attribute to it that nice never quite achieves. Sitting with a grieving person on a Saturday afternoon when you have a million other things that you could and should be doing, giving a pair of broke college kids a free serving of fries, or pulling over to help an elderly couple with car trouble are all examples of kindness that I have witnessed in my own life. Unlike being nice, showing kindness takes a bit more effort—more time. In other words, it takes a bit more of ourselves. It is unselfish. When Paul tells us “be ye kind one to another,”[2] this is what he means. It is what I would like to show more of, because for me, nice comes easy, but kind is much harder. But both are biblical concepts of which we should strive.
[1] James Strong, Strong’s New Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible(Iowa Falls, Iowa: Word Bible Publishers, Inc., 1986), hupŏtassō, 5293
[2] Ephesians 4:32 (Old King James Version)
April 22, 2016
The Daily Christian - The Sneakiness Of Sin
Let’s face it. Sin can be sneaky even for the most discerning Christians among us. Sin can seem like a perfectly acceptable attitude or lifestyle due to the good feelings that it can produce.
This was highlighted for me one day in college when one of my Psychology professors explained that he had once conducted a survey to see if there was any difference between believers and non-believers in regards to their attitude on premarital sex. He confessed that he had been a bit apprehensive about carrying out the survey since he was not sure if there would be any dissimilarity. To his relief, there was a distinction, but it was not that great. From a psychological perspective, he concluded that this lack of variation of opinion was due to the fact that sex naturally created a situation of positive reinforcement. In other words, in the midst of the sexual act, you feel good therefore you continue the behavior.
I was reminded of this when I was shopping at Kohl’s recently. If you are a frequent Kohl’s customer like I am, you know that shopping there is a never ending cycle of positive reinforcement. When you buy $50 or more of merchandise (which is easy to do because of the endless sales), you are handed a nice new crisp $10 Kohl’s cash to spend the next time you shop. When you return, you no doubt end up spending $50 or more once again because of the low prices and since after all, you have a $10 Kohl’s cash. At the register, you are once again handed yet another $10 Kohl’s cash. The cycle continues until at last you have a closet full of exercising pants you’ll never use. Our sin nature is a lot like this, particularly when it comes to sexual sin. Due to the natural state of affairs, generally speaking, there is a reward therefore the behavior is continued. The positive reinforcement keeps us under the delusion that our actions are perfectly fine.
Sin can creep up on us in other ways as well. It can come to us camouflaged and rebranded as if it wasn't even sin at all. What was once considered unrighteous behavior is now entirely acceptable. On the surface this may be called “progress” or the “evolution of the human species.” However, as Christians when we scratch beneath the surface we will simply find the erosion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When we begin to say things like “this is not a sin” or “this is just the way someone was born,” (offering no hope to the person by the way) and when the very concept of sin ever increasingly ceases to exist, then there is less and less need for a Savior to save us from that sin. This is a very tricky game that the other side plays. Perhaps we should not be surprised when the world goes along with this marketing strategy, but when actual believers fail to see this game, it is a sad day.
Another way in which sin can deceitfully find its way into our lives involves a bit of trickery on our part. There was an old episode of Frazier I was recently watching. It was the one where Frazier’s dad Martin tells his son Niles, after being shot on the job as a policeman, that he had made a deal with God that he would never drink another bottle of Ballantines if God would let him live. He of course survives and has to carry through with his promise to stop drinking bottles of Ballantines. He does this by only drinking Ballantines that are not in a bottle.
We laugh at this because we know we are all guilty of doing the very same thing. We attempt to find supposed loop holes in our Bibles in order to justify our sin. Some of the more dangerous ones that I have seen involve sex and marriage. I have actually read self-described Bible teachers explain that sex equals marriage. In other words, if you have sex, in God’s eyes you are married. This is quite the loop hole, and it is generated by ignoring large areas of the Bible, including the fact that the term concubine is used within the text. If sex equaled marriage, this word would not exist in Scripture since the woman would be described as a wife not a concubine. It also disregards Christ attending a wedding in John 2. Christ would not have gone to a wedding if it was considered a redundant ceremony with no spiritual or practical meaning. Obviously, there is more to the idea that two people are married then just sex, and it involves some kind of pronouncement to each other, to God, to the community of one’s intentions.
These are just a few examples of the sneakiness of our sin natures. It can come upon us disguised as something positive or rebranded for the new generation—slick and marketed. Its promoters can be found in the world or unfortunately even in the church. The weapon against it, however, is the Word of God. Use it, and you will be better equipped to know what it is and when it is creeping up behind you.
This was highlighted for me one day in college when one of my Psychology professors explained that he had once conducted a survey to see if there was any difference between believers and non-believers in regards to their attitude on premarital sex. He confessed that he had been a bit apprehensive about carrying out the survey since he was not sure if there would be any dissimilarity. To his relief, there was a distinction, but it was not that great. From a psychological perspective, he concluded that this lack of variation of opinion was due to the fact that sex naturally created a situation of positive reinforcement. In other words, in the midst of the sexual act, you feel good therefore you continue the behavior.
I was reminded of this when I was shopping at Kohl’s recently. If you are a frequent Kohl’s customer like I am, you know that shopping there is a never ending cycle of positive reinforcement. When you buy $50 or more of merchandise (which is easy to do because of the endless sales), you are handed a nice new crisp $10 Kohl’s cash to spend the next time you shop. When you return, you no doubt end up spending $50 or more once again because of the low prices and since after all, you have a $10 Kohl’s cash. At the register, you are once again handed yet another $10 Kohl’s cash. The cycle continues until at last you have a closet full of exercising pants you’ll never use. Our sin nature is a lot like this, particularly when it comes to sexual sin. Due to the natural state of affairs, generally speaking, there is a reward therefore the behavior is continued. The positive reinforcement keeps us under the delusion that our actions are perfectly fine.
Sin can creep up on us in other ways as well. It can come to us camouflaged and rebranded as if it wasn't even sin at all. What was once considered unrighteous behavior is now entirely acceptable. On the surface this may be called “progress” or the “evolution of the human species.” However, as Christians when we scratch beneath the surface we will simply find the erosion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When we begin to say things like “this is not a sin” or “this is just the way someone was born,” (offering no hope to the person by the way) and when the very concept of sin ever increasingly ceases to exist, then there is less and less need for a Savior to save us from that sin. This is a very tricky game that the other side plays. Perhaps we should not be surprised when the world goes along with this marketing strategy, but when actual believers fail to see this game, it is a sad day.
Another way in which sin can deceitfully find its way into our lives involves a bit of trickery on our part. There was an old episode of Frazier I was recently watching. It was the one where Frazier’s dad Martin tells his son Niles, after being shot on the job as a policeman, that he had made a deal with God that he would never drink another bottle of Ballantines if God would let him live. He of course survives and has to carry through with his promise to stop drinking bottles of Ballantines. He does this by only drinking Ballantines that are not in a bottle.
