Christianity Archives - Page 25 of 106

Tag Archive for: Christianity

The Suffering Christian

We live in a troubled world, plagued by sin which leads to pain and suffering. This state of the world is nothing new, it has gone on since the fall of man. The entirety of humankind from Adam to us have dealt with a variety of suffering as a result of this fall. However, though we do not live in a more sinful time, for every age has overflowed with sinfulness, we seem to be facing a different struggle. Our society is fighting a battle of the mind, and losing.

We Just Can’t Even

We live in a world where many cannot seem to bear the slightest sorrow. This makes it all the more difficult to persevere through the most difficult situations anyone of us could face; such as the loss of a loved one, a severe medical diagnosis, the loss of a job, and other heavy burdens. This mental and emotional crisis has been the result of one of the Church’s failings — teaching how to properly handle suffering. This has spread outside of the church and into our society. To put it plainly, we have lost the ability to suffer well. In recent years, our minds have been flooded with messages telling us that we all need therapy, we need to talk about all of our emotions, we need to constantly think about and share whatever trauma we have over and over again

**Where can we actually find help?**

The problem is that this doesn’t seem to be helping. We are more depressed and more anxious than ever. But how should we deal with suffering? Where can we find comfort and help in our suffering? Our Lord has provided us three supports to comfort and strengthen us in this life: prayer, scripture, and the Church.

Prayer: The best guide to prayer that we have are the Psalms. If you need examples of prayers read through Psalms, and you will find a prayer for nearly every situation of life. But if you don’t know what to pray, or you can’t summon the strength to, remember Romans 8:26 “Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.”

The Spirit Himself will pray for us and understands our groanings when we don’t know what to say. In prayer we lift up our lives, the blessings and the sufferings to God, for only God our savior has the strength to carry us through.

Scripture: Studying the Bible, like prayer, is an essential part of the Christian life, especially in times of pain and suffering. The Bible is filled with a multitude of books such as Lamentations and Psalms to help us. I encourage you to read through the Gospels and through the sufferings that Jesus experienced. Scripture reminds us that Christ is with us in our sufferings. He understands and has experienced sufferings greater, and similar to our own.

Moreover, the Apostle Paul lets us know that our affliction is ultimately making us stronger and preparing us for eternity in 2 Corinthians 4:17 saying, ^“For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison . . .”

The Church: Another major tool that God has given us, is the Church, the body of believers. We are not alone in our sufferings. If you are not a part of a local Bible-believing church, join one, and if you have a church, reach out to them. You don’t have to share with everyone all the gory details about the circumstances you might be facing, but you need the support of your brothers and sisters in Christ. The responsibility is not yours alone — God has commanded the Body of Christ [fellow Christians] to stand with you and share your sufferings. Paul writes, “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal 6:2).

We are all one Church. We must be unified. So, if you know another believer is struggling with loss or pain, reach out and help them. This is how we are to love one another.

How Should We Respond to Suffering?

These support structures will help you persevere when you are in the midst of affliction, but there is more that is needed for you to thrive in your suffering. On top of the practical help that we’ve been given, we must also have the proper attitude and emotional response to life’s hardships. To discover how we should respond, we must look at scripture. The most well-known example of suffering in the Bible is Job. In his story, God allowed Satan to take all of Job’s earthly possessions and to kill Job’s children. When this happened, Job’s first response was to worship the Lord and bless His name.

“Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head and fell on the ground and worshiped. ²¹ And he said, ‘Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.’ ²² In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong” (Job 1:20-22).

This by no means is an easy thing to do, but the Bible sets this up as the correct response to suffering. Our first act should be to worship and glorify the Lord. Our comfort should be in God. Paul writes in 2 Corinthians,

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, ⁴ who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God. ⁵ For as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too” (2 Cor 1:3-5)

Our Lord wants to comfort us. He is with us in our affliction. Cling to Christ and allow Him to carry your burdens; let Him bear the brunt of your suffering. If you are still in doubt of how to respond to suffering study the Bible, it is filled with examples of God’s servants and how their lives were filled with affliction, yet they sought God and found their comfort in Him.

Show Us A Sign: The Cross And The Death Of Blind Faith

Theology and Christian Apologetics

Each Easter season, approximately 400,000 churches across the U.S. gather to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus: one story portraying the faith of over two billion people globally. But have we grown ignorant of a driving factor behind the eternally preordained plan? Might we have entirely missed what Jesus cited as making His public execution necessary? The cross has come to manifest the forgiveness of sins, and rightfully so. Notwithstanding, in the time preceding His trial, Jesus made it exceedingly clear the plan was multifaceted . . . and He had skeptics in mind.

Just One Problem

Modern recollections of resurrection Sunday tend to focus solely upon substitutionary atonement. Christians gather to reflect on this distinctive of their faith. The New Testament tells us Jesus, “though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” (Phil 2:6-8).

What good does this do, however, for those who reject the historicity of the New Testament accounts? How can a believer pique the interest of a skeptic with a story of the miraculous when the individual has spent his/her entire life saturated in a culture of naturalism and anti-religiosity? Far too often, well-intentioned believers hope to present the story of the cross in just the right way, at just the right time, with just the right fervor as to convince someone to commit their life to Jesus. There’s just one problem. No matter how beautiful the story, how ardent the presentation, and how well-meaning the speaker, simply explaining the meaning of a story typically won’t communicate that it actually happened. [1]

Was there a real man named Jesus who was the son of a middle eastern carpenter? Is there evidence of His trial under Roman prefect Pontius Pilate circa 30 C.E.? Why shouldn’t these accounts be dismissed alongside hundreds of other religious origin stories that Christians are so quick to label fiction? These are the questions seekers need answered. The effective evangelist must not forego the foundation of historical facts before delivering the story’s ramifications. Examine the words of Jesus leading up to the crucifixion. What were the intentions of the plan He devised from eternity past? He assuredly had to die to bear our sins, but was this His mission’s sole effort? Might there be an angle to the story that we have turned a blind eye to for far too long?

Have We Overlooked Something here?

The public ministry of Jesus is thought to have been between 2-3 years in length. The first year included events that set the foundation for the ministry such as Jesus’s baptism, the calling of the disciples, and the Sermon on the Mount. From that point forward He was adamant about foretelling how His earthly ministry would conclude. Both Matthew and Luke record an occasion in which Jesus heals a man who was both blind and mute (Mt 12:22-42; Lk 11:14-32). Crowds of suspicious onlookers began to gather. Despite bearing witness to this healing, some began requesting additional miracles. How would you respond? Is Jesus obligated to show them another sign just minutes after putting the supernatural on display? He replies with a warning, but a bargain deal, nonetheless. He says,

“An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Mt 12:39-44; )[2].

He will not perform miracles for mere amusement. The greatest miracle of all, however, has just been foretold. Matthew 16:4 records another encounter of the same sort. Immediately after feeding the 4,000, the cynics demand another sign. Jesus does not waver in His response. If they are genuinely seeking the truth, the coming sign of Jonah will suffice.

Later, Jesus gives His disciples yet another sobering forewarning. All three of the synoptic gospel writers see fit to include this prognosis (Mt 16:21, Mk 8:31, Lk 9:22). Jesus clearly states that He must suffer under the elders, priests, and scribes and ultimately be killed, but He doesn’t stop there. He specifies that on the third day He will be raised back to life. A good rule of thumb in biblical interpretation is to pay special attention to repetition. Repetition is emphasis. Jesus has twice referenced the sign of Jonah, therefore communicating His resurrection to come. And now we are given a third instance in which He plainly explains He will be killed and raised on the third day. To the modern Christian’s surprise, these passages are not accompanied by lengthy discourses on substitutionary atonement. Commentary on the forgiveness of sins can be found across the New Testament, but they tend not to be directly partnered with these predictions of Jesus’ death and resurrection. It is as if these soon to be fulfilled prophecies have a message of their own . . .

Next, Matthew and Mark describe another form of this prediction. This time, while passing through Galilee, Jesus simply says, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him. And when he is killed, after three days he will rise” (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 9:31). Surely, by now He has sufficiently made the point, right?

Later, while traveling up to Jerusalem, each of the Synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) corroborates yet another iteration of that prophecy. Jesus says, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished. For he will be delivered over to the Gentiles and will be mocked and shamefully treated and spit upon. And after flogging him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise” (Mt 20:18-19, Mk 10:33-34, Lk 18:31-33).

We have yet to mention John’s contribution. John 2:19-22 records Him saying, “‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The Jews then said, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?’ But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.” Subsequently, John 10:17-18 tells us Jesus has the authority to lay down His life and take it up again, and His Father has given Him charge to do just that.

What’s the Point?

We have seen seven distinct instances of Jesus predicting His own death and resurrection, and there are more passages, not listed here, that do the same. Many of these examples are brief and lack any lengthy theological reflection. What does all this achieve? Why dedicate so much time to constant reiterations of the same foresight? Only one explanation seems fitting: Jesus had skeptics in mind.

Only one explanation seems fitting: Jesus had skeptics in mind.

Some religions (Hinduism, some Eastern beliefs, etc.) present their teachings in mythic stories that aren’t intended to be treated as historical realities. They aren’t supposed to be literal history, but allegories and symbols for deeper truths. These faiths may have their perks, but they are categorically different from beliefs rooted in history – convictions which must answer to the evidence. Other faiths (Islam, Mormonism) proclaim that their preferred holy book itself is the only evidence necessary to validate its claims. Founders of these religions did not claim to personally perform any public miracles to substantiate their claims. Rather, their respective holy books are the best they have to offer when it comes to validating a supernatural origin. For example, the 29^th chapter of the Quran responds to an objection from Jews and Christians who doubt its divine inspiration. It says:

“And they say, ‘Why is it that no signs (miracles) have been sent down to him (Muhammad) from his Lord?’ Say, ‘Signs are only with Allah, and I am only a plain warner.’ Is it not sufficient for them that We have sent down to you the Book that is being recited to them? Surely in it there is mercy and advice for a people who believe.” (Surah 29:50-51, Translated by Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani, Quran.com)

Faiths such as this demand submission solely based on the testimony of the writing itself. There is no tangible demonstration of the supernatural. This is where the cross rises above the rest. The skeptic-turned-believer, Paul, confidently proclaims:

“if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith is in vain . . . And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins . . . If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied” (1 Cor 15:13-19).

