A Brief Word on Atheists, Pineapples, and Shunned Messages

The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science tweeted a story this morning that caught my attention. I follow them for informational purposes, and occasionally something interesting comes to my feed from them. This particular story was about an atheist society getting kicked out of a freshman club fair for displaying a pineapple and naming it "Mohammed".

Yes. A pineapple.

The society said they "wanted to celebrate free speech and promote their upcoming debate 'Should we respect religion?' The pineapple named Mohammed was upsetting Muslim students there, and so they were given a choice to take the pineapple down or get kicked out (you can read the full story here)

The point of my post is not about muslims being offended. The muslim student's response has no real bearing on my post. Instead, I would like to ask one question that may or may not be somewhat obvious: what in the world does a pineapple have to do with debates on religion? Or better yet, what does this atheist society hope to communicate by starting off a "discussion about blasphemy, religion, and liberty" with a personified pineapple? I don't understand how anyone in that society thought that grabbing a pineapple and naming it Mohammed (knowing that there would be Muslim students there) communicates "Hey, let's have a serious discussion about this." The ideas and subject wasn't inappropriate - indeed, a discussion about blasphemy, religion, and liberty would be a good discussion to have, and I give credit to that society for wanting to have that discussion. They weren't thrown out for the discussion that they wanted to have; they were thrown out because their actions undermined what they were supposedly trying to do. If they truly wanted to encourage this discussion, they would not have allowed a pineapple to get them kicked out of this club fair.

Christians preach the gospel of Christ, which is arguably the most provocative idea to have ever existed. Christian apologists deal with objections that would prove the Gospel to be false. But if you are a Christian apologist, don't let something silly or unimportant be the reason why your message is not welcome. It is one thing to be shunned for a message - it is another thing to be shunned for something that has absolutely nothing to do with your message, like a pineapple. Give care to how you conduct yourself as an apologist, and don't allow yourself to be shut down for any other reason than the message you defend.

¹⁴ If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. ¹⁵ But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. ¹⁶ Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. - 1 Peter 4:14-16

Art is Subjective, You Say?

I have been wanting to write a post on this subject for a while,  but I have not been able to bring myself to do it for various reasons. But, thanks to a recent story from CNN, I have the perfect example to use to make a post about this subject.

CNN reported a few days ago that a famous painting of Jesus Christ, known as "Ecce Homo" (Latin for "behold the man"), underwent a restoration from it's deteriorated state in a church in Spain. Below is the picture of the original painting, it's deteriorated state, and it's "restoration"

Did you laugh at the restoration? It's okay if you did - I know I laughed at it. It's goofy and bizarre. But, I want to use this to raise a point about art: is art subjective, or are there objective standards to art?

I want to posit that if art is truly a subjective enterprise, then the restoration on the right could be considered just as much a masterpiece (in the eyes of the parishioner who restored it) as the original painting itself. But does that idea not seem ludicrous? Compared to the original painting, the restoration is hideous. The original painting shows skill and expertise, while the restoration does not. But if quality art is determined subjectively, then the only grounds to say that the original is better than the restoration is based on my own personal preferences.

I don't think anyone would be willing to say that the restoration is a better piece of art than the original. But, what is that claim grounded in? It is a futile claim to ground it in my subjective evaluation of art. I think this situation showcases a point that has subtly been lost in our relativistic society - there are objective standards to good art, and art is not a fully subjective enterprise. "Standards" is a dirty word in this society, but we affirm the idea of objective standards in that this restoration is a failed one - we are crying foul because this restoration attempt failed, and the result looks absolutely nothing like the original. There is implicitly a charge that standards were not met in this case, and this brings to the table a notion that there are objective standards to art.

This post isn't going to make the case for what the standards for art actually are. But, I hope this brief post makes you think - if art has an objective component of accountability, then what could be the implications of this for society? If you have thoughts, sound off below!

The Greatest Commandment: What's Love Got To Do With It?

One time, as Christ was speaking with the Pharisees, he was asked to give the greatest commandment: 

"And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. Matthew 22:35-38 (ESV)

It's interesting to note that Christ told us that the greatest commandment is to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind (the other gospel accounts of this quote sometimes include "strength" as well). In other words, we are to love God with the entirety of our existence.

I think we can make Christianity far more complicated than it really is. Christ gave us clear and simple (though not easy) directives on how to live our lives as followers of him, and he makes clear what the greatest of commands is. Love is the greatest thing we as Christians can do.