We laugh at this because we know we are all guilty of doing the very same thing. We attempt to find supposed loop holes in our Bibles in order to justify our sin. Some of the more dangerous ones that I have seen involve sex and marriage. I have actually read self-described Bible teachers explain that sex equals marriage. In other words, if you have sex, in God’s eyes you are married. This is quite the loop hole, and it is generated by ignoring large areas of the Bible, including the fact that the term concubine is used within the text. If sex equaled marriage, this word would not exist in Scripture since the woman would be described as a wife not a concubine. It also disregards Christ attending a wedding in John 2. Christ would not have gone to a wedding if it was considered a redundant ceremony with no spiritual or practical meaning. Obviously, there is more to the idea that two people are married then just sex, and it involves some kind of pronouncement to each other, to God, to the community of one’s intentions.
These are just a few examples of the sneakiness of our sin natures. It can come upon us disguised as something positive or rebranded for the new generation—slick and marketed. Its promoters can be found in the world or unfortunately even in the church. The weapon against it, however, is the Word of God. Use it, and you will be better equipped to know what it is and when it is creeping up behind you.
December 29, 2015
The Daily Christian – “The Road to Nowhere”
There are times when we as Christians, in the spiritual sense, can find ourselves at the end of a dead end road. We scratch our heads and wonder how we arrived at such a destination. We question where we took that wrong turn that caused us to meet such a conclusion. For some, this road may be a season’s journey. For others, it may encompass the majority of a lifetime. Either way there is always hope in this life to turn around. That is God’s grace. It would be good, however, to avoid such misguided excursions all together. We will look at a few of these and finally how we can stay clear of them altogether.
Prior to even getting started in their faith, unbelievers can sometimes find themselves on a kind of middle road called agnosticism. This road is not atheism, nor is it belief. On such a path, indecisiveness concerning God’s existence can be exalted and shrugging one’s shoulders and repeating, “I don’t know for sure” becomes a sort of religious motto. This road can seem rather pleasant. One can appear to be “above the fray,” because there are no sides being taken, no dogmatic pronouncement of anyone being right or wrong, and where a perpetual state of wondering and speculation becomes one’s religion.
During his ministry in Athens, Paul encountered individuals caught in a similar state. These Athenians and their fellow foreigners loved to hear the newest religious teachings (Acts 17:16-34). Their openness to hearing different ideas was, in a way, a good thing because it allowed Paul to speak to them concerning Christ’s resurrection. Some accepted this. Some didn’t. (vs. 32-34) Those who didn’t no doubt quickly returned to their habit of waiting to hear the next new and exciting teaching that came along.
As Christians, we can find ourselves lost on a similar road wanting to hear the latest and hottest teaching. If you have ever encountered someone like this, it can be utterly exhausting seeing them jump from one new doctrine to another. However, this is not the conduct that a more developed Christian will display. In Ephesians 4:14 a mature believer is explained as one who is not given to being “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive..."[1] This leaping about may be expected in a new believer, but a mature Christian will have most of their beliefs concerning their faith nailed down.
To some extent, most of us are not quite done with this yet. We are still learning and growing. As we go through this process, however, we need to be sure not to go too far from the overall message of the Bible. If we do, we will find ourselves on another road that the Bible refers to as false teachings.
If you do any online reading that pertains to the biblical text, you will inevitably come across one group of Christians accusing the other of putting forth a false teaching. At times, this can become ridiculous to the point where anything that one might disagree with becomes a false teaching. There are of course areas where this charge should be made but with a proper attitude (2 Timothy 2:23-26). However, there are other topics where the Bible is a bit ambigious or where matters are of such trivial nature that it is best to just shake hands with each other and agree to disagree (Romans 14:1). If the teaching, however, leads people to a different Gospel other than the one put forward in the text, such as that taught by the circumcision group described in Galations 1:6-10, or if it simply leads to believing in myths that lead to controversy (1 Timothy 1:3-7), than this is where we need to speak out against such an idea (Titus 1:10-14).
This teaching of a different Gospel may not be apparent at first glance. It may not be as noticeable as someone, for example, standing on the street corner shouting, “Christ is not God!” Instead it may be very subtle. And because of this subtleness, it may require us to practice discernment (Hebrew 5:14). If we feel that this is unnecessary to do, we may find ourselves accepting what appears on the surface to be biblical, when in fact it is the antithesis of the entire biblical message.
So how do we avoid a road that leads to the subtle chipping away of the Gospel message? I have noticed when encountering a teaching that sounds questionable to me that often times all that is required is opening my Bible and reading the verse or chapter in question along with understanding the full context. It is amazing how false teachers not only use but rely on biblical ignorance. And let’s face it, the Bible contains a lot of information. Unless you have a photographic memory most of us are not going to know or remember everything that it says, so we need to admit to ourselves that referencing the text is needed.
In addition, things that are false whether it be a false prophet (Matthew 7:15-20) or a false teaching will bare witness against itself by the kind of fruit it produces. Usually one false concept seeds another false concept and then another. Pretty soon what the person is putting forth is so far from biblical Christianity that it becomes rather simple to detect it as false.
Recognizing such a teaching can also become apparent in the individuals who follow them. These teachings can have a very negative impact on a person’s actions, attitude, and also their personality. On the other hand, those trapped in such ideas can be some of the nicest, most charismatic, or engaging individuals you will ever meet (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). With such a personality, they teach some of the most misguided doctrines you will ever find. Learning to look passed a charismatic persona or a teacher who “pats one on the back” for following their studies takes discernment and discipline.
Another road we as Christians can get lost down is legalism. There is an interesting scene in Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean – Dead Man’s Chest where a voodoo priestess provides Johnny Depp’s character, Captain Jack Sparrow with a jar of dirt so that he can overcome his enemy. For those within the erroneous voodoo religion, the jar of dirt would have been a form of sympathetic magic, but not knowing anything about voodoo, the reaction of Depp’s character reveals something very telling concerning human nature. Unconvinced, he questions the priestess if the jar of dirt will truly help. The priestess tells him to give it back if he does not want it. Depp’s character draws the jar more tightly to him. The priestess agrees—it will help.
The reaction of Depp’s character is rather profound, and it surprisingly highlights the legalism we sometimes live in as Christians. Paul discusses this in the book of Galatians where he admonishes those who were part of the circumcision group. These individuals were telling Gentile believers that they had to be circumcised in order to be accepted by God. These Judizers still had a need for the tangible, for something like Jack Sparrow’s jar of dirt over just putting one's faith in Christ (Galatians 3:1-14 & Galatians 5).
Of course unlike Jack’s jar of dirt the law does serve a purpose. It shows us that we are sinful and if presented with the Gospel, it shows that we need Christ (Romans 7 & Galatians 3:15-22). With the help of the Holy Spirit, the moral aspects of it also serve as a guide for the believer (Romans 8:1-17 & Galatians 5:13-26). However, the law in and of itself can not save due to our sinful natures (Romans 8:3).
