Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 130
July 2, 2013
Enjoy This Fourth of July Week
Because of the holiday on Thursday, we're taking this week
off from challenges. We'll be back with the regularly scheduled challenge in
two weeks, but in the meantime, you can enjoy our past challenges here and here.
So have a happy Fourth of July, and remember: We're to love
all—friends and enemies, fellow countrymen and those around the world—but it's
not wrong to have a special love for your child that goes beyond your love for
other children. It's not wrong to have a special love for your family that goes
beyond your love for other families. And it's not wrong to have a special love
for your country and its people that goes beyond your love for other countries.
God has placed us in various circles (families, churches, cities, countries)
that He intends for us to specially love and care for.
It's the street where everyone cares specially for his own
garden that the most beauty happens for all. Everyone loses on the street where
no one feels a particular attachment to his own garden, where no one has a
special desire to lovingly tend to the space that has been given to him and his
family. So don't be afraid to specially love and work for the good of the
country you find yourself in. If you're Canadian, I hope you love Canada. If
you're Australian, I delight in seeing you love Australia. And since I'm an
American, I'll celebrate the birthday of my country and seek its blessing
(though there are other countries), just as anyone would celebrate the birthday
of his own child and seek his blessing (though there are other children).
If you react negatively to those who say “God bless
America,” ask yourself if anyone hearing a father pray specifically for his son
would scold him for not praying instead for "all the children of the
world.” Would anyone feel the need to point out that his son is imperfect and
unworthy of his special prayers? Do we not rather see the beauty of his familial
love? Are we not touched by it and reminded to love our own? Let us love our
own more, not less, and rejoice in others loving their own.
From last year's post:
On this Fourth of July, I say, “God
bless America!” But saying “God bless America” doesn’t mean, “God, give us
prosperity and everything we want.” I’m asking God for good things, but those
good things include His granting the people of this nation conviction of our
sin, repentance, grace, faith, wisdom, justice and mercy in our treatment of
each other, knowledge of the truth, trust in Him, and even suffering, if that
suffering will bring about everything else on the list.
Have a happy Fourth of July!
July 1, 2013
Let Your Kids Decide about Religion? (Video)
June 28, 2013
The Best Question to Ask When Starting a Conversation About God
Ever found yourself looking for a way to initiate a conversation about God, but not sure exactly how to start? I’ve been in similar situations with people I don’t know (i.e. on airplanes, while waiting for a seat in a restaurant, or while watching a soccer game), and I’ve tried a number of approaches. I continue to return to one simple, effective question, however, to start the most important of all conversations. I’ve come to believe this is the most essential evangelistic question we can ask: “What do you think happens when we die?”
This question can take a variety of forms (like, “Do you believe in life after death?” or, “What do you think about the afterlife?”), and it invariably leads to deeper conversations about the meaning of life, the existence of God and plight of humans. James Boccardo has done an excellent service to the Kingdom by writing about this approach extensively in a book called Unsilenced. I met James several years ago while speaking at a conference in North Carolina and I highly recommend his book. He provides a strategy for using this question and considers a number of possible objections you might hear from people with whom you are sharing. In my own experience with this simple approach, I’ve learned the value of, “What do you think happens after we die?”
It’s Diagnostic
This one question will immediately help you understand the worldview of the person with whom you are talking. It’s helpful to know where people are coming from, and every worldview has a distinctive answer to this question. When you ask it, you’ll almost immediately diagnose the worldview you are about to engage, without having to ask any overt questions about God’s existence.
It’s Disarming
Questions about the afterlife are often easier to ask than questions about God, even though the discussion of one inevitably leads to the discussion of the other. Many people have given thought to issues of life and earth, even though they haven’t seriously considered the existence of God. You’ll be surprised how many people are willing to talk about this question.
It’s Directed
In the end, the Good News of the Gospel is about Salvation; being saved from the future judgment of God we so deserve. While God certainly wants us to be transformed in this life, God’s offer of forgiveness through Jesus saves us from judgment in eternity. The question, “What do you think happens when we die?” is directed at the most important offer of the Gospel: forgiveness and eternal life.
When I ask this initial question of non-believers, they inevitably provide answers in one of two categories. Some believe they will simply return to the dirt. When this is the case, I often talk about the existence and nature of the soul and our desire for justice and mercy. Some possess a vague, undefined belief in life after death (heaven or hell). When this is the case, I usually ask them how our final destination is determined (who gets to decide?). In either case, the question, “What do you think happens when we die?” has been the gateway question that has helped me to diagnose worldview, engage inoffensively and direct discussions toward the most significant gift of the Gospel.
Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email
June 26, 2013
Be Ready to Discuss Same-Sex Marriage Today
We should be hearing the decisions from the Supreme Court on
Prop 8 and DOMA today (see “Now
We Wait for the Ruling” to review what’s being decided). Regardless of what
happens, you can expect to see and hear a lot of discussion on this topic on
social media and among family and friends.