The Bible begs to be tested. Paul is begging people to test the claims of Christianity. He employs the same logic Jesus did as He repeatedly publicized the prediction of His death and resurrection. This was not simply retroactively ascribing significance to an otherwise unlikely event. This was just the opposite. Jesus had already demonstrated supernatural abilities over nature, sickness, and demons. The only further proof He could offer was to demonstrate His power over death itself.

Brave the Questions

We owe it to ourselves to accept the challenge the Bible offers. One of two outcomes are to follow. If proven false, we can do away with the bore of manmade religion and traditions of old. If it’s true, however, life is injected with a new purpose – it’s all real. Whichever the outcome, we can rest assured that we were brave enough to pursue the evidence wherever it leads. The God of the Bible does not seek blind faith. He wants commitment to the truth. Christians should immerse themselves in the mission God has set before them while skeptics should eagerly invite the challenge the New Testament offers. If true, the stakes could not be higher. The cross was never intended to appeal to wishful thinkers. It was purposed with skeptics in mind.

References:

[1] Caravaggio, “Reproduction of the Incredulity of St. Thomas” [oil on canvas] (1601), currently held at Potsdam, Germany. Public domain. Accessed 3 April 2024 at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incredulity_of_Saint_Thomas_(Caravaggio)#/media/File:Der_ungl%C3%A4ubige_Thomas_-_Michelangelo_Merisi,_named_Caravaggio.jpg

[2] All verse references are to the English Standard Version (ESV) unless otherwise noted.

Critical Thinking: The Secret Weapon of Confident Christians

Theology and Christian Apologetics

As Christians, developing critical thinking skills and maintaining an informed understanding of our faith is crucial. The world is full of misinformation and uncertainty, making it difficult to distinguish truth from falsehood. It is not enough for Christians to blindly adhere to whatever traditions or practices they have inherited from the past. They should critically evaluate and discern the relevance and validity of these traditions in their present context.

With so many different worldviews competing for our attention, staying engaged and equipped with our beliefs is essential. Without the intellectual stamina to navigate these opposing views, we risk becoming uninformed and ill-prepared to face the challenges of contemporary society.

The Age of Competing Ideas

In a recent interview with John Stonestreet, president of the Colson Center, I asked him why so many Christians lack the ability to think critically. His initial response was that many Christians lack the proper training in biblical doctrine and have not been catechized in the basic categories of reality. John added,

“We live in a world where we are bombarded with a lot of information, most of which is not objective or neutral. This makes it difficult to determine what to believe and whom to trust. Therefore, this era is better called ‘The Age of Competing Ideas,’ which leads to ‘The Age of Competing Authority.’”

I have seen firsthand how a lack of critical thinking about one’s faith can leave a Christian susceptible to false teachings or worldly philosophies. Paul warned in Colossians 2:8, “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ” (NLT).

We are exhorted by the apostle Paul to “Test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Christianity is not about unquestioningly accepting things without using reasoning and intellect. Instead, it is about having faith while also engaging your mind.

**Not Just Belief, but Informed Belief**

Therefore, we must recognize the role of informed beliefs in Christianity and draw on the biblical foundations of critical thinking to equip ourselves with the knowledge necessary to distinguish truth from falsehood.

Critical thinking is a systematic skill that involves analyzing and assessing a particular belief, idea, argument, or issue in an unbiased manner. After thoroughly examining the subject matter, the individual arrives at a conclusion that makes the most sense of and aligns with reality. In Christianity, possessing a biblical worldview means approaching life matters with an understanding of the Word of God and proper discernment that aligns with biblical doctrine.

I like what David Dockery says about the quality of Christians possessing a robust worldview in his book What Does It Mean to Be a Thoughtful Christian?. Dockery writes,

“A Christian worldview is not escapism but an energizing motivation for godly and faithful thinking and living in the here-and-now. In the midst of life’s challenges and struggles, a Christian worldview provides confidence and hope for the future while helping to stabilize life, serving as an anchor to link us to God’s faithfulness and steadfastness.”

Three Critical Thinking Skills

Applying these three foundational tips in your daily life is an excellent start for developing the art and skill of critical thinking.

Know and pursue truth wisely: Truth is an objective reality that corresponds with, rather than contradicts, the actual state of things. By analyzing, observing, and submitting to objective truth, you will become more aware of the facts that support your Christian beliefs. Proverbs 4:7 advises, “The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight.” Solomon emphasizes the importance of pursuing wisdom as you acquire knowledge and understanding to overcome life’s challenges as a Christian.
Stay grounded in God’s Word: Sadly, less than 20% of self-proclaimed Christians read the Bible daily. Of those who do, the majority only read one verse a day. Reading portions of the Bible daily will enhance your knowledge of Scripture, provide moral fortitude, give insight into wise decision-making, and help you resist temptations.
Embrace questions and objections: Christians should be the last to shy away from people who object to or challenge their faith. Peter directly speaks to this when he affirms, “But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15). Don’t be afraid when someone asks you tough questions about your beliefs. Be prepared to explain why you believe in what you do. If you don’t know the answer to a question, make an effort to research and understand the material. Studying and understanding the material thoroughly will enable you to communicate effectively with others. Lastly, remember always to be respectful towards others, even if their beliefs differ from yours.

I hope you have been challenged to continue developing your critical thinking skills. This will not only keep you informed and prevent you from being deceived, but it will also increase your passion for God’s truth and enable you to become a great defender of the Christian faith. We need more defenders of the faith, and I believe you have the potential to become one!

Post-Christianity… What’s That?

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics, Theology and Christian Apologetics

There has been a new term floating around the Evangelisphere (if that’s a word, if it’s not, let’s coin it) in the last few years: “post-Christian.”

FreeThinking Ministries[i] recently changed some verbiage on the website to indicate that the mission of the ministry is to equip the church to engage with the post-Christian culture.

Some might say, “you (FTM) minister to all sorts of people all over the globe. You ought to relate to culture in general” not just the post-Christian parts of culture. Yes, this concern covers both pre- and post-Christian cultures and everything in between. But acknowledging that we live and operate within a largely post-Christian culture is still important if we are to equip the church in the West, and in America more particularly, with relevant strategies for preaching the gospel and discipling believers within it.

Coopting Christian Values

There are many reasons this new dynamic is important, but chief among them is that post-Christian cultures seek to coopt Christian values, redefine them, and use them for their own purposes. This penchant is markedly different from a pre-Christian culture which might have hints of Christian ethics within their culture but without explanation.

“Post-Christian cultures seek to coopt Christian values, redefine them, and use them for their own purposes.” – Josh Klein

Guideposts to the Gospel

In a pre-Christian culture these features can be used as guideposts to the gospel. As former missionary Don Richardson points out in his book Eternity in Their Hearts:

“It was the gospel of Jesus Christ which made the difference for Celts, Norsemen and Anglo-Saxons. And that is exactly what it will take for Asmat headhunter-cannibals (indigenous group in New Guinea)! All someone has to do is go to live among the Asmat and communicate the gospel as effectively as someone once communicated it to the Celts, Anglo-Saxons, and other tribes of Northern Europe!”[ii]

The communication of the gospel to pre-Christian nations is much simpler compared to the work of maintaining the gospel in a Christianized nation. It is simpler, but simple doesn’t mean easy. As someone that has multiple friends in the mission field of pre-Christian cultures I can certainly attest to the fact that it is extremely difficult. It can, however, be much simpler to introduce the gospel and connect the dots in their cultural context than it is to attempt to reestablish orthodoxy in cultures that have moved beyond Christianity.

What is a post-Christian culture?

A post-Christian culture is one that has been reached by the gospel, Christianized (to a large extent) and then sought to leave its Christian roots behind.

All the cultures Richardson mentioned in the above quote have followed this pattern. At one point, these cultures were pagan non-Christian nations only to have the gospel of Jesus Christ rock them and change them for hundreds of years. Then, after Christianity, in large part, brought peace and prosperity they chose to move beyond it and, often, back to their pagan roots, only with a twist. The paganism became more syncretistic or New-Age than it was in 600AD but the reversion back to it is palpable. Sound familiar?

The United States has been on this path for quite some time and so too, a reversion to certain forms of paganism. The hallmarks of post-Christian society are coming to fruition before our eyes and the Church in the west must learn how to respond.

Often, as Don Richardson argues, in non-Christian cultures one can find cultural hooks on which to contextualize the gospel in a way that makes sense and draws people in. In these cultures, there is a clarity on what C.S. Lewis called the Natural Law that even those who had never heard of God or Jesus would recognize.[iii] Even if some of the “Natural Laws” within the culture were twisted by sin, the reasoning behind these cultural expectations were based on objective morality, integrity, and honor.

For instance, in another book called Peace Child, Richardson outlines the way he was able to communicate the gospel with a head-hunting tribe in New Guinea called the Sawi.[iv] The Sawi had a rule of natural law called a “Peace Child” between warring tribes and it was this concept that opened their hearts to the gospel after previously believing that Judas was the hero of the gospel story.

How Post-Christian Culture Differs

The story in a post-Christian culture is very different. The stories of the Bible have been popularized, modernized, colloquialized, and made into idioms. We see this assimilation in all sorts of discourse. When one sports team takes on another that is heavily favored the pundits will often use the phrase, “it’s a real David and Goliath match-up.” Decidedly Christian and biblical principles are popularized and culturized as well, such as the golden rule, which is taken from Matthew 7:12 whether people realize it or not, or “with great power comes great responsibility” which is borrowed and changed from Luke 12:48 and popularized by the Spiderman comic franchise. And that is only to name a select few.