Paul deals with a slightly different matter in Romans 14 & 15 when he talks about believers discussing parts of the law that deal with daily living. These individuals were not saying that their salvation rested on keeping the law as those in Galacia were proclaiming. These matters were also not moral areas of the law either. Instead they were arguing over the disputable matters of the ceremonial requirements of the law such as not eating meat or observing a certain day as being special (Romans 14:1-6). An extreme and heretical view of this is recorded in Colossians 2:16-23 where Paul deals with Judizers who were teaching a form of asceticism and a strict belief system of needing to keep certain ceremonial aspects of the law. These individuals did not believe that this had been fullfilled in Christ. Those in Rome, on the other hand, were not doing this. Nevertheless, they were described as being weak in their faith because they still needed to hold on to their jars of dirt. But Paul expected others who were stronger to be careful not to cause their weaker brothers or sisters in Christ to stumble (Romans 14:7-15:13).
These jars of dirt that we Christians sometimes cling to do not have to be based on the facets of Israelite law which are “a shadow of things to come."[2] This legalism can actually look very Christian. They can be disciplines of the faith. Attending church, reading the Bible or even praying that at first were actions performed from a sincere desire to grow in ones faith but have now become something the person just does out of habit. This is when the disciplines of our faith turn into a ritual, and the ritual becomes one’s religion in and of itself. Instead of believing, “I am a Christian because I place my faith in Christ” the person now takes on a new mindset of, “I am a Christian because I go to Church or because I read the Bible or...fill in the blank.
As believers, once we step out of unbelief and into faith, our journey will be challenging. Beyond the temptations of sin, there are many roads that we can go down that will slow our growth or stop it altogether, ultimately sending us back to an embryonic state of faith where we’ll need to learn the basics all over again (Hebrews 5:11-14). If one finds themselves on such a road, there will no doubt be many lessons learned, but there is one sure way to keep us from these areas. Second Corinthian 13:5 basically tells to make sure we are always on the right road. We should ask questions such as: Is there good fruit (Galatians 5:22-23 & 2 Peter 1:5-8) or bad fruit coming from my life? This self-evaluation will help to keep us off these roads to nowhere (2 Peter 1:10-11).
[1] Authorized King James Version,(New York: Collins' Clear-Type Press, 1955) Eph. 4:14
[2] Ibid, Col. 2:17
Prior to even getting started in their faith, unbelievers can sometimes find themselves on a kind of middle road called agnosticism. This road is not atheism, nor is it belief. On such a path, indecisiveness concerning God’s existence can be exalted and shrugging one’s shoulders and repeating, “I don’t know for sure” becomes a sort of religious motto. This road can seem rather pleasant. One can appear to be “above the fray,” because there are no sides being taken, no dogmatic pronouncement of anyone being right or wrong, and where a perpetual state of wondering and speculation becomes one’s religion.
During his ministry in Athens, Paul encountered individuals caught in a similar state. These Athenians and their fellow foreigners loved to hear the newest religious teachings (Acts 17:16-34). Their openness to hearing different ideas was, in a way, a good thing because it allowed Paul to speak to them concerning Christ’s resurrection. Some accepted this. Some didn’t. (vs. 32-34) Those who didn’t no doubt quickly returned to their habit of waiting to hear the next new and exciting teaching that came along.
As Christians, we can find ourselves lost on a similar road wanting to hear the latest and hottest teaching. If you have ever encountered someone like this, it can be utterly exhausting seeing them jump from one new doctrine to another. However, this is not the conduct that a more developed Christian will display. In Ephesians 4:14 a mature believer is explained as one who is not given to being “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive..."[1] This leaping about may be expected in a new believer, but a mature Christian will have most of their beliefs concerning their faith nailed down.
To some extent, most of us are not quite done with this yet. We are still learning and growing. As we go through this process, however, we need to be sure not to go too far from the overall message of the Bible. If we do, we will find ourselves on another road that the Bible refers to as false teachings.
If you do any online reading that pertains to the biblical text, you will inevitably come across one group of Christians accusing the other of putting forth a false teaching. At times, this can become ridiculous to the point where anything that one might disagree with becomes a false teaching. There are of course areas where this charge should be made but with a proper attitude (2 Timothy 2:23-26). However, there are other topics where the Bible is a bit ambigious or where matters are of such trivial nature that it is best to just shake hands with each other and agree to disagree (Romans 14:1). If the teaching, however, leads people to a different Gospel other than the one put forward in the text, such as that taught by the circumcision group described in Galations 1:6-10, or if it simply leads to believing in myths that lead to controversy (1 Timothy 1:3-7), than this is where we need to speak out against such an idea (Titus 1:10-14).
This teaching of a different Gospel may not be apparent at first glance. It may not be as noticeable as someone, for example, standing on the street corner shouting, “Christ is not God!” Instead it may be very subtle. And because of this subtleness, it may require us to practice discernment (Hebrew 5:14). If we feel that this is unnecessary to do, we may find ourselves accepting what appears on the surface to be biblical, when in fact it is the antithesis of the entire biblical message.
So how do we avoid a road that leads to the subtle chipping away of the Gospel message? I have noticed when encountering a teaching that sounds questionable to me that often times all that is required is opening my Bible and reading the verse or chapter in question along with understanding the full context. It is amazing how false teachers not only use but rely on biblical ignorance. And let’s face it, the Bible contains a lot of information. Unless you have a photographic memory most of us are not going to know or remember everything that it says, so we need to admit to ourselves that referencing the text is needed.
In addition, things that are false whether it be a false prophet (Matthew 7:15-20) or a false teaching will bare witness against itself by the kind of fruit it produces. Usually one false concept seeds another false concept and then another. Pretty soon what the person is putting forth is so far from biblical Christianity that it becomes rather simple to detect it as false.
Recognizing such a teaching can also become apparent in the individuals who follow them. These teachings can have a very negative impact on a person’s actions, attitude, and also their personality. On the other hand, those trapped in such ideas can be some of the nicest, most charismatic, or engaging individuals you will ever meet (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). With such a personality, they teach some of the most misguided doctrines you will ever find. Learning to look passed a charismatic persona or a teacher who “pats one on the back” for following their studies takes discernment and discipline.
Another road we as Christians can get lost down is legalism. There is an interesting scene in Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean – Dead Man’s Chest where a voodoo priestess provides Johnny Depp’s character, Captain Jack Sparrow with a jar of dirt so that he can overcome his enemy. For those within the erroneous voodoo religion, the jar of dirt would have been a form of sympathetic magic, but not knowing anything about voodoo, the reaction of Depp’s character reveals something very telling concerning human nature. Unconvinced, he questions the priestess if the jar of dirt will truly help. The priestess tells him to give it back if he does not want it. Depp’s character draws the jar more tightly to him. The priestess agrees—it will help.
The reaction of Depp’s character is rather profound, and it surprisingly highlights the legalism we sometimes live in as Christians. Paul discusses this in the book of Galatians where he admonishes those who were part of the circumcision group. These individuals were telling Gentile believers that they had to be circumcised in order to be accepted by God. These Judizers still had a need for the tangible, for something like Jack Sparrow’s jar of dirt over just putting one's faith in Christ (Galatians 3:1-14 & Galatians 5).
Of course unlike Jack’s jar of dirt the law does serve a purpose. It shows us that we are sinful and if presented with the Gospel, it shows that we need Christ (Romans 7 & Galatians 3:15-22). With the help of the Holy Spirit, the moral aspects of it also serve as a guide for the believer (Romans 8:1-17 & Galatians 5:13-26). However, the law in and of itself can not save due to our sinful natures (Romans 8:3).