Christ was not talking about a love for:

• The church
• The Bible
• The Gospel
• Evangelism
• Philosophy
• Theology
• Apologetics
• Science
• History
• Arts
• Music
• Worship
• Marriage
• [fill in the blank].

Christ was talking about a love for God himself. Not the things of Christianity, God himself. Not rational argument or critical thinking, but God himself. Not even living a life of righteousness, but God himself.

Why would Jesus make an emphasis on loving God the most important thing we can do? Because when we love God with the entirety of our existence (heart, soul, mind, and strength), everything in that bullet list above will fall perfectly into place. It is only when we are in love with God first and foremost that everything above can belong where it should be in our lives.

In short, what does love for God got to do with it? Absolutely everything.

Harold Camping Revisited: The "Actual" Rapture Date

[Sarcasm] This feels like deja vu, but it's not. Harold Camping is back, ladies and gentlemen, and according to Mr. Camping, next week is the REAL ending of the world. Yeah, May 21st wasn't quite right - it's really October 21st, and has been all along. Last time, Harold made a simple mathematics error in his computations of the end of the world, and the new answer (the correct one, mind you) is October 21st. [/Sarcasm]

It's hard to write anything new on this. On Rapture Day earlier this year, I wrote a somewhat detailed post and argument against Harold Camping, and most of what I said then stands true now (you can read that post here). There has been no media splash of his exploits this time around, unlike earlier this year when you couldn't even get away from the topic if you tried. I personally haven't checked into his actions or the actions of his followers, but I hope that the followers from the previous time around have learned their lesson and abandoned Mr. Camping to his delusions. If they still follow him...well, more power to them and their beliefs. It is nothing more than a failing faith.

Thankfully guys like Camping can be good teaching tools for showing what is true in comparison to what is blatantly false. I remember around the time of the first Rapture date, a middle school girl of the student ministry at my church was deeply bothered by the idea of the world ending, and resolved to begin praying for her unsaved mother. And while Camping is in extreme error to think in his "wisdom" that he can pinpoint a date for the end of the world, the whole end-of-the-world hullabaloo did produce a positive reminder - Christ can return at any time, and it is best we live in such a way that the world could really end tomorrow. We would want to share Christ with those who are unsaved in our lives, knowing that tomorrow they would be in hell for eternity. And if some crazy old man can produce a reaction of that kind, then perhaps the church could use another event like this - to wake us up of the true reality we face.


Please check out these other essays and posts by my fellow apologists in the Christian Apologetics Blogger Alliance:
http://www.reasonsforgod.org/2011/10/does-harold-camping-discredit-christianity/
http://www.cltruth.com/blog/2011/is-jesus-christ-coming-back-on-october-21-2011/ 
http://www.hieropraxis.com/2011/10/is-the-end-of-the-world-at-hand-reflecting-on-judgment-day-with-poetry/ 
http://lukenixblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/rapture-judgment-day-and-christs.html 
http://www.thinkingchristian.net/2011/10/harold-camping-a-failure-of-accountability/

9/11 and Religious Pluralism

"If this place doesn't make you sick, it is because you've suppressed your reflex to tell right from purely evil deeds."- Famine, "To The Teeth"

It's not hard to figure out what the buzz is today. 10 years ago a nation experienced an attack from a group of people who were zealous about the beliefs they held, zealous to the point of justifying violence. Two massive towers fell when two commercial airliners, hijacked by radical Muslims, flew straight into the buildings. The Pentagon was damaged and a fourth attempt to take out the White House was prevented by heroic men and women who - with their lives - prevented said attempt.

Recently I wrote a post on the absurdity of religious pluralism (you can read it here) and I wish to briefly revisit that subject. The motivating factor behind 9/11 was the religious beliefs of those who carried out the attacks. On religious pluralism it is impossible to condemn the attacks made in their belief because on religious pluralism, all religious beliefs are correct, and the men who carried out these attacks were justified because their beliefs would be correct.

Now, I am not suggesting that 9/11 demonstrates a falsification for all of Islam, conservative or radical. That is not at all what I am trying to say. Actually, Islam doesn't really have anything to do with the post. My beef is with religious pluralism. A consistent religious pluralist cannot condemn 9/11. If a religious pluralist does condemn 9/11, he/she is grossly inconsistent with the demands of religious pluralism and should abandon it entirely. Those who carried out the attacks did so in the name and from the worldview of their religious beliefs. If all religious beliefs are true, then the beliefs behind 9/11 are true as well.