Unbiblical phrases have been mixed with the spiritual cultural ethos as well. Sayings like, “God only helps those who help themselves,” or “don’t be so heavenly minded that you are no earthly good.”

It is not so much that people in this culture are ignorant about Jesus but that they think they knows Jesus too well already. Jesus as a figure is often popular within the post-Christian culture [v] but ultimately, upon further examination, it is not the same Jesus we find in the Bible.[vi] The exclusivity of Christ is an issue.

Christianity’s Role in a Post-Christian Culture?

A post-Christian culture is aware of the claims of Christianity but finds them only utilitarian. Often, the question becomes not are these claims literally true but rather, are they efficacious? As one pastor, who led a breakout session recently on evangelism in a post-Christian culture that I attended, said:

“It is not that unbelievers in our post-Christian culture want to know if Christianity is true. It is that they want to know if it works. We need to show them that it works.”

– Bob Thune, Within Reach Conference, 19 January 2023.

His diagnosis is correct, but his prescription lacks the call to gospel exclusivity. A lot of different things “work” for a lot of different people. Buddhists would adamantly insist that the spirituality of Buddhism works for them. This same sentiment seems to be share among at least 60% of self-professed Christians who indicate that Jesus is not the only way to God.[vii]

Even in the atheistic sphere this utilitarian philosophy of religion, and Christianity in particular, seems to be making headway. One such view is espoused by Bret Weinstein, a former college professor and avowed atheist. Weinstein argues that metaphorical truths are necessary to order the world even if they are not literally true.

Not True, but Useful

He goes on to indicate that while something may be literally false its usefulness as a heuristic for ordering the world around us should not be discarded. In a conversation with Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris, Weinstein puts it this way:

“If it were true that religious heuristics actually increase wellbeing by allowing people to, on average, operate in the world in a way that increases wellbeing, what would you say about them then?”[viii]

This is utilitarianism. So long as the theological position works for me (or society) it ought to be followed. Unfortunately, many Christians have fallen prey to this line of thinking. They see Bret Weinstein’s refusal to discard religion as a sort of intellectual victory.

If religious belief is simply a useful heuristic for ordering the world it removes the power of the gospel and offers a gospel of its own making. Anything then, can be the gospel, so long as it works for you or for a society. I find Sam Harris’s retort worth considering in this exchange:

“But [belief in God] wouldn’t make sense for the right reason. Useful fictions have to be retired at some point. Useful truths stay true . . . You can have a completely rational conversation, in terms of human psychology, sociology, and what you want society to look like – about moral truths like the corrosive nature of pornography . . . You don’t have to invoke mythology to do that.”[ix]

As much as I hate to admit it Harris is mostly right here. His position is more tenable to the human pursuit of truth than Weinstein’s. While it might sit better with religious pluralists, secularists, and even some Christians to hear that religious thought is still useful to order society insofar as we have no better option, it is less than helpful. Harris is correct, it is either true that God exists, or it is not true, and any opining for metaphorical truths to be embraced to have our cake and eat it too simply makes belief utilitarian rather than necessary.

It is not enough that a certain belief system works, and the Church must not fall into the trap of trying to prove that it does. Because the gospel only promises things yet to be seen and grasped, it does not prove that life will be ultimately understandable or easy. Buddhism might work inasmuch as one uses it to accomplish inner peace (whatever that means), or structure to the world. Whether it is truly useful or not, however, rests on its being objectively true.

Competing Gospels

In a post-Christian culture, we are struck, not with opposing religious truth claims, but with opposing gospels that promise to bring about hope, satisfaction, and peace. These competing gospels can often invoke the name of Jesus. In fact, progressive Christianity has made its hay on becoming a heuristic style gospel and should serve as a warning to believers embracing Weinstein’s thoughts.

In a post-Christian culture, words like truth, love, hope, and affirmation have all been personalized and redefined to suit our utilitarian mindset. Progressive Christianity, for instance, does not so much ask what is true but offers that whatever feels most loving is true. This is something new to the Western church, and it is a competing gospel that is nefarious because of its ability to morph from person to person under the guise of usefulness.

A post-Christian culture seeks to use aspects of Christianity without maintaining the foundation of it. This idea is not new. In the 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant sought to square the circle of unbelief and the usefulness of Christianity as a moral framework for society.[x] Removing Christ from the center of morality places the individual as the arbiter of it. Kant reasoned that we only know Jesus as moral exemplar because we already have fashioned the highest ideal of what a moral man ought to look like, thus, we judged Christ before he was incarnate.

But this is, of course, exactly backwards to the Christian tradition. Christ is not simply a moral exemplar because we could not imagine a higher moral standard. He is the moral exemplar because He sets the highest moral standard in Himself as He reveals Himself in the scriptures. Objective moral values are discovered not invented.

Revising Christ

A post-Christian culture sheds the skin of orthodoxy, in a sense, and embraces the subjective nature of the moral good. That is to say that Christ is edited by the moral arbiters of the day. Did Jesus ever really say that homosexuality was a sin or that he was divine? A post-Christian culture can construct a morality borrowing from Christianity, secularism, and other religions and superimpose it on itself. We see a rise in moral language, even invoking the name of Christ, at the same time as the normalization of historically immoral behaviors such as polyamory, pornography, and earth worship. It is this propensity of the culture to which I am referring when I say that evangelism and ministry in a post-Christian culture is more complex than within a non-Christian culture.

Often, the language barrier is an issue. When we speak of justice, love, truth, and fulfillment we are speaking cross-culturally, but because of the Christian past, ideas about Jesus have been erroneously imposed on these new definitions. To make headway we must first establish coherent agreement at the most basic levels, but this is made difficult because the culture, allegedly has progressed beyond the need for foundational truths. The truth of the gospel is inverted to focus mainly on self-actualization and feelings of being an authentic self. This inversion might not challenge missionaries and pastors in pre-Christian settings, but it’s a primary concern for those doing ministry within a post-Christian context.

Post-Christianity says, “we tried that already and now we are beyond it.” The challenge for the church is to expose this lie for what it is. How does one move beyond objective reality and truth? Incidentally, “moving beyond it” is more like reverting back to pagan roots. The worship of nature, self, sex, and hedonistic tendencies. These are not new developments, but they are experienced and promulgated anew in a post-Christian context, often maintaining the language of Christianity to bolster the regressive worship.

This shift is recent in the United States. As recent as 10 years ago political candidates from both parties affirmed the classical definition of marriage, the morality of certain sexual standards, and, even if pro-choice, the recognition that abortion was a tragedy and ought to be safe, legal, and rare.[xi]

What are we to do?

Once the culture flipped though, these supposedly self-evident truths were suddenly up for grabs. People that spent their lives arguing for reason and science to be the basis of morality in society suddenly found themselves arguing for forced vaccination [xii] and for transgenderism.[xiii] When you remove the foundation, everything becomes shaky. Then reintroducing that abandoned foundation seems antiquated. So, what are we to do?

The funny thing about a post-Christian culture is that it relies on the insular or adaptive nature of the Church. The post-Christian culture is more than happy to entertain Christians so long as they isolate themselves into their own groups and, all too often, Christians comply. This self-isolation has happened in Europe and England and it’s happening right now in Canada and the United States. As a pastor friend once said to me, “the Christian life is to be personal, but it is not private.”

On the other hand, the church might try to remain relevant by compromising historic truths for cultural cachet. We sacrifice the relevance of the gospel for the relevance of our popularity.

Neither strategy is tenable for discipling the nation. There is another option, but it is not comfortable. Engage with the post-Christian culture without compromise but with understanding (1 Chron. 12:32). There is an opportunity in a post-Christian culture if one is courageous enough to recognize it. But it comes with risk. Risk of denigration or loss of respect. At least for a time. The truth will set us free (John 8:31-32). God will not be mocked and his Church will remain victorious (Matt. 16:18).

Footnotes:

[i] The author, Josh Klein is a staff writer and speaker with Free-Thinking Ministries

[ii] Richardson, Don. Eternity in Their Hearts: Revised, Regal Books, Ventura, CA, 1984, pp. 118–119.

[iii] Clive S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (London, UK: Geoffrey Bles, 1952; digitally republished as public domain, Canada: Samizdat, 2014), 13-22, accessed 25 March 2024 at: https://www.samizdat.qc.ca/vc/pdfs/MereChristianity_CSL.pdf

[iv] Don Richardson, Peace Child (Norwood, MA: Regal, 1985).

[v] https://www.barna.com/research/openness-to-jesus/

[vi] https://www.christianpost.com/news/60-of-young-adults-say-jesus-isnt-the-only-way-to-salvation.html

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Originally in Jordan Peterson v. Sam Harris debate, moderated by Bret Weinstein. Vancouver BC, Canada: Pangburn Philosophy, 23 June 2018), 01:15:36-01:16:14, accessed 25 March 2024 at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1oaSt60b0om, quoted in https://epiphanyaweek.com/2019/10/20/theism-atheism-and-antitheism-sam-harris-is-wrong-part-3/.

[ix] Ibid., 01:59:03-02:00:11.

[x] https://philarchive.org/archive/PALCKJ

[xi] https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2006/03/toward-making-abortion-rare-shifting-battleground-over-means-end

[xii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMaHKykfdcQ

[xiii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBl9qwVDvIY

Truth Matters

1. Does Truth Exist?

The world defines truth as relative and subjective: “You have your truth, I have my truth.” It is customizable to one’s preferences and lifestyle. Definitive or absolute truth is considered offensive to the culture at large. This confusion over truth is further fueled by social media. Liking, sharing, retweeting, and posting happen with the click of a button. To promote and defend “your truth,” all you have to do is open an app on your phone. Though some may suggest that our culture is more unified based on the controversial matters of our day, I would argue that we are walking in greater disunity than ever before.