Paul deals with a slightly different matter in Romans 14 & 15 when he talks about believers discussing parts of the law that deal with daily living. These individuals were not saying that their salvation rested on keeping the law as those in Galacia were proclaiming. These matters were also not moral areas of the law either. Instead they were arguing over the disputable matters of the ceremonial requirements of the law such as not eating meat or observing a certain day as being special (Romans 14:1-6). An extreme and heretical view of this is recorded in Colossians 2:16-23 where Paul deals with Judizers who were teaching a form of asceticism and a strict belief system of needing to keep certain ceremonial aspects of the law. These individuals did not believe that this had been fullfilled in Christ. Those in Rome, on the other hand, were not doing this. Nevertheless, they were described as being weak in their faith because they still needed to hold on to their jars of dirt. But Paul expected others who were stronger to be careful not to cause their weaker brothers or sisters in Christ to stumble (Romans 14:7-15:13).
These jars of dirt that we Christians sometimes cling to do not have to be based on the facets of Israelite law which are “a shadow of things to come."[2] This legalism can actually look very Christian. They can be disciplines of the faith. Attending church, reading the Bible or even praying that at first were actions performed from a sincere desire to grow in ones faith but have now become something the person just does out of habit. This is when the disciplines of our faith turn into a ritual, and the ritual becomes one’s religion in and of itself. Instead of believing, “I am a Christian because I place my faith in Christ” the person now takes on a new mindset of, “I am a Christian because I go to Church or because I read the Bible or...fill in the blank.
As believers, once we step out of unbelief and into faith, our journey will be challenging. Beyond the temptations of sin, there are many roads that we can go down that will slow our growth or stop it altogether, ultimately sending us back to an embryonic state of faith where we’ll need to learn the basics all over again (Hebrews 5:11-14). If one finds themselves on such a road, there will no doubt be many lessons learned, but there is one sure way to keep us from these areas. Second Corinthian 13:5 basically tells to make sure we are always on the right road. We should ask questions such as: Is there good fruit (Galatians 5:22-23 & 2 Peter 1:5-8) or bad fruit coming from my life? This self-evaluation will help to keep us off these roads to nowhere (2 Peter 1:10-11).
[1] Authorized King James Version,(New York: Collins' Clear-Type Press, 1955) Eph. 4:14
[2] Ibid, Col. 2:17
November 26, 2015
The Daily Christian - The Reasons Why Some People Don’t Believe In God
As I was searching various internet sites for opinions on why some people don’t believe in God, I quickly came across a blog by an individual who was very willing to share his views on the subject all accompanied by a ridiculing cartoon of Christ as its banner. This blogger could best be described as an atheist who was angry. There are of course other atheists out there who will very coolly and mechanically tell you that they simply have not been convinced that there is a God.
This person, however, got my attention because his comments on why he did not believe were directed mainly at the character of God illustrated within the biblical text. I have to admit, I was a bit surprised by this even with the mocking cartoon because I was expecting a more generalized attack on all religions, but this individual no doubt had been involved either in the Christian faith at one point and had become disillusioned by it or had been seriously hurt by someone who was a Christian or who claimed to be a Christian.
The major theme of his blog post was the question: “Why?” It hung over everything. Why did God put the tree in the Garden of Eden? Why did God give us desires to do things and then punish us for doing those things? It was apparent that at some point, the blogger had searched out answers to these questions but had found them wanting. For example, he did not like the idea of free will, which is the fundamental answer for the above questions. In fact, he went on to share his own ideas on how he could have done a better job of running the universe.
One of his suggestions was that God should have given every human being the choice between free will and basically becoming a pre-programmed robot. This was a rather strange proposal coming from someone who did not like the idea of free will to begin with since he wanted to experience free will in order to choose between it and being a robot. His proposal was a contradiction to the fullest sense of the word. It was also odd since this blogger seemingly hated the very idea of God being in authority. And yet, he was upset that God had not given him the choice of being a robot that did everything right which would have put God squarely in control of everything this person did. Again, this was a contradiction.
One might ask if this blogger even saw the apparent inconsistencies of his own argument. In C.S. Lewis’ book The Screwtape Letters there is a great opening paragraph where Lewis touches on the contradictory beliefs that many modern humans have. It would be nice if after these conflicting statements were pointed out, that the unbeliever would just throw their hands up and say, “Golly jeepers, you’re right. I believe now.” But I certainly have not experienced this, and you probably have not either. Usually the unbeliever will just move on to other complaints and arguments, and your debate will continue on indefinitely. In situations like this, particularly if the person becomes rude or abusive (Acts 18:1-6), perhaps it is best to exit the disagreement and pray that God work in that person’s heart. If, however, you think you are making progress, there may be some other things yet to consider.
Remember that hurt I mentioned? For unbelievers who are angry at God because of a wound that they feel came directly from God or from God’s people, it really isn’t about hearing reasonable or biblical arguments for the faith. They are lying to you and to themselves if they are claiming that this is what they are searching to find. Their arguments against the faith are just a shield hiding the hurt.
As believers, recognizing and then acknowledging this hurt in another person is hard work. Saying, “Hey what’s really going on here?” is a bit uncomfortable for a lot of us. Truth be told, some of us would rather just keep to the academic debate and not get too emotionally involved. However, Paul touches on the importance of this in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3:
“If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but not do have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.”[1]
Without love what is the point of any of it?
There are of course other reasons for why some people take on the banner of atheism. Perhaps two of the main reasons are best illustrated in an article written by Rachael Slick who is the daughter of Matt Slick, an apologetic Calvinist teacher and founder of the online apologetic site CARM. In the piece, Rachael details how she was brought up by her father who gave her very intense studies in the Bible, Christian apologetics, reasoning, and critical thinking. [2] She divulges that she became an atheist after not being able to reconcile a question concerning Old Testament Law during a college discussion with a friend.
Now, I do not claim to know Rachael, but there are some inferences that a reader can make from evaluating the article. It quickly becomes apparent that there is hardly a hint of experienced faith in Christ. Rachael no doubt had held a lot of knowledge in her hand, but she never actually seems to have had the experience of taking Christ’s hand. Knowledge was her god not God himself. When it came to a question about Old Testament law, her faith in that knowledge god failed because she did not have an immediate answer. If she had possessed a true relationship with Christ then the next obvious move would have been asking God for help to find an answer to what was a fairly easy theological question. But she did none of this.
Rachael also seems to have had the false assumption that she was a Christian because everything around her was Christian: her entire family and her knowledge. From this, she wrongly believed that she too was a Christian. But she seems to not have known the most important part which was her need for Christ. Knowing who Christ is and believing there is a God are very different from having an active faithful walk of believing God as Abraham did. We are told that even the demons know who Christ is and tremble, and yet they are not saved (James 2:19). It is putting ones faith in Christ that makes the difference. Now, this is not to say that Christians cannot lose their faith for a time or even have doubts concerning their faith from time to time, but for Rachael, this does not seem to have been the case that she was a Christian in the first place.