Such is the consequence of a dangerous and irrational idea, that somehow all religious beliefs can be true. I think 9/11 and the overwhelming condemnation of the attacks should show us that truth matters, and the truth is that what happened on this day ten years ago is something that should have never taken place, and no belief could justify it. We will never forget.

Here are a few other posts concerning 9/11 that are worth checking out, from my fellow apologists in the Apologetics Blogger Alliance:

Faithful Thinkers: Atheism, Evil and Ultimate Justice
The Point: Christianity and 9/11: Guilt by Association?
The Gospel According to Erik: Did God Allow the Attacks on 9/11 for a “Greater Good”?
J.W. Wartick: On September 11th, 2001, harmless things became fearful
Sarcastic Xtian: Do all roads (and flights) lead to God?
Reasons for God: The Two Ground Zeroes
Hieropraxis: Suffering and the Cross of Christ
Take Two: Remembering 9/11: A Young Californian’s Perspective
Apologetics Guy: America After 9/11: Is Religion Evil?
Apologetics 315: Resources on the Problem of Evil
The Real Issue: The Three Faces of Evil and a Christian Response
Neil Mammen: Where was God on 9-11?
Thinking Christian: 9/11: "Full Cognitive Meltdown" and Its Fallout
Cold and Lonely Truth: 9/11: Where is God during a catastropy?
In Defense of the Christian Faith: If God, Why Evil?
Wintery Knight: Ground Zero: Why truth matters for preventing another 9/11-style attack
Possible Worlds: The Need for Moral Choices and Consequences
Tilled Soil: The Problem of Evil: Who's problem is it? Is it a problem?
Bringing Back the Tao: 9/11 Memorial: Christianity Gives Authentic Hope In The Face Of Suffering
Patheos: Are we all moral monsters?

The Camping Rapture Fail

Harold Camping before an interview

 Hey, boys and girls! Guess what? It's May 21st! That means, according to this guy on the left, that the end of the world is nigh! The rapture is taking place at 6 PM tonight! Everything that Tim LaHaye wrote about in the Left Behind series is coming to pass! (Okay, so not really on that last sentence.)

It would kill me if I didn't write something about the Harold Camping hullabaloo, because not everyone realizes the kind of fallout that will come from this. We can point our fingers and laugh, but come Monday, Christianity as a whole will be held up and mocked again thanks to the exploits of this extremely misguided man who thinks he has found the secret formula identifying the day of Christ's return. I, for one, find this to be a serious issue, but I also think there are several valid lessons to learn from this. But first, let's take it one point at a time...

Let's compare statements concerning the coming of Christ...
Now, Harold Camping claims to be a Christian. If he is a Christian, then he recognizes Jesus Christ as the Lord of his life, and has put his faith in Christ alone for salvation. So let us start with what Jesus has said on His return. All of these verses are the spoken words of Christ in the Gospels.

“If anyone tells you then, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘Over here!’ do not believe it! False messiahs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. Take note: I have told you in advance. So if they tell you, ‘Look, He’s in the wilderness!’ don’t go out; ‘Look, He’s in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Wherever the carcass is, there the vultures will gather. Matthew 24:23-28 (HCSB) "

“Now concerning that day and hour no one knows—neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son—except the Father only. As the days of Noah were, so the coming of the Son of Man will be. For in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah boarded the ark. They didn’t know until the flood came and swept them all away. So this is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be: Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and one left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and one left. Therefore be alert, since you don’t know what day your Lord is coming. But know this: If the homeowner had known what time the thief was coming, he would have stayed alert and not let his house be broken into. This is why you also must be ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. Matthew 24:36-44 (HCSB)

“Now concerning that day or hour no one knows—neither the angels in heaven nor the Son—except the Father. Watch! Be alert! For you don’t know when the time is ⌊coming⌋. It is like a man on a journey, who left his house, gave authority to his slaves, gave each one his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to be alert. Therefore be alert, since you don’t know when the master of the house is coming—whether in the evening or at midnight or at the crowing of the rooster or early in the morning. Otherwise, he might come suddenly and find you sleeping.
And what I say to you, I say to everyone: Be alert!” Mark 13:32-37 (HCSB)

“Be on your guard, so that your minds are not dulled from carousing, drunkenness, and worries of life, or that day will come on you unexpectedly like a trap. For it will come on all who live on the face of the whole earth. But be alert at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are going to take place and to stand before the Son of Man.” Luke 21:34-36 (HCSB)

There are several things worth emphasizing in these passages. Of course, these are just snippets of a much larger picture. I am not trying to provide a crash course on eschatology and it's various views, but given these passages above, let us establish a few facts:

• The coming of Christ will be instantaneous.
• The coming of Christ will be unpredictable and unexpected.
• The Body of Christ is to stay constantly alert for His coming.