Can’t We All Just Coexist?

The Coexist bumper stickers often seen on the back of vehicles advertise that all religions are equal with a mutually unifying end. To argue against this can be considered hate speech in some spaces. The irony in this pop-culture view of truth, however, is that the major world religions have some profound differences that mutually exclude the other. It does not take very long to find contradictions between Mormonism and Islam.

Furthermore, there are particular instances of absolute truth that no logical person could deny. Gravitational pull or mathematical equations are proven true with singular explanations and sums. Your trash pick-up being on Monday is a fact. If you decide to put your garbage can at the curb on Tuesday because that is your truth, you will be disappointed to find overflowing trash the next day. Yet, the larger issues in life take on a whole different meaning to the word “truth”.

Scriptural Definition of the Truth

In John 14, Jesus names himself to be the way, the truth, and the life. The familiar passage goes on to say that no one accesses the Father except through Christ. Anyone claiming another means to heaven apart from Jesus the Messiah is promoting a lie.

“Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’”
John 14:6

Upon the trial and accusation of Christ, just before his crucifixion, Pontius Pilate asked the question “What is truth?” (John 18:38). The question is still being asked centuries later, and the answer remains. Jesus, being God himself was, is, and always will be the truth. Our triune God displays the reality of truth. The Holy Spirit leads the Christian into all truth (John 16:13). God the Father never lies, He fulfills all His promises (Numbers 23:19). Jesus the Messiah is the only true path to restoration and eternal life (John 3:16).

Why Truth Matters

In 2022, I prepared for an unmedicated birth. Among many things, I conducted research and read books about the goals I had for labor. I found myself needing to carefully filter content that included New Age and witchcraft practices. Much of what I came across revolved around feelings of empowerment and self-expression. However, bringing a new baby into the world is a complete act of surrender to the Creator of the universe. It is emptying oneself to rely solely on Christ. It is for the glory of God that none may boast.

Satan strives to keep us in a feelings-based mindset. He convinces us that life is about us and the benefits we can receive. Faith in Christ must extend beyond feelings to facts. Otherwise, we blend in with the culture around us. It was invaluable to study the creation account in Genesis and to spend time prayerfully considering the heart of God as our due date neared. In Scripture, we unfold the truth of Christ and are changed to reflect him. We exist for the singular purpose of glorifying Jesus our Lord.

To distinguish truth as absolute and to follow Christ with wholehearted devotion is the greatest threat to Satan. He is unbothered by “his truth” and “her truth.” He is, however, thrown off his high horse when a people boldly stand for and confidently share the truth.

Living Transformed by the Truth

As said in Matthew 7, there is one path to heaven, and it is indeed narrow (Matt 7:13-14). To say that Jesus is the only way may feel a bit too exclusive and limited to an on-looking unbeliever. Therefore, it is deemed best to reject singularly defined truth. As Christians, we are to take up our cross, forgoing anything within us that does not align with the will of God by bringing his name glory. The word “cross” in Matthew 16:24 means only one thing. In the first century, a cross represented death by crucifixion. Though the emblem of the cross is undoubtedly viewed through a lens of agape love, it very much signifies death. The Christ follower is to die to themselves and the sin that so easily entangles. Though actions based upon one’s personally determined truth are appealing for a time, there will inevitably be an ongoing search for more apart from an intimate relationship with Christ the King.

Subjective Truth is Unloving

Affirming the idea of truth being subjective is one of the most un-loving things we can do. If Jesus is the only way to the Father, and therefore eternal life, we have the tremendous responsibility of shutting down every other notion besides the inspired Word of God. Speaking the truth means that we know the truth. In Philippians 4, Paul the Apostle provides a beautiful list of things to think about in combating anxiousness (Phil 4:16-17). From a prison cell in Rome, he tells the church to remember that which is true. In doing so, we remember the very nature of God. All that God is, he is truly. He is true love, true kindness, true mercy, true forgiveness, true hope, true life, true light, true grace, true rest, true wisdom, and the list goes on. When we think about the trueness of God, anxiety and fear diminish. How profound and contradictory to the rest of society when a person chooses to humbly submit to the revelation of God as the only means to authentic understanding and perfect clarity.

The Truth is Transformative

A belief in the one truth that exists is transformative. We are brought to life upon our confession of faith and trust in Christ. Manifestation says, “Believe in me and my ability”, but transformation says, “Believe in Jesus and his sovereignty.” Jesus being the truth means that we acknowledge our limitations and humbly submit to the Lord who has none. John 8:31-32 says, “So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” Believing and abiding in the infallible, inerrant, and inspired Word of God is the most freeing thing a person can do. The shackles we were once bound by are broken by belief in Jesus Christ. This is the good news of the Gospel, and it is available for all people, everywhere. Sharing the truth in boldness is a radical act of love.

Our world measures truth based on personal preference and ideology. It is ever-changing and regularly modified to best please mankind. Freedom is miraged by temporary happiness and affirming acceptance. Freedom in its truest form is found in one place; it exists in one person. His name is Jesus, and it is in his presence that we walk in perfect clarity. His presence abides in us, and we have the unique privilege of inviting others to dwell with Christ who is our peace. There is no greater combat against division than Divine intervention.

God is not the author of chaos or confusion. We do not have to question right from wrong or good from bad. His Word makes it clear. In both our belief and our obedience, we are blessed beyond our comprehension by the Lord of Hosts. The truth found in Scripture is both life-giving and life-changing. Second Timothy reminds us that the entirety of the Bible is useful for teaching and training us to look more like Christ (2 Timothy 3:16-17). All sixty-six books hold tremendous weight and power in our lives still today. As we learn it on an individual basis, we are drawn closer to the heart of God, and our belief is confirmed time and time again. Let God’s truth transform you because it is the only thing that will.

Why Do You Call Yourself a Christian?

Theology and Christian Apologetics

Have you ever heard the tale of the elderly woman who wanted to restore an old painting and… well, didn’t?

Meet Potato Jesus. The woman’s intentions were noble. I certainly respect her heart. But that doesn’t change the fact that she is not an artist and did not restore Martinez’s work. Just because she intended to do something and thought she was able, that didn’t turn her into an artist. Desire and good intentions aren’t enough.

[1]

Nowadays, anyone can set up a page and identify as whatever they want. But taking a name for ourselves doesn’t make us that thing. We still have to be it or become it.

Two Ways to Identify

We can identify ourselves in two ways: “I’m x, and by that, I mean this,” and “I’m x, and I think this word accurately fits or describes x.” Too often, people identify as something because they think that’s how they are supposed to identify, and then they try to describe it. I think a better way would be to figure out who and what we are, then figure out what best names or describes that. This will prevent us from accidentally using words that don’t really fit.

I’m a human. I am a member of the human species, so human is an accurate word to describe me. But I’m also a hobbit. I’m kind of short, round, a little hairy, and I love food and books. I’m also part Scottish but don’t identify as Scottish: I am not a Scotsman. I have some lineage through some ancestor, but I’m not from Scotland, I don’t speak Scottish or Gaelic (or any other dialect/language from there), I don’t wear kilts, I’ve never been there, neither of my parents have ever been there (I think?). So, it would be true to say I have a Scottish history, but not that I am Scottish. Calling me Scottish would give more incorrect information about me than correct information.

Let’s move from regular descriptions to something more controversial: religion.

Religious Identity

The word “Muslim” means “submission” or “submission to God.” I don’t, however, follow Muhammad or Allah of the Qur’an. So even though the definition, “submission to God,” is technically a fitting description of me, “Muslim” would not be a good description of me, nor do I feel it would be respectful to Muslims for me to use that term.

But Christian is a good description of me. Why? What’s different? That requires a little history:

The word Christian comes from the Greek word christos, or maschiach in Hebrew, meaning the “Messiah” or “the anointed one.” The Messiah refers to the character foretold by the prophecies given by Israelite poets and prophets found in the Jewish Tanakh, or Old Testament. As a Christian, I believe Jesus fulfilled those prophecies and is the Anointed One, the Jewish Messiah. That’s why I call myself a Christian, a follower of Jesus the Christ who fulfilled those prophecies.

That’s why I believe using the word Christian to describe me is appropriate.

Why do you identify as a Christian?

If you identify as a Christian, why? What about your beliefs or life makes you think, “Christian is a good description of what I believe and do”? Let’s take a few example answers to see why this is important:

I read my Bible. As a Christian, I’m glad you do! But I already read Harry Potter, and that doesn’t make me a wizard. While some things would be so much easier with a little accio, that’s not quite how this works.
I go to church on Sundays. Okay, but what about that is different from a social club? Is there any other difference in your life? If we took out that one hour and just looked at the rest of your life, would “Christian” still describe you?
I raised my hand and prayed a prayer. A marathon is 26.2 miles long, named in honor of a messenger’s run after the battle of Marathon. To qualify as having run a marathon, someone has to do two things: 1) stay within the race course and 2) finish the race. Are you still running?

Let’s try some harder questions:

I believe in Jesus’ teachings about love. Okay, but so do Muslims. And so do some Hindus; Gandhi is famously quoted with, “I like your Jesus but not your Christians.” Even many atheists like Jesus’s teachings about love.
I welcome everyone just like Jesus. So do Buddhists. So do telemarketers.
I give to the poor. So do Muslims. And so do atheists.

What about those (and so many similar answers) is best, or accurately, described by the word Christian? Any?

Let’s try something different: I trust Jesus with my life. Okay, now we’re getting somewhere.