Later in the article, Rachael reveals that she is healing from her old ideas and enjoying her secular learning because she believes it is more honest. In other words, she prefers to be on the side of science where people are willing to say, “I don’t know” than be on the side of Christians who profess to know all the answers but really don’t. This of course is unbiblical. As Christians, we do not know all the answers (1 Corinthians 13:12). We may have answers to the most important questions such as those related to salvation, but not everything has been revealed to us. It is true that we are to have a reason for why we believe, (1 Peter 3:15) but this does not mean we have an answer for everything. Rachael seemed to believe that having theological answers for every single thing was the entire point of Christianity. This misinterpretation of Christianity no doubt led to her moving from it. This walking away was in a sense a good thing. The Christianity that she was experiencing was more of quiz show than a true relationship with God.
Rachael’s experience also highlights another reason why people don't want to believe in God—the pursuit of temporary pleasure (Hebrews 11:24-26 & 1 John 2:17). For some, the choice is easy. Temporary sin is chosen over God and eternal life. This would not be a rational choice by any means if it weren’t for unbelief because what is really at the heart of it is not the pleasure but the unbelief. If the person really believed there was a God and eternal life than any reasoning human being would choose God and eternal life over a sin that was only temporary.
For others, however, it is knowing full well, perhaps even more so than some Christians, that in accepting Christianity they will have to stop participating in the sin that gives them the pleasure. Like a child with a new toy, these unbelievers can't imagine how they could give up that pleasure. What they fail to see is that without God’s help there is little success in dealing with temptations, demonstrating that even with this the heart of the matter is again—unbelief. Similarly in the article, Rachael very openly and honestly explains that she felt guilty for having relations with her boyfriend while under the guise of Christianity. Once she left her Christianized philosophies she felt a freedom that she had never felt before. Rachael’s choice is a bit different since she was choosing between a counterfeit Christianity and pleasure. The sin won out of course because when it came to temptation, her knowledge god was as useful as a wooden idol.
None of this seems to have been apparent to Rachael. Perhaps she would have disagreed with this analysis. From the article, she appears to have felt justified in placing most of the blame either fairly or unfairly upon her father, which brings us right back to one of our initial reasons for why some people don't believe in God—believers. Whether or not this was true in Rachael’s case, this is not something we as believers should scoff at or overlook. Our words and actions as believers can certainly be the cause for someone to stumble.
It is interesting that getting to the real answer as to why some people don’t believe in God may be just as difficult for the unbeliever as it is for the believer. But getting to that “why” is important, for once we do—true healing can begin.
[1] Scripture quotation taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®
[2] "The Atheist Daughter of a Notable Christian Apologist Shares Her Story,” http://www.patheos.com/
This person, however, got my attention because his comments on why he did not believe were directed mainly at the character of God illustrated within the biblical text. I have to admit, I was a bit surprised by this even with the mocking cartoon because I was expecting a more generalized attack on all religions, but this individual no doubt had been involved either in the Christian faith at one point and had become disillusioned by it or had been seriously hurt by someone who was a Christian or who claimed to be a Christian.
The major theme of his blog post was the question: “Why?” It hung over everything. Why did God put the tree in the Garden of Eden? Why did God give us desires to do things and then punish us for doing those things? It was apparent that at some point, the blogger had searched out answers to these questions but had found them wanting. For example, he did not like the idea of free will, which is the fundamental answer for the above questions. In fact, he went on to share his own ideas on how he could have done a better job of running the universe.
One of his suggestions was that God should have given every human being the choice between free will and basically becoming a pre-programmed robot. This was a rather strange proposal coming from someone who did not like the idea of free will to begin with since he wanted to experience free will in order to choose between it and being a robot. His proposal was a contradiction to the fullest sense of the word. It was also odd since this blogger seemingly hated the very idea of God being in authority. And yet, he was upset that God had not given him the choice of being a robot that did everything right which would have put God squarely in control of everything this person did. Again, this was a contradiction.
One might ask if this blogger even saw the apparent inconsistencies of his own argument. In C.S. Lewis’ book The Screwtape Letters there is a great opening paragraph where Lewis touches on the contradictory beliefs that many modern humans have. It would be nice if after these conflicting statements were pointed out, that the unbeliever would just throw their hands up and say, “Golly jeepers, you’re right. I believe now.” But I certainly have not experienced this, and you probably have not either. Usually the unbeliever will just move on to other complaints and arguments, and your debate will continue on indefinitely. In situations like this, particularly if the person becomes rude or abusive (Acts 18:1-6), perhaps it is best to exit the disagreement and pray that God work in that person’s heart. If, however, you think you are making progress, there may be some other things yet to consider.
Remember that hurt I mentioned? For unbelievers who are angry at God because of a wound that they feel came directly from God or from God’s people, it really isn’t about hearing reasonable or biblical arguments for the faith. They are lying to you and to themselves if they are claiming that this is what they are searching to find. Their arguments against the faith are just a shield hiding the hurt.
As believers, recognizing and then acknowledging this hurt in another person is hard work. Saying, “Hey what’s really going on here?” is a bit uncomfortable for a lot of us. Truth be told, some of us would rather just keep to the academic debate and not get too emotionally involved. However, Paul touches on the importance of this in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3:
“If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but not do have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.”[1]
Without love what is the point of any of it?
There are of course other reasons for why some people take on the banner of atheism. Perhaps two of the main reasons are best illustrated in an article written by Rachael Slick who is the daughter of Matt Slick, an apologetic Calvinist teacher and founder of the online apologetic site CARM. In the piece, Rachael details how she was brought up by her father who gave her very intense studies in the Bible, Christian apologetics, reasoning, and critical thinking. [2] She divulges that she became an atheist after not being able to reconcile a question concerning Old Testament Law during a college discussion with a friend.
Now, I do not claim to know Rachael, but there are some inferences that a reader can make from evaluating the article. It quickly becomes apparent that there is hardly a hint of experienced faith in Christ. Rachael no doubt had held a lot of knowledge in her hand, but she never actually seems to have had the experience of taking Christ’s hand. Knowledge was her god not God himself. When it came to a question about Old Testament law, her faith in that knowledge god failed because she did not have an immediate answer. If she had possessed a true relationship with Christ then the next obvious move would have been asking God for help to find an answer to what was a fairly easy theological question. But she did none of this.
Rachael also seems to have had the false assumption that she was a Christian because everything around her was Christian: her entire family and her knowledge. From this, she wrongly believed that she too was a Christian. But she seems to not have known the most important part which was her need for Christ. Knowing who Christ is and believing there is a God are very different from having an active faithful walk of believing God as Abraham did. We are told that even the demons know who Christ is and tremble, and yet they are not saved (James 2:19). It is putting ones faith in Christ that makes the difference. Now, this is not to say that Christians cannot lose their faith for a time or even have doubts concerning their faith from time to time, but for Rachael, this does not seem to have been the case that she was a Christian in the first place.
