"Most people scorn or ignore apologetics because it seems very intellectual, abstract and rational. They contend that life and love and morality and sanctity are much more important than reason.
Those who reason this way are right; they just don't notice that they are reasoning. We can't avoid doing it, we can only avoid doing it well. Further, reason is a friend, not an enemy, to faith and to sanctity, for it is a road to truth, and sanctity means loving God, who is Truth.
Not only does apologetic reasoning lead to faith and sanctity, but faith and sanctity also lead to apologetic reasoning. For sanctity means loving God, and loving God means obeying God's will, and God's will is for us to know him and to be "ready to give a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15).
- Kreeft & Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Ch. 1, The Nature, Power & Limitations of Apologetics, 20-21.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Saturday, December 3, 2011
The Muslims Are Coming!
Opened my email to find a forwarded message from a friend about the National Day of Prayer being canceled. I read further to find that the originator was exhorting Christians to be enraged concerning the cancellation and the favor shown to Muslims over Christians. It went on to read that the Christian should be fearful for the direction this country is going.
"The direction this country is headed
should strike fear in the heart of every Christian,
especially knowing that the
Muslim religion believes that if Christians cannot be
converted, they should be annihilated."
I thought this statement to be especially unChristian. It assumes that Christians fear for their lives because of Islam. But Islam is not something to fear. Like Elijah laughing at the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel, the Christian knows of its powerlessness. The mujaheddin cannot do anything to the Christian that is a cause for fear. If a Christian dies by the scimitar, he gains Christ. If the Christian lives under Sharia, he suffers like Christ. If everything tangible is stripped from the Christian, he still loses nothing, because it was all considered nothing in the first place. The Christian is a Stoic in this sense; he is unshakable because the world cannot take from him what has been promised. Martin Luther, in his 95 Theses, writes,
Christians should be exhorted to be zealous to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells.
And let them thus be more confident of entering heaven through many tribulations rather than through a false assurance of peace.
For the Christian, "to live is Christ and to die is gain." (Philippians 1:21) And to live like Christ often entails suffering, like a lifelong crucifixion until they are dead, buried and resurrected; like the prophets and saints of antiquity who "were tortured, refusing to be released so that they might gain an even better resurrection. Some faced jeers and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. They were put to death by stoning; they were sawed in two; they were killed by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated— the world was not worthy of them." (Hebrews 11:34-38) These were all commended for their faith.
I am not saying that Christians should invite this kind of torture from those who hate them, but it should not be a thing to be feared. And if it is to be resisted, it is to be resisted only in as far as the Christian has an absolute love for his God, and therefore his neighbor and does not want his countrymen to be subject to such hostilities. The impetus for resistance should be out of love not fear.
It seems to me, that the only thing Christians have to fear is God. Because "fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." (Proverbs 9:10) And it is wisdom that will help to steer the country in the right direction. However, ours is a world, as Malcolm Muggeridge states, "of empires rising and falling, revolutions and counter revolutions, wealth accumulating and wealth dispersing." Such is the nature of the Kingdom of Man. It adheres to a law of undulation. In fact, one could say that the most basic thing about the Kingdom of Man, or the most foundational thing is that it oscillates. And anyone who builds their house on a shaky foundation should have reason to fear, because the house will crack and crumble. But the Christian's Kingdom is fixed. It does not waiver. It is constant and it is eternal. It is perfect for building a house because the foundation is faithful.
And so the Christian puts his trust in this foundation, eliminating the fear, but still builds on the undulating one. His care for earthly kingdoms is still one of divine calling, like Adam tending the garden, or Kings appointed to reign over cities. It is demonstrated over and over in Scriptures that Christians do care for the ephemeral, but they understand, too, that it is ephemeral. Thus, a Christian's reaction to a withering flower is not one of shock or fear. The Christian loves his neighbor, who may put his trust in the flower, as beautiful as it may be, but unlike his neighbor the Christian does not dread when the flower finally turns ugly and bows to the passage of time. He knows that it wilts and that it is not a thing to be trusted.
It is good to call Christians to civic duty and to be active in just cause. Christians are called to do so. But fear of death should not be the animus, instead it should be love for God, who commands Christians to love their neighbor. A soldier does not fight a war because he fears for his life; he fights because he loves his brother.