So, if those answers won’t work, what will? Let’s see what the earliest historical records about Jesus talked about:

Jesus’ identity: which Jesus are you following? The Jewish Messiah as prophesied by the God of the Old Testament? Or just a good man who said some nice things?
Jesus’ activity: the first Christian creed recorded specifies not Jesus’ charity but His crucifixion. We don’t identify as followers of Bill Gates or Gandhi for giving to the poor; what did Jesus do that merits His name?
Jesus’ exclusivity: Jesus very clearly taught one path, one way to the Father; either you’re on that path, or you aren’t on the path of Jesus.

So, Why do you identify as a Christian?

Editor’s Note: If you have read this far, and now you’re not sure what it means to be a Christian or if you’re a Christian, then there’s no time like the present to make it right. You can trust in the Biblical Jesus to forgive you, to save you, and lead you. “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). You can also go here to find out more: “A Simple Explanation of How to Be Saved”. Trusting your life in Jesus’s hands is like a gateway into a whole new world, complete with a new outlook on life, a new way to live, and a new hope for the future. Please make sure, today, that you are right with God

Footnotes:

[1] Image Source: ABCNews

Dismantling Doubt

4. Is the NT True?

Is God really there for me? God, do you see? Do you hear my prayer? Experiences such as job loss, broken relationships, mental illness, or any unyielding pain can stir up questions of doubt. Doubt is standing at your door desiring to chip away at your faith. During these seasons of sorrow and pain, many days can be filled with questions like: Why are you silent? Why didn’t you save them? Why won’t you show them they are wrong? Will you resolve the situation? When you feel as if there is no answer, doubt festers. Is what I believe true? Lest someone think that non-religious persons are different, C.S. Lewis’s personal comment is very instructive.

“Now that I am a Christian, I do have moods in which the whole thing looks very improbable, but when I was an atheist, I had moods in which Christianity looked terribly probable.”[1]

Evidence can aid in dismantling doubts, and though far from being exhaustive, this article will highlight three reassurances that can start the process of dismantling those doubts about Christianity.

Evidence Reassures

When you doubt, remember you are not alone. Recall John the Baptist who appears to be wrestling with doubt while he is in prison. Although he had baptized Christ, he is later taken to prison and questions if Jesus is the Messiah. Matthew writes, “Now when John, while imprisoned, heard of the works of Christ, he sent word by his disciplesand said to Him, “Are You the Expected One, or shall we look for someone else?” (Matt 11:2-3; NASB). We don’t know exactly what John was thinking, but we do know he is seemingly doubting. Jesus lovingly responds without rebuke and instead sends word of the miracles. Matthew writes, “Jesus answered and said to them, “Go and report to John what you hear and see: the blind receive sight and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Matt 11:4-5). The miracles are delivered as signs of comfort to reassure, strengthen, and dismantle the doubt John is experiencing.

Evidence Reminds

Now you might be wondering, where is my miracle to solve my pain and sorrow? It’s possible John the Baptist could have asked the same question. C. S. Lewis notes it seems easy to believe when you are not the patient, but suppose you are in surgery with a good surgeon with wholly good intentions. Lewis writes, “If he yielded to your entreaties if he stopped before the operation was complete, all the pain up to that point would have been useless.“[2] God reminds

us in pain that he is with us and doing something, just like he was with Joseph in the Old Testament (Acts 7:9; 2 Cor 4:16-18; Rom 5:3-5). Remember when Job was suffering, and his wife wanted him to curse God? He asked a significant question, “Shall we indeed accept good from God and not accept adversity” (Job 2:10)?

In times of questioning and doubt, who is Jesus? He is the Son of Man who came to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many (Matt 20:28). His life reminds us of his love for us. The eyewitness accounts remind us that Jesus, too, suffered for a little while, but ultimately, He conquered death. 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 spotlights the eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. Paul writes to remind the believer that Cephas, James, the Twelve, and more than five hundred brothers, and sisters witnessed Christ overcoming death.

Evidence Transforms

The disciples in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 are the same disciples who had earlier abandoned Jesus during his trial before his crucifixion. The ones that lacked the courage to stand with Jesus possibly due to their doubts or uncertainty. What changed? Jesus’s disciples and Paul were transformed after their encounter with the risen Jesus. They became bold witnesses willing to die for Christ. Paul changed from persecuting Christians to sharing the gospel with the world. Why would anyone be willing to face persecution or die for something that is untrue? Sean McDowell attests regarding the Apostles of Christ historically “The evidence shows that some really died as martyrs, and that none recanted.”[3]

Transformation for people happens all the time; what is different about the disciples? They were eyewitnesses; they did not believe in a tradition. They believed what they saw firsthand. Too, these transformational encounters with the risen Jesus provide hope for us in our doubt. John is providing encouragement to the followers of Jesus stating, “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). It is so we may know and believe. This is encouragement for all believers.

Summing it all up

In conclusion, please note this is not a one-stop article that erases all doubt or pain, but it is a reminder that you are not alone in your doubt, and contemplating the evidence can reassure, remind, and transform our hearts through the work of the Holy Spirit. God is there for you and uses human agents in the Church to encourage us as we wrestle with doubt. People have wrestled with the ways of God throughout the Psalms and many other pages of the Bible. But hopefully, as you work through your doubts, this evidence can play a role in strengthening the weary traveler. The disciples testify to the risen Lord. He will one day establish a government with perfect justice and love. He will wipe away every tear, and suffering will be no more; doubt will be gone. Until then, don’t lose heart in your doubts; wrestle through them and ask God to dismantle doubts by reassuring, reminding, and transforming you to see with his eyes and heart.

Footnotes

[1] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1952), p. 123.

[2] C. S. Lewis, A Grief Observed (New York, NY: Harper One, 1961), 43.

[3] Sean McDowell, The Fate of the Apostles (Burlington, VA: Ashgate Publishing, 2015), 260.

Here Comes the He Gets Us Campaign Again: Why Its Portrayal of Jesus is Still a Problem

Culture and Politics, Theology and Christian Apologetics

Last year, I wrote an article called “7 Problems with the He Gets Us Campaign,” in which I critically responded to the $100 million advertising campaign featuring a website, billboards in major cities, a book, and ads that have been viewed more than 300 million times. Perhaps most visibly, the campaign’s ads were featured in last year’s Super Bowl. When thousands of people went searching for more information on it, my article came up, and it went viral—actually pulling down my site at one point! Clearly, a lot of people are interested in knowing more about the nature of these ads.

Fast forward to 2024. Super Bowl Sunday was on February 11. And He Gets Us once again ran ads generating widespread curiosity. Given the reach of the campaign and high interest level, I wanted to do an updated evaluation of what He Gets Us is doing today. To that end, I’m going to answer four questions:

Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in Jesus?
Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the rightJesus?
Do the He Gets Us campaign reading plans take people to the next level of understanding Jesus (beyond the slick website and TV ads)?
Does the He Gets Us campaign direct people to theologically solid churches for continuing their search for truth?

There are three things that will inform my answers. First is my professional background in marketing (I have an MBA in marketing and am a former adjunct marketing professor). Since this is a campaign aimed at “marketing” Jesus, that background is particularly relevant. Second is my evaluation of the publicly available He Gets Us content (the website and YouVersion reading plans). I have not read the He Gets Us book, so that isn’t part of what I’m responding to. Third is a recent interview campaign consultant Ed Stetzer did with Biola professors Scott Rae and Sean McDowell on Biola’s “Think Biblically” podcast (Stetzer is the Dean of Biola’s Talbot School of Theology). While Stetzer says he is not a spokesman for the campaign, he has been closely involved, so his comments are helpful for an insider view of the goals and strategies.

1. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in Jesus?

Stetzer says that the people who eventually started the campaign had become concerned “that the perception of Christianity had suffered and people weren’t necessarily considering who Jesus was. And they would like for people to consider who he was, who he is.” They then brought in market researchers who found that skeptics were open to considering who Jesus was (I’d love to know more about that, but no further information was noted). Stetzer emphasized repeatedly in the interview that the very narrow goal of the campaign is to reach those skeptics. Ultimately, He Gets Us wants to build a bridge from people seeing the ads to learning more by going to the website and ultimately signing up for a Bible reading plan and/or asking to be connected to a church.

So, in short, the goal is very specifically to get skeptics interested in Jesus. That’s a very worthy goal, especially if you have millions of dollars to do it with. My first question is, does the campaign successfully meet that objective?

While I don’t know the statistics on how many people have visited the He Gets Us website as a result of the ads, Stetzer says over 600,000 people have signed up for the reading plans and “hundreds of thousands” have been referred to churches. So, as a surface-level answer to the question, it certainly seems reasonable to say that yes, the campaign has generated interest. If the goal was to get people to one of those two action points—signing up for the Bible reading plan and/or asking for a church referral—then marketers have achieved at least some success. (Whether the numbers justify the money spent is a different question that I’m not evaluating here.)

**2. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the right Jesus?**

From a marketing perspective, there is a predictable funnel that people go through before taking action (e.g., making a purchase). It starts with becoming awareof something, which then sometimes converts to interest, which then sometimes converts to desire for action, which then sometimes converts to action. Marketers know that if you want people to take action—to get to the bottom of the funnel—you have to first take them through those stages, and those stages have to be tailored toward the action you want.

In this case, if you are marketing in order to generate interest in Jesus, you want to be sure you’re generating interest in the right Jesus (a correct portrayal) if you want that to lead to the action you desire. This is where I believe the campaign fails in a serious way.

As I said in last year’s article, the Jesus of this campaign is nothing more than an inspiring human who relates to our problems and cares a whole lot about a culturally palatable version of social justice (the exception to this is in parts of the reading plan, which I’ll address in the next point). This has not changed since I last wrote. My points then remain true now: The fact that Jesus “gets us,” stripped from the context of His identity, is meaningless; Jesus is presented as an example, not a Savior; The campaign reinforces the problematic idea that Jesus’s followers have Jesus all wrong; And the campaign reinforces what culture wants to believe about Jesus while leaving out what culture doesn’t want to believe. I won’t expand on these points here since you can read my prior article for that analysis.