Later in the article, Rachael reveals that she is healing from her old ideas and enjoying her secular learning because she believes it is more honest. In other words, she prefers to be on the side of science where people are willing to say, “I don’t know” than be on the side of Christians who profess to know all the answers but really don’t. This of course is unbiblical. As Christians, we do not know all the answers (1 Corinthians 13:12). We may have answers to the most important questions such as those related to salvation, but not everything has been revealed to us. It is true that we are to have a reason for why we believe, (1 Peter 3:15) but this does not mean we have an answer for everything. Rachael seemed to believe that having theological answers for every single thing was the entire point of Christianity. This misinterpretation of Christianity no doubt led to her moving from it. This walking away was in a sense a good thing. The Christianity that she was experiencing was more of quiz show than a true relationship with God.
Rachael’s experience also highlights another reason why people don't want to believe in God—the pursuit of temporary pleasure (Hebrews 11:24-26 & 1 John 2:17). For some, the choice is easy. Temporary sin is chosen over God and eternal life. This would not be a rational choice by any means if it weren’t for unbelief because what is really at the heart of it is not the pleasure but the unbelief. If the person really believed there was a God and eternal life than any reasoning human being would choose God and eternal life over a sin that was only temporary.
For others, however, it is knowing full well, perhaps even more so than some Christians, that in accepting Christianity they will have to stop participating in the sin that gives them the pleasure. Like a child with a new toy, these unbelievers can't imagine how they could give up that pleasure. What they fail to see is that without God’s help there is little success in dealing with temptations, demonstrating that even with this the heart of the matter is again—unbelief. Similarly in the article, Rachael very openly and honestly explains that she felt guilty for having relations with her boyfriend while under the guise of Christianity. Once she left her Christianized philosophies she felt a freedom that she had never felt before. Rachael’s choice is a bit different since she was choosing between a counterfeit Christianity and pleasure. The sin won out of course because when it came to temptation, her knowledge god was as useful as a wooden idol.
None of this seems to have been apparent to Rachael. Perhaps she would have disagreed with this analysis. From the article, she appears to have felt justified in placing most of the blame either fairly or unfairly upon her father, which brings us right back to one of our initial reasons for why some people don't believe in God—believers. Whether or not this was true in Rachael’s case, this is not something we as believers should scoff at or overlook. Our words and actions as believers can certainly be the cause for someone to stumble.
It is interesting that getting to the real answer as to why some people don’t believe in God may be just as difficult for the unbeliever as it is for the believer. But getting to that “why” is important, for once we do—true healing can begin.
[1] Scripture quotation taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®
[2] "The Atheist Daughter of a Notable Christian Apologist Shares Her Story,” http://www.patheos.com/
October 12, 2015
The Daily Christian--Is Believing in God Reasonable?
Some suggest that believing in God is unreasonable, but let us take for example how we react when let's say a new cell phone comes out with an innovative feature. Our first reaction to that phone is usually, "Who in the world made that?" Well, this is what Christians do. They look at the stars, the moon, and even the intricate human body and say, "Wow, who made that?" It's a perfectly reasonable question.
Now someone really on their toes will argue that the question is not the problem. Instead, it is the answer that Christians give to the question that's the point of contention which is that some unseen being made the stars, the moon, and so forth. This, they may contend, is more difficult to accept than believing that some person in California designed the phone. This answer that Christians give may appear, on the surface, to be unreasonable, but let us examine some of the current options that are available to us that can possibly explain how the stars, the moon, and more importantly, how we all got here.
When you look at these items, in particular, how your own body is set up (for example, you don't have to walk around holding your liver in your hands, which would be quite inconvenient while grocery shopping) you get to thinking that not just any average Joe made these things but rather it had to be someone more intelligent than that neighbor of yours or smarter than Microsoft so you conclude it had to be someone of a higher intelligence.
Maybe at this point you're thinking aliens. But if aliens do exist, could they really have made the sun, us, and themselves? Probably not. Not willing to give up so easily, others may suggest that these aliens have evolved and become so advanced that they are invisible or exist in another dimension, and it is these aliens who made the sun and us. However, the question still remains: Who made these aliens before they evolved?
Going in a less Star Treky direction, you might be tempted to believe as Stephen Hawking has essentially suggested that the laws of physics made the universe. But then you realize that laws are simply explanations of processes or habits, if you will. They too are just things that also need to be made and set into motion.
Maybe you start to speculate that these things came from nothing. Didn't some scientists make something come from nothing?[1] But then again, the nothing first needed the scientist to make the conditions to make the something come from nothing. In other words, there actually needed to be something to make the something come from nothing or we'd all be selling something from nothing all the time on eBay. So there had to be intelligence behind it in order to set up the conditions to make the something. By the way, it has been said that this experiment and those like it have only demonstrated that even in a vacuum there is something.[2] The problem now is finding the nothing in order to show that something can come from nothing. But even then, you still have the scientist setting up the conditions. And that isn't nothing.
Another idea that has been theorized is that our universe is just a product of another universe in perhaps another dimension. But this is just an idea that attempts to avoid the question all together by piling on more universes which are just things too. We still end up at the beginning asking, who made the universe in the other dimension? It also brings us back to holding our livers in our hands since we have to ask, could a universe, which is a physical thing design me so purposefully? You might try to insert the theory on Macro Evolution at this point, but this concept is just an explanation of a process, a theory at best, which also needs something or someone to get it rolling. The same of course goes for the Big Bang Theory--not the TV show but the actual theory.
At this point, you may say it's all an illusion that we are here or that we are really just living in a Matrix. However, we are still trapped by that same nagging question: Who made the illusion or Matrix? And this keeps returning us to the three ingredients we seem to need: an unfathomable intelligence with unphysical properties that has an immortality which extends in both directions which has no beginning or end--hence eternity.
Due to this, you may suggest, as others have, that perhaps our universe was an eternal static universe, which did not have a beginning. This theory, however, has been shown to be erroneous since even this "static" universe could not have existed forever.[3]
Now before I get accused of some logical fallacy, the options that have been discussed are the ones that have been placed on the table thus far in recent history. You may employ the “we’re not smart enough to figure this out yet, but sometime in the future we will," classical response. However, the way in which you will no doubt figure it out is by using the laws of physics, which are just things that have to be made.
The point to all of this is that it is reasonable to believe that something of unfathomable intelligence that exists outside of time and matter, which is the very idea of God, could have made the universe. It certainly is more reasonable than believing that aliens did it. Due to this, perhaps there are other reasons for why people don't consider that God made the universe other than that it is unreasonable. We will explore this in next month's post.
1. Daniel Bates, "Sparks and mirrors: Quantum scientists make something out of nothing," Daily Mail, June 7, 2011, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetec...
2. Charles Q. Choi, "A Vacuum Can Yield Flashes of Light," Scientific American, February 12, 2013, http://www.scientificamerican.com/art...
3. Jacqueline Mitchell, "In the Beginning Was the Beginning," Tufts Now, May 29, 2012, http://now.tufts.edu/articles/beginni...
Now someone really on their toes will argue that the question is not the problem. Instead, it is the answer that Christians give to the question that's the point of contention which is that some unseen being made the stars, the moon, and so forth. This, they may contend, is more difficult to accept than believing that some person in California designed the phone. This answer that Christians give may appear, on the surface, to be unreasonable, but let us examine some of the current options that are available to us that can possibly explain how the stars, the moon, and more importantly, how we all got here.