There is a very important point that arises from these facts, but we will get to that in a second. Here is what Harold Camping has said about the return of Christ. This is his formula from which he was able to pin the date down for May 21st.

1. The number five equals "atonement", the number ten equals "completeness", and the number seventeen equals "heaven".
2. Christ is said to have hung on the cross on April 1, 33 AD. The time between April 1, 33 AD and April 1, 2011 is 1,978 years.
3. If 1,978 is multiplied by 365.2422 days (the number of days in a solar year, not to be confused with the lunar year), the result is 722,449.
4. The time between April 1 and May 21 is 51 days.
5. 51 added to 722,449 is 722,500.
6. (5 × 10 × 17)² or (atonement × completeness × heaven)² also equals 722,500. (retrieved here)

The Bible guarantees that you are just plain wrong.

Now, it is so very tempting to go through this argument and highlight the unproven premises, mainly in the first two premises. That, however, would simply be a waste of time, in light of what Christ Himself said on the subject of His return. For Harold Camping to think that somehow this argument can overshadow and supersede the words of His Lord Christ is nothing but the height of arrogance. He has elevated this calculation over the words of Christ, and this is nothing short of pure, raw arrogance. Unfortunately, he fits the description of the false prophet as Christ mentioned in Matthew 24:23-28 above, as his nationwide campaign for awareness of May 21st has been basically claiming "Look, here is the Messiah" (see picture above). In order for Harold's claims to even get off the ground, he must create a convincing and plausible case that Christ did not say those things - if he can't do that, his prophecy arrives dead on arrival, condemned at the very conception of the idea. As long as Christ's claims are true, Camping's are necessarily false.

Now, this is more than enough to convince the reasonable mind that Harold Camping's "prophecy" should be dismissed. However, before I move on to the damage that this campaign has caused, allow me to point out that, technically, May 21st could be the day when Christ returns. James R White wrote an excellent piece on this point in a blog post last week about how it is entirely possible that Christ returns today. If He does, however, it would not be because Harold Camping predicted it would be - it would be on God's timetable. Just because an extremely misguided false prophet claims a date for Christ's return doesn't mean that God cannot return on that date - like the verses said, "now concerning that day and hour no one knows". It is up for Christians to not say that Christ's return will not be today. We are to stay on alert and make the most of each day, knowing that Christ's return is guaranteed, just not when we expect it. Who knows? Christ could return on June 1st. He could return 10 years from today. He could return on August 7th 1000 years from now. It is not up for us to pin dates on the wall for His return - as I will explain later, it is up for us to live like His return is soon.


The fallout of this whole debacle

Allow me to copy/paste a segment from James R White's blog post concerning some of the actions Harold Camping's followers have take. 

I listened to two NPR reports on Camping's prophecy today, and it was truly disheartening to listen to these folks. One lady had been about to enroll in medical college, but did not, so that she could warn people about "Judgment Day." Another man had left wife and children behind, as they did not "believe." A couple, the woman expecting their second child in June, were interviewed. They had given up everything, and had just enough money to make it till May 21. After that…well, they will be destitute. The New York Post just reported on a man who squandered his $140,000 life's savings to buy advertisements in the New York area promoting the May 21 prophecy. (James R White, retrieved from here)

This is what separates Harold Camping from just the average doomsday guy - this guy will ruin the lives of many people who have followed him. To be sure, those who follow him are doing so out of their own free will - regardless, if there is no message, then there is nothing to follow. This guy will give Christianity a very bad taste in those who have abandoned everything for this false prophecy. This is simply inexcusable for any Christian. Camping owns an entire radio station chain called Family Radio (which has been his chief propaganda arm for decades) to which he will still have even when some of his followers have given everything to follow Him. I will pity his followers - I have little pity for Camping.