But I do want to say more this time about who the campaign is clearly targeting. Stetzer mentioned that it’s “skeptics,” but a close evaluation (or even not so close evaluation) of the campaign makes it clear it’s not all skeptics they have in mind. This is crucial to understand. It’s a very specific segment of skeptics—it’s progressives who primarily view the world through a lens of social justice (and specifically the critical theory model of social justice, which places everyone in oppressor/oppressed buckets).

5 Signs Your Church Might Be Heading Toward Progressive Christianity

If you’ve never immersed yourself in the world of this viewpoint, you might not recognize how laden the content is with language and framing designed to appeal very specifically to this group. If they were targeting just any skeptic, you wouldn’t see such a specific framing of Jesus in progressive terminology; there are plenty of skeptics who aren’t beholden to progressive social justice thinking.

For example, they use hashtags with words that have a specific connotation to a progressive audience, even if the campaign isn’t necessarily using them in the same way (on the home page, you see #inclusive #activist #struggle #refugee #justice #outrage #bias #judgment). They also frame their content in terms that are commonly used in progressive social critiques. For example, the words “religious leaders” or “religious people” are often used with a negative connotation, which serves to reinforce the notion that it’s bad to be “religious.” That was never Jesus’s claim (see my podcast with Alisa Childers). There are recurring references to concepts like lived experience, power dynamics, oppression, racial conflict, toxic systems, corruption, and political conflict—all progressive focal points. That’s not to say that none of these things are actually problems, but rather that it’s clear they’re focusing on progressives given their obvious focus on progressive concerns.

So why is this a concern? I have no concern at all with choosing progressives as your target audience. But I have a lot of concern with the nature of the campaign given this target and what they are likely to take from it. Here are three key reasons why.

First, the campaign will likely lead many progressives to conclude that they (still) like Jesus and (still) hate Christians. To be honest, I’m not very convinced that we even have a problem with Jesus’s reputation in culture. People tend to like Jesus because they don’t understand all that He taught. As far as the average person is concerned, Jesus was a loving guy who hated “the system” and can serve as a good moral example—and that’s exactly how the He Gets Us website portrays Him. People, however, tend to have disdain for Christians when we present the fullness of what the Bible teaches, particularly on moral subjects. So, if a progressive sees this content and never gets to a Bible reading plan or church connection, they’ve taken away that Jesus was the great guy they thought He was and that all those Christians today who talk about things they don’t like are still the problem.

Second, the campaign will solidify the idea in progressives’s minds that their social justice lens of the world is the lens through which Jesus sees it, too. It would be one thing if marketers used progressive language to present a full picture of Jesus. But when you just use progressive language without presenting the full picture, it leaves the impression that their language—representing a whole underlying worldview structure built on critical theory—is correct. Those who don’t get to the desired Bible or church action points will simply come away thinking that Jesus was a social justice warrior just like they are (with all that implies to them).

It would be one thing if marketers used progressive language to present a full picture of Jesus. But when you just use progressive language without presenting the full picture, it leaves the impression that [Progressive Christianity] is correct.

Is that really a big problem? Yes, yes it is. It is this model of oppressed/oppressor thinking that leads progressives to claim the gender binary is oppressive, that white people are inherently racist, that abortion is a form of justice for women, that heterosexuality is an oppressive norm, and that we need to abolish the nuclear family. If this campaign even inadvertently suggests through a social justice veneer that this is the lens through which Jesus would have seen the world, that is a disastrous consequence.

It is this model of oppressed/oppressor thinking that leads progressives to claim the gender binary is oppressive, that white people are inherently racist, that abortion is a form of justice for women, that heterosexuality is an oppressive norm, and that we need to abolish the nuclear family

Third, the campaign can easily be construed to affirm theologically progressive Christianity. In my last two points, I was speaking specifically of progressives who don’t identify as Christians. There are, however, many who hold to the same social justice ideology and do identify as Christians. They are typically focused on a human Jesus who merely cares about a social gospel, and they reject the authority of the Bible. These Christians would heartily affirm everything on the He Gets Us site. Given that the site portrays a fully human Jesus and at the same time claims to be presented by “Christians,” there’s no reason to think someone wouldn’t come away thinking they can be a Christian and not believe all the “baggage” about things like the Bible being God’s Word.

It’s worth noting this statement on the site: “He Gets Us is a diverse group of Jesus followers with a wide variety of faith journeys and lived experiences. Our work represents the input from Christians who believe that Jesus is the son of God.” All of this looks good so far. But they continue saying, “as well as many others who, though not Christians, share a deep admiration for the man that Jesus was, and we are deeply inspired and curious to explore his story.” It’s pretty clear theologically progressive Christians, who deny the deity of Christ, have been part of the team.

So, my answer to the question, “Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the right Jesus?” is a resounding no. It’s not just an incomplete picture of Jesus. It’s an inaccurate one. And because it will just confirm what the target audience already thinks, many if not most will jump out of the marketing funnel before they get to the desire to learn more. If you don’t challenge people’s thinking, what would they need to learn more about?

3. Do the He Gets Us campaign reading plans take people to the next level of understanding Jesus (beyond the slick website and TV ads)?

While I clearly have significant concerns about the people who imbibe ideas about Jesus and Christians from the He Gets Us web and TV content alone—never getting to the Bible or a church from this campaign—what about those who do actually get to the Bible reading plans? Are they designed well to take people to the next level of understanding—to an accurate one?

There are 7 plans on YouVersion, ranging from 4 to 9 days of content. I read all 43 days of the plans. If you’re interested in the details, I’ve documented below. If not, you can jump to the bottom line after I list the plans.

Plan 1: “He Gets Us” (7 days)
This plan continues the model of using progressive language and framing. The devotionals make comments like these:

“[Jesus’s enemies] feared him because he challenged the norm.” In progressive contexts, norms are typically seen as bad and need to be overturned.
“The way Jesus called out the toxic religious and political systems turned history upside down.” In progressive contexts, religion—especially Christianity—is toxic, as are political systems, so this makes Jesus appear to favor that view.
“[Jesus] made friends with people just as they are and let himself be known just as he was, too. Authentic. Trust-worthy. The kind of friend we all long for.” It’s true that Jesus made friends with people as they are, but most progressives are likely to read this as, “Jesus accepts you for whoever you want to be, so be your authentic self.” That’s not what it says, but if you have cultural awareness of the claims and debates today, it’s fairly obvious that’s something progressives would take from it without realizing the distinction between being friends with someone and approving of their identity/behavior.
“The Samaritan stopped and cared for the Jew, at his own expense just like he would a neighbor—unlike the racist, religious men who stepped over the beat-up guy on their way to worship, of all things.” Again, this plays into the progressive hatred for the “religious”; yes, the men were religious, but that wasn’t the problem. Jesus never scolded people for being too religious; He scolded them for being self-righteous and hypocritical.
“Yes, it’s true. The one who stood bravely against the strongest, most corrupt system of the day, was on his face in fear.” And yet again, this plays into the progressive view of systems being inherently corrupt.

In short, plan 1 is more of the same from the ad/web campaign and, far from redeeming the nature of that content, simply doubles down on the equivocation and misunderstandings.

Plan 2: “Diving Deeper” (7 days)
I thought that, given the title, this is where we would get deeper into a theologically accurate portrayal and reading of Jesus, but that’s not what I found. This one had fewer problematic statements than plan 1, but the content overall gets no closer to teaching people about the true Jesus (while continuing with occasional progressive framing along the way, such as casting Jesus’s infant trip to Egypt as a “refugee” situation).

On day 1, it says, “The best way to discover his actual purpose, regardless of the centuries between us, is to look at his life. Sure, plenty of books have been written about what he taught, but let’s look at his private side, the side you see when you walk with someone side by side down a new road.” The subsequent days go on to have subjects like “He grieves with us,” “He understands us,” “He’s vulnerable like us,” “He loves us,” “He faced hardship like us,” and “He is for us.” Do the actions leading to these statements really reveal Jesus’s “actual purpose” as indicated on day 1? Jesus’s purpose was to give His life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). But to understand that would require an understanding of the nature of God, the nature of man, the divine nature of Jesus, and the problem of sin—none of which He Gets Us had addressed by this point. Instead, they offer people yet again more confirmation that Jesus simply gets us.

Plan 3: “Questions Jesus Asked” (7 days)
This plan seems disconnected from the other plans, rather than being on some kind of trajectory like “digging even deeper.” It features a set of questions Jesus asked people, with answers showing His character (no, still not his divine nature). There’s again a dig at “religious leaders” saying, “The cancel campaign began in Jerusalem where the jealous, paranoid religious leaders set a plot in motion to kill Jesus and they wouldn’t quit until he hung dead on a cross.”

Notably, this is the first plan where the verses themselves start referring to Jesus as something more than a human (John 6:66-69). It’s also the first time the devotional content casually references Jesus doing something supernatural (day 5 talks about Him walking on water). There is, however, zero explanatory transition from human Jesus to Jesus as God here. Someone who didn’t know that the Bible teaches Jesus is God could be forgiven for scratching their heads at how this human was now walking on water!

Despite this strange jump, I thought they were going to bring home the good news when they said, “But Jesus offers love, not because we measure up, but because of who he is. On that day, She chose to believe Jesus was who he said he was.” And, somewhat inexplicably, they don’t go on to say who Jesus said He was. Not only that, but they don’t get to it until the plan after the next one.

Plan 4: “Who Did Jesus Love?” (9 days)
Plans 4 and 5 are so different from everything else in the He Gets Us campaign that it seems like they hired a committed Christian to insert this content to make the well-meaning funders (who want people to know about the true Jesus) happy. I realize that sounds cynical, but it’s a jarring difference.