When you look at these items, in particular, how your own body is set up (for example, you don't have to walk around holding your liver in your hands, which would be quite inconvenient while grocery shopping) you get to thinking that not just any average Joe made these things but rather it had to be someone more intelligent than that neighbor of yours or smarter than Microsoft so you conclude it had to be someone of a higher intelligence.
Maybe at this point you're thinking aliens. But if aliens do exist, could they really have made the sun, us, and themselves? Probably not. Not willing to give up so easily, others may suggest that these aliens have evolved and become so advanced that they are invisible or exist in another dimension, and it is these aliens who made the sun and us. However, the question still remains: Who made these aliens before they evolved?
Going in a less Star Treky direction, you might be tempted to believe as Stephen Hawking has essentially suggested that the laws of physics made the universe. But then you realize that laws are simply explanations of processes or habits, if you will. They too are just things that also need to be made and set into motion.
Maybe you start to speculate that these things came from nothing. Didn't some scientists make something come from nothing?[1] But then again, the nothing first needed the scientist to make the conditions to make the something come from nothing. In other words, there actually needed to be something to make the something come from nothing or we'd all be selling something from nothing all the time on eBay. So there had to be intelligence behind it in order to set up the conditions to make the something. By the way, it has been said that this experiment and those like it have only demonstrated that even in a vacuum there is something.[2] The problem now is finding the nothing in order to show that something can come from nothing. But even then, you still have the scientist setting up the conditions. And that isn't nothing.
Another idea that has been theorized is that our universe is just a product of another universe in perhaps another dimension. But this is just an idea that attempts to avoid the question all together by piling on more universes which are just things too. We still end up at the beginning asking, who made the universe in the other dimension? It also brings us back to holding our livers in our hands since we have to ask, could a universe, which is a physical thing design me so purposefully? You might try to insert the theory on Macro Evolution at this point, but this concept is just an explanation of a process, a theory at best, which also needs something or someone to get it rolling. The same of course goes for the Big Bang Theory--not the TV show but the actual theory.
At this point, you may say it's all an illusion that we are here or that we are really just living in a Matrix. However, we are still trapped by that same nagging question: Who made the illusion or Matrix? And this keeps returning us to the three ingredients we seem to need: an unfathomable intelligence with unphysical properties that has an immortality which extends in both directions which has no beginning or end--hence eternity.
Due to this, you may suggest, as others have, that perhaps our universe was an eternal static universe, which did not have a beginning. This theory, however, has been shown to be erroneous since even this "static" universe could not have existed forever.[3]
Now before I get accused of some logical fallacy, the options that have been discussed are the ones that have been placed on the table thus far in recent history. You may employ the “we’re not smart enough to figure this out yet, but sometime in the future we will," classical response. However, the way in which you will no doubt figure it out is by using the laws of physics, which are just things that have to be made.
The point to all of this is that it is reasonable to believe that something of unfathomable intelligence that exists outside of time and matter, which is the very idea of God, could have made the universe. It certainly is more reasonable than believing that aliens did it. Due to this, perhaps there are other reasons for why people don't consider that God made the universe other than that it is unreasonable. We will explore this in next month's post.
1. Daniel Bates, "Sparks and mirrors: Quantum scientists make something out of nothing," Daily Mail, June 7, 2011, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetec...
2. Charles Q. Choi, "A Vacuum Can Yield Flashes of Light," Scientific American, February 12, 2013, http://www.scientificamerican.com/art...
3. Jacqueline Mitchell, "In the Beginning Was the Beginning," Tufts Now, May 29, 2012, http://now.tufts.edu/articles/beginni...
September 4, 2015
The Daily Christian -- Why Do People Read Christian Fiction?
In seeking an editor for my Christian fiction novel, I did a quick search online and found someone whose credentials looked promising. When I described my project to her she very politely told me that she knew nothing of Christian fiction and that she was very sorry but couldn't even point me to anyone she knew that could work with me. I found out later why she had come up in my search; her last name was Christian. For those who know about this type of work or are at least curious about it, I offer my point of view, as not only a writer of the genre but also as a reader of it, on why it falls into one of the top categories (Religious/Spirituality) of self-published books.
If you know anything about Christian fiction, you might expect me to say something along the lines of, "People read Christian fiction because it brings hope and comfort to a troubled world.” This might be the underlying motivation for why some or even all read this type of work, but I don't think it provides the real explanation, particularly since Christians can turn to their Bibles in order to meet those needs. In other words, it doesn't answer the question my grandfather once asked, "Why don't they just read their Bibles?" To be fair, he was speaking of nonfiction, but I think the question still holds true for fiction.
An obvious answer to the question of why it is being read is that readers are simply identifying with the characters in these stories as they do with the historical figures found within the biblical text. But this of course can happen in secular works as well. You often enjoy a book because you feel a connection to one or more of the characters. The teen that can't wait to start her own life, the lonely career-minded woman who decides she needs more, or the rambunctious senior citizen who doesn't give a wit anymore what people think are all examples of some well-used characters most of us can relate to on some level. Everyone has felt impatience, dissatisfaction, and a need for greater freedom at some point in their lives. In stating this, however, the question then becomes: Why don’t Christians just read secular works if all of it can be boiled down to simple emotional experiences that we all share? Obviously, these readers are seeking something more than just an emotional connection to a fictitious character.
But what is it that they are seeking? I recall reading a historical novel and although extremely well written in both the technical and creative sense, the characters still lacked something for me. They seemed to have very little interest in the spiritual aspects of their own lives. And what little sense they may have had of it was explained away in a few paragraphs and never discussed again. This may have been fine for an unreligious reader, but as a Christian reading this work, it simply did not ring true for me that even unbelievers and believers alike would have spent so little time thinking about what they thought on the subject especially in a historical piece. In like manner, a well-known Christian author once said in an interview that she wanted to write about a character’s entire self which included their spirituality. I believe this statement gives us some further insight into why this type of work is enjoyed. Readers of Christian fiction want to read about multilayered characters whose spiritual lives are not ignored or brushed aside. It is this holistic approach to story telling that can be very satisfying in a sea of carbon-copied characters whose interests are usually only for this world.
This is not, however, a vague spirituality that is being sought here rather it is a spirituality based solely on one's faith in God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I once heard an NPR listener clarify this point by the complaint he lodged at the types of shows featured on the station. To this person, the programming never seemed to express this particular individual's point of view. This listener identified himself as a Christian. For the Christian fiction reader, there is a real desire to see characters play out a Christian worldview that is not often found in our modern-day culture.
Within a Christian fiction piece, the treatment of the teen, the lonely career-minded woman, and the senior citizen will be very different compared to what may be found within a secular work. There is an expectation of an apparent faith in these works which is not based on an unnamed generalized nature as if it were a vapor floating above which makes everyone feel happy. Instead, it is based on the nature of God and how belief in God plays out in the lives of each character.
In answering the question of why people read Christian fiction, we pretty much looked at the question from a Christian reader's point of view. This of course does not shed light on the fact that non-Christians, agnostics, and non-religious readers also take part in reading this genre as well. As a Christian myself, I can not speak to why this is only that perhaps this genre does offer some hope and comfort to a troubled world.