Of course, the atheist camps will take great advantage of this opportunity. I imagine the atheist organizations will have some new members in their ranks come next week, and that there will be a circus parade in the media (although it appears that the media is already calling this a failed prediction - and good for them). As my apologist friend Lauren Kimball pointed out, it is funny that a clearly misguided Christian gets a large amount of screen time, yet when it comes to Christian charities or other good things that Christians are doing (or worse, the persecution against Christians that is already well documented in other countries) gets relegated to Christian publications and news sources. Bias, much?

Of course, there is a lesson to be learned from this as well - as my apologist friend Steve Bedard, the editor of the apologetics journal Hope's Reason, wrote on his blog,if people are willing to give everything they have for a cause they believe in, even when it is a false cause, what does it say about the majority of American Christianity? Are we willing to give up our stuff and sell it for a cause which does matter? I can testify that I am not. Though charitable giving is a major part of my life, there is always more I can be doing besides giving. The American Church would do well to not write off the followers of Camping when it comes to what they have done for their belief - indeed, the American church should learn a lesson from them. I would do well to learn a lesson from them. This ultimately leads to my last point.

Christian don't get to choose how they want to live

There are valuable lessons to learn from all of this. Christians should not waste the time that they are given here on Earth. We are not guaranteed tomorrow, so how we live out lives is not a matter of personal preference, but of unquestionable importance:

"Besides this, knowing the time, it is already the hour for you to wake up from sleep, for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. The night is nearly over, and the daylight is near, so let us discard the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us walk with decency, as in the daylight: not in carousing and drunkenness; not in sexual impurity and promiscuity; not in quarreling and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no plans to satisfy the fleshly desires." Romans 13:11-14 (HCSB)

"Therefore, I say this and testify in the Lord: You should no longer walk as the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their thoughts.They are darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them and because of the hardness of their hearts.They became callous and gave themselves over to promiscuity for the practice of every kind of impurity with a desire for more and more.But that is not how you learned about the Messiah, assuming you heard about Him and were taught by Him, because the truth is in Jesus.You took off your former way of life, the old self that is corrupted by deceitful desires;you are being renewed in the spirit of your minds;you put on the new self, the one created according to God’s ⌊likeness⌋ in righteousness and purity of the truth.Since you put away lying, Speak the truth, each one to his neighbor, because we are members of one another.Be angry and do not sin. Don’t let the sun go down on your anger,and don’t give the Devil an opportunity.The thief must no longer steal. Instead, he must do honest work with his own hands, so that he has something to share with anyone in need.No foul language is to come from your mouth, but only what is good for building up someone in need, so that it gives grace to those who hear.And don’t grieve God’s Holy Spirit. You were sealed by Him for the day of redemption.All bitterness, anger and wrath, shouting and slander must be removed from you, along with all malice.And be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving one another, just as God also forgave you in Christ". Ephesians 4:17-32 (HCSB)

"Therefore, with your minds ready for action, be serious and set your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. As obedient children, do not be conformed to the desires of your former ignorance. But as the One who called you is holy, you also are to be holy in all your conduct; for it is written, Be holy, because I am holy." 1 Peter 1:13-16 (HCSB)

This whole event can serve as warning for Christians that we don't get the luxury of living life for our own benefits, and that we are called to live differently from the ways of this world. Christ has given us the directive of the Great Commission, to make disciples of all nations and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19-20). That is not an optional call for Christians to take up when they feel like doing so - for those who call themselves Christians, they are acknowledging Christ as the Lord of their lives (or as my former youth minister Ryan told his daughters, "Jesus is Boss"), and that Lord has commanded that disciples be made over the world. The focus of my life is to make disciples - Christ has commanded me to do so, and as someone who has surrendered my life to Him acknowledging that without him I am an object of God's wrath that is due my sin, I am to obey in that calling wherever I am located (and guess what? If you are a Christian, that last sentence applies to you as well).American Christianity is great at communicating a lukewarm commitment to Christ, and while I am certainly guilty of being a lukewarm Christian at times, it is not acceptable for any of us. And at the end of today, if Christ has not returned today (again, if He does return today, it is not because Camping called it), it does not diminish our call to "be holy in all your conduct, for it is written, Be holy, because I am holy". His coming is certain, so let us be faithful servants until that time.

Constitutional Clauses and the Persecuted Church

Last night, another good atheist friend of mine named Stetson (not the same atheist that I spoke of a few days ago) asked about the Bible's stance on the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. Since it was such a long reply, with his permission, I copied/pasted it below (with a few edits). I have slightly deviated the focus in this blog post to what I was originally replying to - in particular, I want to note the relation of the two clauses to the current situation of the Persecuted Church in other countries.