In plan 4, we read verses where Jesus is proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease—a clearly supernatural Jesus. Day 2 says, “The person we despise, he loved. And not for anything they did to deserve it but because of who he was,” and that comes with verses about salvation and how the Son of Man came to seek and save the lost. We read that Mary knew Jesus’s birth was far from “natural.” We see a doubting Thomas who wanted to personally experience the fact that Jesus was raised from the dead. And we read the gospel in John 3:16.

So, if people see an ad, go to the site, sign up for a Bible reading plan and make it to plan 4, they will find a supernatural Savior. (Granted, you could theoretically start with plan 4, but I’m guessing most people start with plan 1.)

Plan 5: “Who Did Jesus Say He Was?” (9 days)
This is the plan that really brings home what they should have been bringing home all along. Day 1 says, “Not only does he get us. He wants us to get him.” Yes! At long last, they make this connection. They go on to teach the full Jesus in this plan. Again, it’s so different in nature and even in language, that it really feels like they brought in someone to insert the “theological” content after the progressive Christians on staff developed everything else. Day 7 in particular brings the whole message home, laying out the Gospel and exclusivity of Jesus, and encourages people to pray.

Plan 6: “Jesus & Joy” (4 days)
This is a short plan focused on the subject of joy. There’s little here of interest other than another passing criticism of religious leaders (“Religious guys seemed to love following Jesus around town. Could you imagine being the popular guy in a town that stirred up the kind of noise that very religious people hated? That was Jesus”).

Plan 7: “What Jesus Gave Up” (6 days)
This one focuses on how Jesus was “after a different way of living.” Unfortunately, the plan reverts to a primarily human Jesus. For example, it lists four ways Jesus spent His life on earth and changed history: Jesus taught another way, He served, He forgave (the description of this only includes his human forgiveness of others, not His divine forgiveness), and He loved. It leaves out the most important reason why He changed history—He was God incarnate. On the final day, titled, “He Gave Up Vengeance,” it says, “The reality of what was happening was not lost on him. And nothing about it surprised him. Jesus was determined to accomplish what he came to do. And he did.” That’s the end, with no explanation about what He accomplished. (To be clear, they explained that in plan 5, but the plans seem to be written independently of one another, so a reader wouldn’t necessarily have been through plan 5 to know what they’re talking about.)

So, the bottom line is that the plans range from problematic (more social justice framing) to some basic Bible content (e.g., on joy) to some actual theological meat on what was left out of everything else on who Jesus is (plans 4 and 5). If someone actually makes it to plans 4 and 5, they’ll hear the gospel.

4. Does the He Gets Us campaign direct people to theologically solid churches for continuing their search for truth?

When people become interested in learning more about Jesus, they’re directed to a “Connect” page. One of my most significant concerns with the campaign last year was that there was no clear theological vetting of churches to which people were being sent. I do not see any updates or information on the current site as to the criteria they’re using to select church prospects.

[Editor’s Note] On the “Connect Locally” page, people are invited to join a local Alpha Course Small Group where they can discuss their questions in a church-based small-group setting.

As I explain in Faithfully Different, 65% of Americans identify as Christian while only about 6% have a worldview consistent with what the Bible teaches, and a dismal percent of pastors have a biblical worldview. If you have no theological criteria for where you’re sending people, you’re actually more likely than not—based on statistics—to be sending them to a church whose teachings don’t line up with those of the Bible. In other words, you’re sending unsuspecting truth seekers to places where they won’t hear truth.

Perhaps they have tightened up their criteria but aren’t explicitly saying that on the site. I’ll be happy to update my comments here if someone from the campaign wants to reach out and contact me.

Closing Thoughts

In conclusion, I want to say I’m sure there is good that will come from the campaign. I hope there is much good that comes from it. And I know God can make good come from anything He chooses. But those aren’t reasons to not critique something and offer discernment. I find it highly discouraging that when there is so much money being poured into a campaign, it’s being used to further the perception that Jesus is the same Jesus people already believe in rather than the one they need to believe in. Promoting a social justice Jesus can actually make talking about the real Jesus more difficult, because He Gets Us has placed one more data point in people’s minds that it’s His followers who talk about all that “unpopular stuff” who don’t get it. They’ll come away knowing Jesus gets them, but they won’t get Him.

Let’s hope a lot of people get to Bible reading plans 4 and 5.

The Need for Cognitive Closure in Dealing with Doubts

Theology and Christian Apologetics

Over the years in my work as a public apologist, I have spoken with many dozens of ex-Christians who have renounced their faith and become atheists, as well as numerous individuals who still consider themselves believers but nonetheless are struggling seriously with intellectual doubts concerning the veracity of the Christian faith. In addition, I have watched literally hundreds of YouTube videos wherein a testimony is given of one’s journey out of the Christian faith towards atheism. Through listening to countless people in this situation, I have come to realize how difficult it is for believers to express to members of their church or Christian community that they are struggling with doubts (presumably because to express that one struggles with doubt carries a negative stigma in many churches today).

Struggling with Doubt?

God has therefore placed a burden on my heart for Christians who wrestle with doubts, and I have for several years offered a free service for Christians who wrestle with intellectual doubts. There is a form on my website people can fill out and I endeavor to set up a meeting (normally online) with them to discuss their doubts in confidence.

One of the things I try to do when counseling someone who is walking through doubt is to help them to develop a protocol for managing doubt in an intellectually responsible way and to make them aware of intellectual pitfalls that can ensnare the unwary. In this and future articles, I want to unpack some of those common pitfalls.

Needing Closure?

There is a phenomenon in psychology, which can be an impediment to sound critical thinking. That is, the need for cognitive closure. Wikipedia defines it this way:

Closure or need for closure (NFC) (used interchangeably with need for cognitive closure (NFCC)) are social psychological terms that describe an individual’s desire for a firm answer to a question and an aversion toward ambiguity. The term “need” denotes a motivated tendency to seek out information.

Different people have varying levels of tolerance for mystery and ambiguity. Individuals with a high need for cognitive closure are more prone to walk away from the Christian faith than individuals with a lower need. For some people, in order to be content within one’s worldview, satisfactory answers must exist to all possible questions and objections that might be raised against it.

It is important, however, that we do not become too fixated on the objections to Christianity that we miss the forest for the trees, losing sight of the avalanche of positive confirmatory evidence that cumulatively demonstrates that Christianity is true. Because we have such robust reasons to think Christianity is true, we can justifiably say,

“I don’t know why God permits so much suffering in the world. But I have enough reasons to believe in the God of the Bible and that He is good that I am willing to trust that there is some morally sufficient explanation for why there is so much suffering, even if I do not yet know what that explanation is.”

Does the problem of evil, by itself, discredit Christianity?

Indeed, the argument from evil, especially natural evil, has been wielded as a cumulative counter-case that competes with the case offered in confirmation of Christianity. An important point to bear in mind when dealing with this subject, however, is that successive pieces of evidence are dependent rather than independent. To see this, suppose that we were to make a long list of specific cases of human and animal suffering for which we do not see any obvious purpose. Let us call them E1, E2, …, En. If we were to take one of them (say, E1) and ask how it affects the probabilities of theism (T) and atheism (~T), then we might say P(E1|~T)/P(E1|T) = k, where k >>1. For the sake of argument, let us suppose that k = 100. That is to say, the probability of E1 is 100 times greater given the falsehood of theism than given its being true. In order to make the cumulative case, we need to bring in additional pieces of evidence. But do they have the same epistemic force as the first one did? This is not at all clear. After all, if God were to have, however unexpectedly, some morally sufficient reason for permitting E1, then it is quite reasonable to expect that God might well have a similar reason for permitting E2, and so forth. The pieces of evidence are all fundamentally similar, all being instances of the suffering of conscious beings. But if God has a morally sufficient reason for one, that same justification may well also explain a host of other similar cases. Now contrast this to the cumulative case for the truth of theism and indeed Christianity. Not only is it extensive, but it is also varied in kind. It is therefore much more difficult to conceive of there being a single alternative explanation for a widely varied evidence that would all be expected if the hypothesis in question were true. It is for this reason that I submit that counter-evidence such as the problem of evil be considered not in isolation but within the broader context of the overall evidence taken as a whole.

What about Evidence Doesn’t Seem to Fit?

Scientific theories often have evidence both supporting and conflicting with it. But anomalous data should not automatically overhaul a well-supported theory, even if a satisfactory explanation of the anomalous data has not yet been proposed. Likewise, I would argue, the strength and varied nature of the positive evidence for Christianity should cause us to expect that explanations of the anomalous data, for which we do not yet have a satisfactory account within the framework of the Christian worldview, in fact exists — even though we do not yet know what that explanation is.

The English rhetorician, logician, economist, academic, and theologian Richard Whately (1787-1863) put it this way:

“Similar to this case is that which may be called the Fallacy of objections; i.e. showing that there are objections against some plan, theory, or system, and thence inferring that it should be rejected; when that which ought to have been proved is, that there are more, or stronger objections, against the receiving than the rejecting of it. This is the main, and almost universal Fallacy of anti-christians; and is that of which a young Christian should be first and principally warned. They find numerous ‘objections’ against various parts of Scripture; to some of which no satisfactory answer can be given; and the incautious hearer is apt, while his attention is fixed on these, to forget that there are infinitely more, and stronger objections against the supposition, that the Christian Religion is of human origin; and that where we cannot answer all objections, we are bound, in reason and in candour, to adopt the hypothesis which labours under the least.