If you know anything about Christian fiction, you might expect me to say something along the lines of, "People read Christian fiction because it brings hope and comfort to a troubled world.” This might be the underlying motivation for why some or even all read this type of work, but I don't think it provides the real explanation, particularly since Christians can turn to their Bibles in order to meet those needs. In other words, it doesn't answer the question my grandfather once asked, "Why don't they just read their Bibles?" To be fair, he was speaking of nonfiction, but I think the question still holds true for fiction.
An obvious answer to the question of why it is being read is that readers are simply identifying with the characters in these stories as they do with the historical figures found within the biblical text. But this of course can happen in secular works as well. You often enjoy a book because you feel a connection to one or more of the characters. The teen that can't wait to start her own life, the lonely career-minded woman who decides she needs more, or the rambunctious senior citizen who doesn't give a wit anymore what people think are all examples of some well-used characters most of us can relate to on some level. Everyone has felt impatience, dissatisfaction, and a need for greater freedom at some point in their lives. In stating this, however, the question then becomes: Why don’t Christians just read secular works if all of it can be boiled down to simple emotional experiences that we all share? Obviously, these readers are seeking something more than just an emotional connection to a fictitious character.
But what is it that they are seeking? I recall reading a historical novel and although extremely well written in both the technical and creative sense, the characters still lacked something for me. They seemed to have very little interest in the spiritual aspects of their own lives. And what little sense they may have had of it was explained away in a few paragraphs and never discussed again. This may have been fine for an unreligious reader, but as a Christian reading this work, it simply did not ring true for me that even unbelievers and believers alike would have spent so little time thinking about what they thought on the subject especially in a historical piece. In like manner, a well-known Christian author once said in an interview that she wanted to write about a character’s entire self which included their spirituality. I believe this statement gives us some further insight into why this type of work is enjoyed. Readers of Christian fiction want to read about multilayered characters whose spiritual lives are not ignored or brushed aside. It is this holistic approach to story telling that can be very satisfying in a sea of carbon-copied characters whose interests are usually only for this world.
This is not, however, a vague spirituality that is being sought here rather it is a spirituality based solely on one's faith in God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I once heard an NPR listener clarify this point by the complaint he lodged at the types of shows featured on the station. To this person, the programming never seemed to express this particular individual's point of view. This listener identified himself as a Christian. For the Christian fiction reader, there is a real desire to see characters play out a Christian worldview that is not often found in our modern-day culture.
Within a Christian fiction piece, the treatment of the teen, the lonely career-minded woman, and the senior citizen will be very different compared to what may be found within a secular work. There is an expectation of an apparent faith in these works which is not based on an unnamed generalized nature as if it were a vapor floating above which makes everyone feel happy. Instead, it is based on the nature of God and how belief in God plays out in the lives of each character.
In answering the question of why people read Christian fiction, we pretty much looked at the question from a Christian reader's point of view. This of course does not shed light on the fact that non-Christians, agnostics, and non-religious readers also take part in reading this genre as well. As a Christian myself, I can not speak to why this is only that perhaps this genre does offer some hope and comfort to a troubled world.
August 2, 2015
The Daily Christian-Feelings and Our Walk with God
Recently a question that a seemingly sincere Christian posted on an online question/answer site got my attention. She asked simply if non-Christians were happy. According to her, the question was inspired by a conversation she had encountered with her sister and mother where both had insisted that non-Christians were not happy nor content because they were well, non-Christians.
As you can imagine, this prompted a barrage of comments from atheists, people of other faiths, including an unusually high percentage of pagans, particularly those of the Wicca variety that they were, and believed themselves to be, in fact happy and content--thank you very much.
This response, of course, should not come as a surprise to us Christians and should be completely expected according to the biblical text. While in Lystra, after healing a man, the pagan crowd began to think that Paul and Barnabas were gods. Paul attempted to correct them and started to minister saying that even though God had let all the nations go their own way He still had shown Himself by providing rain and food to the unbelieving nations. Interestingly, we are also told that God fills their "hearts with joy". (New International Version - Acts 14:16-17 - see also Matthew 5:44-46)
Often people believe that feeling good and content means that they are on the right path. But according to this verse, that is not always the case. They simply may be experiencing God's kindness that He shares with believers and nonbelievers alike.
Unfortunately, we Christians today often believe the same thing. We conclude that our immoral actions are okay simply because we feel good or even content when we carry out the behavior. This is perhaps why our country is on such a moral free fall.
There is nothing wrong with feelings in and of themselves. God created them after all. In fact, I would contend that the Holy Spirit works through our emotional experience in order to help us. Nehemiah 8:10, "The joy of the Lord is your strength" is a phrase that reflects this (see also Acts 9:31). The problem arises when we do not recognize that our feelings should not be our final authority, particularly if they contradict what the Bible is teaching us (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Of course, the other extreme of this is to believe that feelings should play no part in one's spiritual life and that it should all be based on intellect or everyday practicality. But having feelings is a part of being a human being and a Christian. We are not Spock where we have no emotions. We are human beings with a mind and also a heart for God (Deuteronomy 6:5 & Matthew 22:36-40). Let us understand the power of our feelings but also their limitations and pitfalls.
The Link That Could Not Be Broken
As you can imagine, this prompted a barrage of comments from atheists, people of other faiths, including an unusually high percentage of pagans, particularly those of the Wicca variety that they were, and believed themselves to be, in fact happy and content--thank you very much.
This response, of course, should not come as a surprise to us Christians and should be completely expected according to the biblical text. While in Lystra, after healing a man, the pagan crowd began to think that Paul and Barnabas were gods. Paul attempted to correct them and started to minister saying that even though God had let all the nations go their own way He still had shown Himself by providing rain and food to the unbelieving nations. Interestingly, we are also told that God fills their "hearts with joy". (New International Version - Acts 14:16-17 - see also Matthew 5:44-46)
Often people believe that feeling good and content means that they are on the right path. But according to this verse, that is not always the case. They simply may be experiencing God's kindness that He shares with believers and nonbelievers alike.
Unfortunately, we Christians today often believe the same thing. We conclude that our immoral actions are okay simply because we feel good or even content when we carry out the behavior. This is perhaps why our country is on such a moral free fall.
There is nothing wrong with feelings in and of themselves. God created them after all. In fact, I would contend that the Holy Spirit works through our emotional experience in order to help us. Nehemiah 8:10, "The joy of the Lord is your strength" is a phrase that reflects this (see also Acts 9:31). The problem arises when we do not recognize that our feelings should not be our final authority, particularly if they contradict what the Bible is teaching us (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Of course, the other extreme of this is to believe that feelings should play no part in one's spiritual life and that it should all be based on intellect or everyday practicality. But having feelings is a part of being a human being and a Christian. We are not Spock where we have no emotions. We are human beings with a mind and also a heart for God (Deuteronomy 6:5 & Matthew 22:36-40). Let us understand the power of our feelings but also their limitations and pitfalls.
The Link That Could Not Be Broken