Alright, about the Bible's take on the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause. First I will give a few Scriptures that would apply to this, and then I will give my thoughts on it.

First, one of the most important texts for dealing with the government comes from Romans 13:1-8. It is a very important passage for dealing with how Christianity should relate to the government:

Everyone must submit to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist are instituted by God. So then, the one who resists the authority is opposing God’s command, and those who oppose it will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have its approval. For government is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For government is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong. Therefore, you must submit, not only because of wrath, but also because of your conscience. And for this reason you pay taxes, since the ⌊authorities⌋ are God’s public servants, continually attending to these tasks. Pay your obligations to everyone: taxes to those you owe taxes, tolls to those you owe tolls, respect to those you owe respect, and honor to those you owe honor. Romans 13:1-7 (HCSB)

This passage, while it commands Christians to submit to the authority of the government, when taken in together with what Jesus said about the government, it establishes a very important directive that we should follow.

Tell us, therefore, what You think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not?” But perceiving their malice, Jesus said, “Why are you testing Me, hypocrites? Show Me the coin used for the tax.” So they brought Him a denarius. “Whose image and inscription is this?” He asked them. “Caesar’s,” they said to Him. Then He said to them, “Therefore give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left Him and went away. Matthew 22:17-22 (HCSB)

Christ is saying here that when it comes to matters of the government, then we are to obey the government. However, if the government is seeking to do something that is to be done against God or if the government is asking for it's citizens to do something immoral or something wrong, then it is the duty of Christians to stand against the government. Taking a stance against the government is not the default stance. That is a much larger subject to dive into, however.

Now, to the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. Time for a little church history. Prior to the founding of America, we have the Protestant Revolution, beginning when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the church in Wittenburg. At the time, the Catholic Church was the religion of the state - and because it was the religion of the state (for the majority of the European nations at the time) it was able to use the power of the state - it's resources, governing bodies, enforcement forces, ect - to suppress what it openly deemed to be a heretical movement within the church at the time, and it openly persecuted, sometimes through violent means, to try and silence the Reformation. This was only possible because the Catholic Church was established as the official religion of the government, and therefore was able to use the government's powers to accomplish it's will. Had the Catholic Church not been established as the official religion, they would not have been able to do anything.

America was colonized for several reasons, but one of the most important one was for those that were seeking religious freedom - the pilgrims. Among other things, they were seeking to escape the religious persecution that was taking place through the government. The founders knew what they were doing when they included the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause - it was to prevent history from repeating itself and from Religion A from being able to beat up Religion B because Religion A was the official religion.

I believe those two clauses are what makes this country incredible - I believe that no religion, even Christianity, should be adopted to be a government established religion, and here is why: I am very involved with watchdog groups that inform about the persecuted church in other countries, and the persecution I speak of it only possible because of a lack of (either in the countries' constitution, or in enforcement) of these two Clauses. If there is one fact that the media continually wishes to suppress, it is the well document, very frequent, very common, (sometimes) very violent and very disturbing amount of persecution that takes place against Christians in the Middle East, China, N. Korea, and elsewhere. This is only possible because in those places, things like the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause do _not_ exist - in fact, in these countries where persecution of Christians take place, it is precisely because a specific religion is established (most of which is Islam) and because you are not free to practice anything else! America is a great nation because of those two clauses, because it allows people to believe whatever they want knowing that they will not face persecution from the government.

Questions? Comments? Leave your thoughts below!

Twitter + Apologetics = Twittegetics

Whenever I think of Twitter, I think of David Crowder and a video he made. He makes a very convincing case (through the emotional manipulation of comedy) that Twitter is quite dangerous. Watch it here.

I disagree with his conclusion that Twitter will kill you. I've been using it for some time, and I am quite healthy and fine ;)

If you aren't familiar with what Twitter is, it is a social media site (social media: think Facebook and Myspace) where the form of communication are very short status updates. Unlike Facebook, where you can have long statuses and type an entire book in the comment box, Twitter limits you to only 140 characters per post. Unlike Facebook, where you have to send a friend request and they have to approve it in order to interact with someone, Twitter is an open community. You can "follow" someone (the Twitterlingo for becoming a "Friend" of that person") and see the updates they post. You can send links, tag people by using @, you can use # to start a trend or a conversation, and you can freely interact with anyone in Twitter without having to follow them. It is a very fun and wonderful service. Musicians, companies, news organizations, authors, actors, and more use Twitter to converse with subscribers, customers and fans. If you look in the right column on this blog, you will see my personal Twitter posts. Honestly, I enjoy Twitter just as much if not more than Facebook. It is very simple, very streamlined (unlike Facebook), and just a lot of fun. If you use Twitter, follow me at @EvangelancerAuz

With this kind of viral and open Twitter community comes the question of the role of apologetics. How does one use Twitter for apologetic conversations or in-depth dialogue when you are limited to 140 characters per post?