That the case is as I have stated, I am authorized to assume, from this circumstance,—that no complete and consistent account has ever been given of the manner in which the Christian Religion, supposing it a human contrivance, could have arisen and prevailed as it did. And yet this may obviously be demanded with the utmost fairness of those who deny its divine origin. The Religion exists; that is the phenomenon. Those who will not allow it to have come from God, are bound to solve the phenomenon on some other hypothesis less open to objections. They are not, indeed, called on to prove that it actually did arise in this or that way; but to suggest (consistently with acknowledged facts) some probable way in which it may have arisen, reconcilable with all the circumstances of the case. That infidels have never done this, though they have had 1800 years to try, amounts to a confession, that no such hypothesis can be devised, which will not be open to greater objections than lie against Christianity.” [i]

Indeed, there is no shame for a Christian in having unanswered questions. The question is not “are there questions about Christianity for which there are no satisfactory answers?” Rather, the question is, “are there more numerous and more substantive objections to believing the gospel or to disbelieving the gospel?” Every worldview has its share of unanswered questions. Rejecting Christianity because there are unanswered questions in favor of an alternative worldview that raises even more numerous and more substantive unanswered questions does not resolve the problem.

Every worldview has its share of unanswered questions.

That’s a Good Question!

I recently received an email from someone who was struggling with doubt over the question of why God creates people whom He knows for sure will choose to reject Him and will therefore end up estranged from God’s favorable presence in the hereafter. This is a very good question, and I do not believe anyone really knows the answer since we lack complete information about the relationship between divine sovereignty, divine foreknowledge, and human free will, etc. If Christianity is true, however, we would not be expected to have answers to most questions like this. So, the fact that we do not, in fact, have answers to such questions does not, I would argue, really count as a serious blow against Christianity.

Note that saying we wouldn’t be expected to have answers is quite different from saying that the questions are unanswerable. That is why many Christians get drawn into a speculative response (i.e. “perhaps it is because…”). There is nothing wrong with such responses per se. But precisely because we do not know, we should not get too invested in such speculations. Nor should we treat their failure as signifying something grave.

“Help My Kid is Deconstructing!” [CE Podcast]

Difficult questions about God’s sovereignty and salvation program must always be accompanied by a consideration of the plausibility that there is some answer to those questions that has not been disclosed to us, is beyond our finite ability to comprehend, or simply has not occurred to us. In other words, is it a problem that overhauls the vast confirmatory evidence for Christianity and thereby warrants rejection of the Christian faith, or is it a question with which we can live contentedly in the absence of an answer? An unanswered question is not the same thing as an epistemic warrant for rejection of Christianity.

The atheist so frequently assumes the high ground when it comes to epistemic humility. When pressed on where the Universe or life came from the atheist typically responds “I don’t know.” They are content with not knowing. Why, then, should the same luxury not be extended to the Christian when it comes to why God has done things this or that way? We need to be willing to accept an element of mystery when it comes to divine action. Unlike God, we do not have the box top, as it were, of the jig saw, which reveals how all of the pieces are meant to fit together.

Therefore, we just ought to trust God that he knows what He is doing. As the Proverb states, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths” (Proverbs 3:5-6).

Footnotes:

[i] Richard Whately, Elements of Logic, 9th ed. (London: Longmans, Green, Reader, & Dyer, 1870), pp. 144-45.

Why We Are Not Best Judges of What Is Good

Theology and Christian Apologetics

“Avast yer jabberin, ya bunch a bilge rats!” The voice sounded strange as it reached into the hallway. The speaker was apparently trying to make a point. “Yer division a booty must be… “ he paused to consider his words, “more equitable if ye be wanting to sail with me.”

He had my attention. I was at a work conference in a hotel, wandering the halls during a break, when I happened across this conference room. I peeked inside. It could have been a scene from the latest Pirates movie. Men of various ages with lots of facial hair, many dressed in striped pants, with the occasional peg leg and hook hand. Yes, I had stumbled across a pirates’ convention, the 350th annual, it seemed, from the schedule which I found posted outside.

Pirate Ethics

The speaker’s topic was ethics. He went on to explain what an equitable share of booty amounted to, in his view, using a very modern looking PowerPoint presentation to punctuate his points.

I caught up with him at the break and asked if he had time for a few questions. He seemed a bit suspicious, what with my business casual attire, but nonetheless willing.

“Seriously,” I began. “Ethics for pirates? I mean, for centuries you guys have been boarding and capturing and enslaving people without much regard for ethics. You’ve been known to rape, pillage and plunder, and your personal hygiene is … not the best.” I quickly ended, seeing that I was crossing a line.

A hurt look crossed his face. “Yer words be stingin,” he began, but my words were nothing compared to his breath. I took a step back and tried not to stare at the parrot on his shoulder. “I don’t suppose ye know bout all the good that we do. Why ar ann’l ball raises thousands for the widows n’orphns fund, and we do lots of behind the scenes work ye never be aware of. Last year alone, we returned almost 30 percent of our captured booty to charitable organizations.”

“Is that a fact?” I asked. “I had no idea. But,” I persisted, “this is stuff that you’re stealing.”

Who’re the REAL Thieves?

“We make no excuses for that, m’lad. But we’ve been pretty transparent about that from the beginning, ain’t we? After all, ye had no trouble spotting us for who we are. If ye want the real thievin’ ones, it’s the bankers and lawyers ye want to be houndin…” He pointed down the hall to the lawyers’ convention I had been attending.

Yes, of course I’m making this up. But I think there is a valid point here to be made. Human beings have an amazing capacity to judge themselves on a curve. Pirates no doubt convince themselves that they are somehow justified in doing what they do. They may think of harm they suffered when younger, or may feel that life dealt them the hand that they play. And they no doubt have a set of ethics that they follow, however uncivilized it may seem to us. And many, if pressed, would seek to justify their behavior by reference to all the things they don’t do. “Sure, we kill on occasion. But only those who don’t surrender, or those who for whatever reason need killing.” This is the human condition, whether in a high school, at the office, on a pirate ship, or in a prison. We don’t seem to have the capacity to see ourselves for what we truly are.

I’m Good Enough to Go to Heaven, right?

What does any of this have to do with Christian apologetics? Just this: the number one response of nonbelievers as to why they don’t worry about the afterlife goes something like this. “I don’t know if there is a God, but if there is, he will see all the good that I do and accept me. So, I’m not worried. A good God will see that I am living a good life.”

But holding this view is not that different than the pirates in the analogy above. Compared to others of that ilk, an individual pirate might seem like a good guy. But that hardly would qualify him for life in a peaceful and civilized society. His problem isn’t how he compares to his fellows, but how he measures up to the place he’s trying to get to. He may think himself “good” when in an objective sense he is anything but. Similarly, many people today believe they have a proper sense of what “good” human behavior is, but how can they know for sure when they are mired in the corruption of their nature? And more importantly, have they given any thought to what “perfect” behavior requires? What a perfect being might use to measure admission to His realm?

We’re Not As Good As We Think We Are

It’s easy for us to pat ourselves on the back for our goodness. But perhaps we are a bit too smug. Our persistent feelings of guilt serve as a guide – a reminder – that all is not well. They serve to call us to account to the One who left us here, and who expects something of us if we are to be in relationship with Him. These feelings of guilt provide the backdrop of bad news, the kind of news from which we naturally shy away. The kind of bad news that sets the stage for the ultimate Good News of the gospel.

So, next time you encounter this response, you might suggest that the nonbeliever consider his frame of reference. Immersed in a sinful culture, inhabiting flesh and blood bodies whose weakness overcomes the willingness of the spirit, we may be as unable to see ourselves for what we truly are as the fictional pirates above would be. In short, we may not be in the best position to know if we are as “good” as we pretend.

We Need a Savior

Fortunately, there is a better answer, one that does not require us to earn our way back to God’s presence. But until we see our need for a Savior, we’re not likely to find the answer that is waiting to set us free.

The righteousness of God is through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe, since there is no distinction. ²³For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; ²⁴they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.
Romans 3:22-24 (HCSB)

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Frank Turek (Mp3/ Mp4)

Jesus vs. The Culture by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4 Download, and Mp3

Hell? The Truth about Eternity (MP3 Set), (DVD Set), and (Mp4 Download Set) by Dr. Frank Turek

Old Testament vs. New Testament God: Anger vs. Love? (MP3 Set) (DVD Set) (mp4 Download Set) by Dr. Frank Turek

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Al Serrato earned his law degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1985. He began his career as an FBI special agent before becoming a prosecutor in California, where he worked for 33 years. An introduction to CS Lewis’ works sparked his interest in apologetics, which he has pursued for the past three decades. He got his start writing Apologetics with J. Warner Wallace and Pleaseconvinceme.com.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

March 18, 2024/by Ty Unknown

Tag Archive for: Christianity

We Just Can’t Even

Where can we actually find help?

How Should We Respond to Suffering?

Recommended Resources On This Topic

Have We Overlooked Something here?

What’s the Point?

Brave the Questions

References:

Recommended Resources On This Topic

The Age of Competing Ideas

Not Just Belief, but Informed Belief

Three Critical Thinking Skills

Recommended Resources On This Topic

Coopting Christian Values

Guideposts to the Gospel

What is a post-Christian culture?

How Post-Christian Culture Differs

Christianity’s Role in a Post-Christian Culture?

Not True, but Useful

Competing Gospels

Revising Christ

What are we to do?

Footnotes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Can’t We All Just Coexist?

Scriptural Definition of the Truth

Why Truth Matters

Living Transformed by the Truth

Subjective Truth is Unloving

The Truth is Transformative

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Two Ways to Identify

Religious Identity

Why do you identify as a Christian?

Footnotes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Evidence Reassures

Evidence Reminds

Evidence Transforms

Summing it all up

Footnotes

Recommended resources related to the topic:

2. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the right Jesus?

3. Do the He Gets Us campaign reading plans take people to the next level of understanding Jesus (beyond the slick website and TV ads)?

4. Does the He Gets Us campaign direct people to theologically solid churches for continuing their search for truth?

Closing Thoughts

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Struggling with Doubt?

Needing Closure?

Does the problem of evil, by itself, discredit Christianity?

What about Evidence Doesn’t Seem to Fit?

That’s a Good Question!

Footnotes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

**Where can we actually find help?**

**Not Just Belief, but Informed Belief**

**2. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the right Jesus?**