To equip you for that conversation, Ryan Anderson has a
helpful, concise article titled “5
Things You Need to Know about the Supreme Court’s Marriage Cases.” Here are
the five things he covers:
1. Courts Shouldn’t Redefine Marriage
2. President Obama and the
Government of California Didn’t Do Their Duty [defending laws passed by
citizens and legislators]
3. Telling the Truth About Marriage
Matters for Policy
4. Redefining Marriage Would Have
Bad Consequences
5. What You Can Do to Prepare for
the Rulings
It’s a short, readable article with links to follow for more
information (you can view a summary of the article as an infographic here). Post it, pass it on, and take a few minutes to learn from it so
you can engage others today graciously and persuasively.
Inherent Legal Difficulties in Same-Sex Marriage
Last year, I wrote about the legal
difficulties that same-sex marriage will inevitably bring. Marriage, the
public recognition and upholding of a union between a man and a woman,
naturally arose because of a biological reality about men and women—i.e., the
fact that their union is the kind of union that creates children which need the
permanency,
sexual exclusivity, and complementarity supported by this public recognition in
order to flourish. Despite the current
push to reject sexual complementarity as the basis of a family, our concept of family
still involves children, and yet there’s no getting around the fact that in
order for a child to exist (leaving aside cloning), a man and a woman
must be involved.
So what happens when a definitional change is forced onto naturally
occurring institutions (both marriage and family)? That’s what the UK is
finding out as it tries to create new laws to hold up a new definition. It’s
turning out to be not as simple as they thought, and the Church of England is
pushing for better legislation:
[Rt Revd Tim Stevens,
Convenor of the Lords Spiritual] made clear that the bishops would look
not only at strengthening opt-outs for those who oppose a new definition of
marriage but at the future practicalities for people in same-sex unions.
He signalled that bishops would
seek to introduce a notion of adultery into the bill and extend parental rights
for same-sex partners.
Under the current bill people in a
same-sex marriages who discover that their spouse is unfaithful to them would
not be able to divorce for adultery after Government legal experts failed to
agree what constitutes “sex” between gay or lesbian couples.
The bishops are also seeking to
change a provision which says that when a lesbian woman in a same-sex marriage
has a baby her spouse is not also classed as the baby’s parent.
The result is that in some cases
children would be classed as having only one parent….
"The bill now requires
improvement in a number of other key respects, including in its approach to the
question of fidelity in marriage and the rights of children.
“If this bill is to become law, it
is crucial that marriage as newly defined is equipped to carry within it as
many as possible of the virtues of the understanding of marriage it will
replace.
Extra legislation is needed to try to artificially
create a similarity between same-sex marriage and opposite-sex marriage because the two are inherently different in
ways that are relevant to the institution of marriage.
Lesbian activist Masha Gessen says that because of these
inherent differences and the resulting need for a new legal system to
accommodate same-sex couples, the institution of marriage “should not exist” (see
the first link in this post for a transcript, or listen here):
[F]ighting for gay marriage
generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we
get there—because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to
change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and
it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist…. I would like to
live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality [of my
children having five parents]. And I don’t think that’s compatible with the
institution of marriage.
In other words, there’s no way to make same-sex marriage exactly like marriage because of the
issue of children, therefore something entirely new must be created for all. The
problem is that creating a new, man-made institution by force of law will lead
to many unintended consequences. And as Robert Oscar Lopez points out in The Public Discourse,
in France the tide of public opinion has been turning against same-sex
marriage as people learn more about the children-related legal
changes it will bring, including the push to promote surrogacy,
which treats both women and children as commodities.
Lopez concludes that the dropping support in France, taking place as
knowledge increases, shows that same-sex marriage in this country is not
inevitable, nor can opposition to it be explained by a lack of information.
June 25, 2013
Links Mentioned on the Show
The following are links that were either mentioned on this week's show or inspired by it, as posted live on the @STRtweets Twitter feed:
The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
Biblical Manuscript Evidence – Podcast commentary (second hour) by Greg Koukl
When Evangelism Looks Like a Protest by J. Warner Wallace
Why Some Scientists Embrace the 'Multiverse' by Dennis Prager
New Atheist Documentary by Dawkins and Krauss Won't Make an 'Unbeliever' Out of Anyone by William Lane Craig
Gospel of John: What Everyone Should Know About the Fourth Gospel by John Shelby Spong (article responded to by J. Warner Wallace)
Was John Describing Something He Saw, or Was He Trying to Make a Point? by J. Warner Wallace
The 10 Most Common Objections to Christianity by Alex McFarland
10 Answers for Atheists: How to Have an Intelligent Discussion About the Existence of God by Alex McFarland
Listen to today's show or download any archived show for free. (Find links from past shows here.)