I ask this question because I had the opportunity to start a good dialogue with one of my Twitter followers about a post he made. In paraphrase, this follower said "Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are all the same: hate, war, and slaughter them all". Aside the fact that this is a blatant ad-hominem against many religions, this would have been a great chance to start a conversation about the validity of this claim. Using the skills from Tactics, I imagine this conversation to be a fruitful one where it could have been easy to demonstrate the incredibly absurdity of the claim. And yet I chose to chicken out and ignore it. Why? I didn't know how I could do this conversation with only 140 characters. If you use Twitter, you know how hard it can be to use less than 140 characters!

Apologetics and Facebook were just made for each other. I have regular conversations with a few of my atheist friends about religion and the like, and I can always say what I want/need to say knowing that I will have plenty of room. Indeed, apologetic conversations on Facebook are usually very productive because the fear of face-to-face conversation is diminished, and this applies to Twitter as well, but unlike Facebook, you have a limit on what you can say in Twitter.

A few months ago a Twitter user re-tweeted a post I made, and almost overnight I had a slew of critics slamming me for what I had said. It wasn't a controversial post, yet many choose to twist my words out of context. Knowing this was a good opportunity to plant seeds, I made an effort to reply to each and every one of them, usually extending a hand of friendship and compassion in spite of the comments they had made against me. A couple of users want to have a debate with me, which I gladly accepted, and I found myself juggling several conversations ranging from the historical existence of Jesus Christ to the nature of faith. It was impossible, until I discovered Twitlonger, a service that allows you to write massive Twitter posts. Twitlonger (and the new Tweetdeck feature called deck.ly) allows for long Twitter post, yet I don't like using it because it betrays the spirit of Twitter. Shortly enough, these conversations died down (several of them never replied to my rebuttals), and Twitter returned to "normal".

I am not sure if using Twitlonger is how apologetics will have to be spoken of in Twitter, or if there is a unique, Twitter-specific way to do it. Yet I know that at some point, the "how" must be overshadowed by the "do". Yes, I am a coward and shy by nature, but salvation is at stake. To the glory of God may little Twitter account point others to Christ.

The Genetic Fallacy and Hypocritical Christians [Part 2]

 "An ounce of love outweighs a ton of argument" - Dr. James Spiegel, The Making of An Atheist

The first part of this blog series discussed the basics of a reasoning error known as the Genetic Fallacy. If you missed that one, read it here to catch up on what's going on. Or, if you already know about the Genetic Fallacy, just keep reading. No need to hear again what you already know.

Thinking over the events of the last year, there are two events that highlight when Christians become the definition of hypocrisy. The first is the (ongoing) atrocities of Westboro Baptist Church. If you've not heard about these guys, you must live in the desert or in a cave or something. "God Hates Fags" and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" have become phrases brought to light by a group that is the definition of hate speech. Protesting at the funerals of soldiers, and a protest attempt at the funeral of the 9 year old victim of the Tuscon shootings (the Arizona legislation banned them from coming), this group has given ammo for many critics of Christianity and has provided an eyesore for those who are actually living the teachings of Christ, much less for Christ Himself. The other would be the attempting Qu'ran burnings on 9/11. Now, the Qu'rans that would've been burnt were English Qu'rans; technically, that is not the Qu'ran. In Muslim theology, the Qu'ran is written in Arabic. However, that is beside the point. The firestorm that was caused over that incident was worldwide. Since I trust the reader is aware of this event, I won't elaborate on it.

Aside from the painful obvious that in both instances the name of Christianity is being slandered and tarred, it pales in comparison from the many actions of Christians that don't make the national headlines. To be sure, there are Christians who are living out their faith and making positive differences in the lives of others. At the same time, there are just as many (if not more, in some places) plenty of Christians who claim one thing yet live antagonistically to it. Christian hypocrisy is one of the most powerful weapons of Satan. It is a very powerful weapon to have someone who calls himself/herself a Christian yet brings about the divisiveness and destruction that Satan desires.