"The direction this country is headed
should strike fear in the heart of every Christian,
especially knowing that the
Muslim religion believes that if Christians cannot be
converted, they should be annihilated."
I thought this statement to be especially unChristian. It assumes that Christians fear for their lives because of Islam. But Islam is not something to fear. Like Elijah laughing at the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel, the Christian knows of its powerlessness. The mujaheddin cannot do anything to the Christian that is a cause for fear. If a Christian dies by the scimitar, he gains Christ. If the Christian lives under Sharia, he suffers like Christ. If everything tangible is stripped from the Christian, he still loses nothing, because it was all considered nothing in the first place. The Christian is a Stoic in this sense; he is unshakable because the world cannot take from him what has been promised. Martin Luther, in his 95 Theses, writes,
Christians should be exhorted to be zealous to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells.
And let them thus be more confident of entering heaven through many tribulations rather than through a false assurance of peace.
For the Christian, "to live is Christ and to die is gain." (Philippians 1:21) And to live like Christ often entails suffering, like a lifelong crucifixion until they are dead, buried and resurrected; like the prophets and saints of antiquity who "were tortured, refusing to be released so that they might gain an even better resurrection. Some faced jeers and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. They were put to death by stoning; they were sawed in two; they were killed by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated— the world was not worthy of them." (Hebrews 11:34-38) These were all commended for their faith.
I am not saying that Christians should invite this kind of torture from those who hate them, but it should not be a thing to be feared. And if it is to be resisted, it is to be resisted only in as far as the Christian has an absolute love for his God, and therefore his neighbor and does not want his countrymen to be subject to such hostilities. The impetus for resistance should be out of love not fear.
It seems to me, that the only thing Christians have to fear is God. Because "fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." (Proverbs 9:10) And it is wisdom that will help to steer the country in the right direction. However, ours is a world, as Malcolm Muggeridge states, "of empires rising and falling, revolutions and counter revolutions, wealth accumulating and wealth dispersing." Such is the nature of the Kingdom of Man. It adheres to a law of undulation. In fact, one could say that the most basic thing about the Kingdom of Man, or the most foundational thing is that it oscillates. And anyone who builds their house on a shaky foundation should have reason to fear, because the house will crack and crumble. But the Christian's Kingdom is fixed. It does not waiver. It is constant and it is eternal. It is perfect for building a house because the foundation is faithful.
And so the Christian puts his trust in this foundation, eliminating the fear, but still builds on the undulating one. His care for earthly kingdoms is still one of divine calling, like Adam tending the garden, or Kings appointed to reign over cities. It is demonstrated over and over in Scriptures that Christians do care for the ephemeral, but they understand, too, that it is ephemeral. Thus, a Christian's reaction to a withering flower is not one of shock or fear. The Christian loves his neighbor, who may put his trust in the flower, as beautiful as it may be, but unlike his neighbor the Christian does not dread when the flower finally turns ugly and bows to the passage of time. He knows that it wilts and that it is not a thing to be trusted.
It is good to call Christians to civic duty and to be active in just cause. Christians are called to do so. But fear of death should not be the animus, instead it should be love for God, who commands Christians to love their neighbor. A soldier does not fight a war because he fears for his life; he fights because he loves his brother.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
How Gingrich Is Worse Than Clinton
Recently Newt Gingrich launched a platform on his website dedicated to defending himself against the attacks of his political opponents. On the site, he compares himself against Bill Clinton, stating, "I'm no Bill Clinton." Newt never committed perjury being the difference. So Newt never lied under oath. Really? When he promised to love his wife until death; was this not an oath? Clinton, for however much a sham his marriage may be, is still married to his first wife. Newt has been married three times...I think. Hard to keep track of these things.