To follow the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00–7:00 p.m. PT), use the hashtag #STRtalk.
The Source of Our Fear When It Comes to Evangelism
I’m presently training a group of high school students at the Unleashed Camp here in Southern California held on the campus of Vanguard University. This camp prepares young people to share and defend their faith, and students spend every afternoon putting what they learn into practice as they share the Gospel with people in the local community. Yesterday was the first day of the camp, and there were many students there who had never participated in evangelism of this nature. I could sense some nervousness in the room. So, I began by asking what caused them to be fearful about sharing the Gospel. Here is what they said:
“I’m afraid I will look or sound stupid.”
“I’m afraid I will forget what to say or I will say the wrong thing.”
“I’m afraid I will get ‘cussed out’ by someone I meet.”
“I’m afraid I won’t know how to start the conversation and it will be awkward.”
“I’m afraid someone will want to fight me!”
These students expressed some of the same fears their older counterparts describe when I teach this material across the country. Our fears are almost always driven by the same underlying concern. Can you see it in the responses the students gave yesterday? These students, courageous and sacrificial enough to give up a week of their summer to participate in this evangelism adventure, exposed the same anxieties most of us have when it comes to evangelism. Their fears were centered myopically in their concern for how they were going to appear to the world around them.
They were afraid about how they might look or what might happen to them. Would they experience something awkward or embarrassing? Would they become uncomfortable? Would they experience some pain? Most of our fear of evangelism is centered on our own desire to be comfortable, and there’s nothing more uncomfortable than being embarrassed or humiliated by our peers. For these young people, it’s bad enough that they might look foolish to strangers, but there’s also the very real possibility that they’ll look foolish to their fellow students!
So my first goal in training yesterday was to simply help these young men and women get comfortable with discomfort by taking their eyes off themselves and placing them firmly on God. I tried to remind them that character is more important than comfort. It’s easy to get caught up in thinking that our worldly image is more important than our heavenly mission. As Christians, we ought to know better:
1 John 2:15-17
Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever.
James 4:4
You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
Sometimes our fears expose what’s really important to us, so they’re a good place to assess and address our priorities. What are you afraid of? What’s keeping you from sharing the Gospel with the people in your life, even the strangers who you meet every day? It might just be that (like me) you’re often more concerned with your own comfort than you are with the cause of Christ. It’s easy to worry more about the world we see than the Kingdom that matters. But we can change all that. We can conquer our fears by simply changing our focus.
Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email
June 24, 2013
Webcast Tuesday
Tuesday is the live weekly webcast 4-7 p.m. PT. J. Warner Wallace is hosting. Give him a call with your question or comment at (855) 243-9975.
Jim will interview Alex McFarland on his book Ten Common Objections to Christianity.
Listen live online. Join us on Twitter during the program @STRtweets #STRtalk.
Does No Eternal Life Equal Greater Accountability Now? (Video)
June 21, 2013
When Evangelism Looks Like a Protest
Many years ago our youth group partnered with a street evangelist in Utah who took a similar approach. His efforts were often met with great resistance; his signs were brutally direct. I wondered if the message was the problem, so we tried crafting signs that were more “inviting” and less provocative. Our efforts met with the same response. We were heckled, resisted and abused. Even when our signs were worded so carefully that we nearly lost the exclusive truth of the Gospel, people still found our efforts offensive. Finally a young man on the street asked the question that illuminated the problem: “What are all you people protesting?” The question caught me off-guard. “We’re not protesting anything,” I said, re-reading our signs carefully in an attempt to understand how he could misinterpret our efforts. But his question made perfect sense.
Even though our “words” were not “words of protest”, our “actions” were “actions of protest.” Think about it for a minute. If I told you I saw a group of people walking back and forth in a limited geographic area carrying signs and talking to anyone who was willing to engage them, what would you think I was describing? A picket line? A protest event? We have a cultural context for this kind of behavior; it is the behavioral language of protest. Before I even get close enough to see what’s written on those signs, I’ve already started to interpret the behavior of the group and it’s not a favorable interpretation. Protestors are generally regarded as angry people who want an injustice to be righted. Most of us want to avoid protestors and few of us think of picket lines as the location where winsome interaction is likely to occur.
As I watched the efforts of that local Christian group of street evangelists, I couldn’t help but believe they limited their impact by using those signs. They took the time to carefully craft the language of the text on the placards without considering the language of their actions as sign holders. After my own experience using signs to proclaim a message on the streets of Utah, I’ve decided to think carefully about the perception created by this approach. While I never want to sacrifice the direct, exclusive and honest message of the Gospel, there’s no sense in adding offense. I don’t want my evangelism to look like a protest.
Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email