The social mores of the post-modern world frown upon this type of infidelity, but accept it. It is assumed that his current state has reached some type of resolve. Christians assume the same, but should they? Christians do not, or at least should not, determine what is righteousness according to the world, for that is our own righteousness, but what is righteousness to God. So accepting this premise, and accepting that God has spoken to us through the prophets of antiquity, we look to the Scriptures to view God's standard of righteousness. From Scriptures we know that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." We will never attain the righteousness God requires for us to be with Him. This is why Jesus Christ died as an atonement for our sins in order to place us in right standing with Him. And this Jesus, whom Christians claim to follow, said, "Repent and believe for the kingdom of God is at hand." Why must we repent if God has died for our sins? "Shall we take God's grace as a license to sin," Paul asks the Romans. "By no means," is the answer. We are to turn away from our sins, to hate what is evil and to cling to what is good. So we look at what God calls good in marriage. Jesus points to the proper form of marriage by recalling the beginning in Matthew 19 - Adam and Eve. One man and one woman for life is the model form of marriage. Anything that deviates from this is not a marriage, but a form of adultery against the original partner.
Accepting this to be true, it can be deduced that Gingrich is currently committing open adultery, not a third marriage. The woman he is with now is not his wife, but his mistress, whom Christians everywhere accept as his wife. How did we come to this dull resignation? This right standing before the world, and unfortunately before fellow Christians, is made possible through the auspices of a divorce and then remarriage, which is clearly defined as adultery in the Scriptures. But we are beyond the protection of cultural norms, are we not? And our goal is not right standing before the mass of men, but before God alone. Christians are held to a standard of righteousness that God has called His followers to, well, follow.
Clinton apologized and acknowledged what he did as wrong. And, yes, I doubt the sincerity of his repentance. I believe more in the sincerity of his regret for getting caught. Nonetheless, Clinton is a lesser fraud than Newt. Newt displays his sin like Sodom. He does not even try to conceal it, as Clinton had. The prophet Isaiah warns that those who sin in such a manner, bring evil on themselves. And Paul says that those who sin in such a manner bring evil upon the community. I think Gingrich to be a prime candidate for the GOP according to worldly standards. But in this case, I am a single issue voter who will not be supporting this particular principle of darkness. For it wraps itself in comfortable warm blankets of Truth, but usually never in cold shrouds of Falsity. Which makes it difficult to see, but I see it and refuse to partner in it.
Let me be clear in saying that Gingrich should not be branded with Hawthorne's scarlet letter. To do so would make his sin permanent and unforgivable. I am saying that Gingrich willingly wears the letter and we do not acknowledge it. Though we should acknowledge it as long as he wears it. The sin is indefinite as long as Gingrich does not repent. As such, he should be treated like Hester and worse than Clinton.
The social mores of the post-modern world frown upon this type of infidelity, but accept it. It is assumed that his current state has reached some type of resolve. Christians assume the same, but should they? Christians do not, or at least should not, determine what is righteousness according to the world, for that is our own righteousness, but what is righteousness to God. So accepting this premise, and accepting that God has spoken to us through the prophets of antiquity, we look to the Scriptures to view God's standard of righteousness. From Scriptures we know that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." We will never attain the righteousness God requires for us to be with Him. This is why Jesus Christ died as an atonement for our sins in order to place us in right standing with Him. And this Jesus, whom Christians claim to follow, said, "Repent and believe for the kingdom of God is at hand." Why must we repent if God has died for our sins? "Shall we take God's grace as a license to sin," Paul asks the Romans. "By no means," is the answer. We are to turn away from our sins, to hate what is evil and to cling to what is good. So we look at what God calls good in marriage. Jesus points to the proper form of marriage by recalling the beginning in Matthew 19 - Adam and Eve. One man and one woman for life is the model form of marriage. Anything that deviates from this is not a marriage, but a form of adultery against the original partner.
Accepting this to be true, it can be deduced that Gingrich is currently committing open adultery, not a third marriage. The woman he is with now is not his wife, but his mistress, whom Christians everywhere accept as his wife. How did we come to this dull resignation? This right standing before the world, and unfortunately before fellow Christians, is made possible through the auspices of a divorce and then remarriage, which is clearly defined as adultery in the Scriptures. But we are beyond the protection of cultural norms, are we not? And our goal is not right standing before the mass of men, but before God alone. Christians are held to a standard of righteousness that God has called His followers to, well, follow.
Clinton apologized and acknowledged what he did as wrong. And, yes, I doubt the sincerity of his repentance. I believe more in the sincerity of his regret for getting caught. Nonetheless, Clinton is a lesser fraud than Newt. Newt displays his sin like Sodom. He does not even try to conceal it, as Clinton had. The prophet Isaiah warns that those who sin in such a manner, bring evil on themselves. And Paul says that those who sin in such a manner bring evil upon the community. I think Gingrich to be a prime candidate for the GOP according to worldly standards. But in this case, I am a single issue voter who will not be supporting this particular principle of darkness. For it wraps itself in comfortable warm blankets of Truth, but usually never in cold shrouds of Falsity. Which makes it difficult to see, but I see it and refuse to partner in it.
Let me be clear in saying that Gingrich should not be branded with Hawthorne's scarlet letter. To do so would make his sin permanent and unforgivable. I am saying that Gingrich willingly wears the letter and we do not acknowledge it. Though we should acknowledge it as long as he wears it. The sin is indefinite as long as Gingrich does not repent. As such, he should be treated like Hester and worse than Clinton.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Sigh No More
Serve God, love me and mend
This is not the end
Lived unbruised, we are friends
And I'm sorry
I'm sorry
Sigh no more, no more
One foot in sea and one on shore
My heart was never pure
And you know me
You know me
But man is a giddy thing
Oh man is a giddy thing
Oh man is a giddy thing
Oh man is a giddy thing
Love it will not betray you
Dismay or enslave you, it will set you free
Be more like the man you were made to be
There is a design, an alignment, a cry
Of my heart to see,
The beauty of love as it was made to be
- Mumford and Sons
This is not the end
Lived unbruised, we are friends
And I'm sorry
I'm sorry
Sigh no more, no more
One foot in sea and one on shore
My heart was never pure
And you know me
You know me
But man is a giddy thing
Oh man is a giddy thing
Oh man is a giddy thing
Oh man is a giddy thing
Love it will not betray you
Dismay or enslave you, it will set you free
Be more like the man you were made to be
There is a design, an alignment, a cry
Of my heart to see,
The beauty of love as it was made to be
- Mumford and Sons
Thursday, September 22, 2011
C.S. Lewis on Myth
Now as myth transcends thought, incarnation transcends myth. The heart
of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the
dying God without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of
legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens – at a
particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable
historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying
nobody knows when or where, to a historical person crucified (it is
all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease
to be myth: that is the miracle. I suspect that men have sometimes
derived more spiritual sustenance from myths they did not believe than
from the religion they professed. To be truly Christian we must both
assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth (fact though
it has become) with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to
all myths. The one is hardly more necessary than the other is.
[C. S. Lewis, “Myth Became Fact,” in The Grand Miracle and Other
Selected Essays on Theology and Ethics from God in The Dock, ed.
Walter Hooper (New York: Ballantine, 1970), pp. 38-42 (41-42).]
of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the
dying God without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of
legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens – at a
particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable
historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying
nobody knows when or where, to a historical person crucified (it is
all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease
to be myth: that is the miracle. I suspect that men have sometimes
derived more spiritual sustenance from myths they did not believe than
from the religion they professed. To be truly Christian we must both
assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth (fact though
it has become) with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to
all myths. The one is hardly more necessary than the other is.
[C. S. Lewis, “Myth Became Fact,” in The Grand Miracle and Other
Selected Essays on Theology and Ethics from God in The Dock, ed.
Walter Hooper (New York: Ballantine, 1970), pp. 38-42 (41-42).]
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Why I Desire the Eremitic Life
I have just now come from a party where I was its life and soul; witticisms streamed from my lips, everyone laughed and admired me, but I went away — yes, the dash should be as long as the radius of the earth's orbit ——————————— and wanted to shoot myself. - From the Journals of Soren Kierkegaard
Friday, September 16, 2011
The Hollow Liturgy: Till Death Do Us Part
You would think that a body of believers obsessed with the unconditional love message would start to resemble the message, but this is not the case. Recently, Pat Robertson said that a person whose spouse is suffering from Alzheimers has the right to divorce and remarry because the person suffering from the disease is already dead. I do not even know where to begin with this.
Christian voices from everywhere have denounced Robertson's remarks, but why? They say it is an assault on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is true, but what do they know of this? They take communion with those who have divorced and remarried. They go to the remarriage ceremonies. They are the ones that are divorced and remarried. It is a web of contradictions. The reason for the divorce with respect to Robertson's remarks is a more obvious, "of course you don't divorce" case. But all cases, whether obvious or not, have to do with conditional verses unconditional love. The fellowship loves to hear about the unconditional love Christ has for them, but then they fail to love unconditionally, even when they know that they are supposed to emulate Christ.
Most marriages, seem to me, to be predicated on conditions. The relationship is built on the fact that I will love you only if you stay exactly like you are now and make me feel like I feel now. Well what if years later that person becomes someone different and they do not make you feel the same. What then? Sayonara, I guess. See it's a conditional love. It's a love that says I will only love you if you make me feel a certain way or do a certain thing, which is really no love at all.
Additionally, Pat Robertson believes in healing. So what if that person becomes healed of the Alzheimers and their spouse is married to someone else? How does this show Christ to them?
And then you have the obvious, which I think Pat's co-host may have brought up - in sickness and in health. It does not apply to Alzheimers apparently.
A few weeks ago a friend told me about a co-worker whose wife shot him with a shotgun in his arm and chest during an argument. The lawyer and everyone around him said to divorce. My friend was asked by his co-worker what he should do. With the world and every principality of darkness against him, he responded with this:
"Jesus says that if you divorce your wife and marry someone else you commit adultery. And think about all the times that you have been faithless to Christ, yet he remains faithful to you."
So you know what his co-worker did? He decided not to press any charges, not to divorce his wife, and he took her home the very same day as the court hearing. THAT is love. THAT is what Christ has done for us. And THAT is being Christ to your spouse. Let me say this again. This guy was SHOT by his wife and he still said I love you anyway. Could you get a more similar picture of what Christ did for us?
Even when we were nailing Him to the cross, Jesus said "Forgive them Lord for they know not what they do."
This is my prayer. And it is my prayer that our myopic understanding of love would begin to expand and that the Holy Spirit would illuminate, strengthen and awaken the minds and hearts of a deaf, dumb, self-seeking, cowardice and adulterous generation.
Christian voices from everywhere have denounced Robertson's remarks, but why? They say it is an assault on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is true, but what do they know of this? They take communion with those who have divorced and remarried. They go to the remarriage ceremonies. They are the ones that are divorced and remarried. It is a web of contradictions. The reason for the divorce with respect to Robertson's remarks is a more obvious, "of course you don't divorce" case. But all cases, whether obvious or not, have to do with conditional verses unconditional love. The fellowship loves to hear about the unconditional love Christ has for them, but then they fail to love unconditionally, even when they know that they are supposed to emulate Christ.
Most marriages, seem to me, to be predicated on conditions. The relationship is built on the fact that I will love you only if you stay exactly like you are now and make me feel like I feel now. Well what if years later that person becomes someone different and they do not make you feel the same. What then? Sayonara, I guess. See it's a conditional love. It's a love that says I will only love you if you make me feel a certain way or do a certain thing, which is really no love at all.
Additionally, Pat Robertson believes in healing. So what if that person becomes healed of the Alzheimers and their spouse is married to someone else? How does this show Christ to them?
And then you have the obvious, which I think Pat's co-host may have brought up - in sickness and in health. It does not apply to Alzheimers apparently.
A few weeks ago a friend told me about a co-worker whose wife shot him with a shotgun in his arm and chest during an argument. The lawyer and everyone around him said to divorce. My friend was asked by his co-worker what he should do. With the world and every principality of darkness against him, he responded with this:
"Jesus says that if you divorce your wife and marry someone else you commit adultery. And think about all the times that you have been faithless to Christ, yet he remains faithful to you."
So you know what his co-worker did? He decided not to press any charges, not to divorce his wife, and he took her home the very same day as the court hearing. THAT is love. THAT is what Christ has done for us. And THAT is being Christ to your spouse. Let me say this again. This guy was SHOT by his wife and he still said I love you anyway. Could you get a more similar picture of what Christ did for us?
Even when we were nailing Him to the cross, Jesus said "Forgive them Lord for they know not what they do."
This is my prayer. And it is my prayer that our myopic understanding of love would begin to expand and that the Holy Spirit would illuminate, strengthen and awaken the minds and hearts of a deaf, dumb, self-seeking, cowardice and adulterous generation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)