Many people don't believe in Christ because of the attitudes of Christians who have wronged them. I know people who believe this (and I know one who has had her mind changed after the miraculous survival of her son). In this ugly reality, however, pain and suffering often cloud clear thinking. Those who don't believe in Christ because of hypocritical Christians are committing the Genetic Fallacy by finding fault with the believers rather than the belief itself. Even if every single Christian lives the opposite of the Gospel of Christ, it does not mean the Gospel is false. The claims of the Gospel, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and is the only One who can provide forgiveness of sins, are true or false independent of those who hold them. Of course, when encountering this example, diving into an explanation of faulty thinking isn't what the antidote is (unless the Spirit of God explicitly commands you to go that route). Often, the antidote to these kinds of wounds are by living a life that characterizes a devotion to the Gospel. In other words, a public demonstration of a lack of hypocrisy is the best antidote to those who have been wounded by hypocrisy.

Apologetics is powerful in many ways, but it has it's limits. Many people have a very distorted view of apologetics, thinking that it is useless or inferior to service or love. "People just need to see Christians love others and get into action and they will believe" and "You can't argue people into the Kingdom of God", they say. While both views are false (though there is some truth in the former), the best apologetic is always an apologetic of love and compassion. If 1 Peter 3:15-16 commands us to prepare a defense of our faith, sometimes that defense is one characterized in a lifestyle. Some people need a philosophical argument; all need a display of an authentic life.

The Genetic Fallacy and Hypocritical Christians [Part 1]

I love philosophy. It is the field of study that every single other field depends on. You cannot do science without doing philosophy, you cannot do language studies without philosophy; virtually everything in some way falls under the umbrella of philosophy. I started this blog to write about philosophy and philosophical apologetics for Christianity, but I've not actually done that until now. This is part one of a two-part conversation concerning the very real and practical claim against Christianity that people don't believe in Christ because of hypocritical Christians. Part 1 talks about the Genetic Fallacy itself, and Part 2 talks about why claiming "I don't believe in Christ because Christians are hypocritical", though a very real and understandable claim, is a bad reason not to believe in Christ.

In philosophy, there are several mistakes in reasoning that one can commit. One of the most common of those is called the Genetic Fallacy. The Genetic Fallacy isn't hard to understand; you probably use it or recognize it often. A person committing the Genetic Fallacy is finding fault with a belief or a truth claim based on it's supposed origin. A good example that I hear quite often from my liberal friends is "Because [insert truth claim] came from Glen Beck/Fox News, it's not true". Independent of the merits of the claim itself, a conclusion about a claim is formed on the sole basis of it's origin. It fails to assess the claim on it's merit by refusing to examine the evidence for and against the claim. While that wasn't a plug for either Glen Beck or Fox News, I hope you get the point.

For Christians, it is important to be familiar with the Genetic Fallacy for several reasons. For one, it gets used  against us quite often. A very common form of the Genetic Fallacy against Christians (and one that was used on me the other day) is "You only believe in Jesus Christ because that is what you were told to believe by your parents/friends/pastor". Regardless of how I came to form my belief that Jesus Christ is God, the question is whether or not the claim is true; namely, that Jesus Christ is God. Saying that the claim is false simply because of how I came to hold that belief is to ignore the merits of my belief/claim and judge it by false merits. Another common example is "I don't believe what the Bible says about Jesus Christ because the New Testament was written by Christians". When you think about it, that is such a silly claim. If the New Testament as we have it is false because it was written by Christians, would the New Testament be true if it were written by pagans? Of course not. Just because the New Testament was written by Christians does nothing to disprove what they are saying. Indeed, Luke has been shown over and over again to be a very solid historian when writing Luke and Acts, even though he was a Christian. If we aren't careful, we can get trapped in a corner with no good reason other than our own ignorance of how to handle a faulty objection.


Christians who make an effort not to commit the Genetic Fallacy are doing a huge service to both themselves and society. By resolving to not commit the Genetic Fallacy when having discussions about faith or politics, you are granting a massive amount of grace to people who believe differently than you. By being willing to show evidence as to why you think someone is wrong (and subsequently showing evidence for your own beliefs) instead of assuming they are wrong from the start, you open the door for an opportunity to show the other person good, solid reasons why his/her belief is wrong are yours are right. Not only that, you show that you care about the person himself/herself because you are taking an interest in his/her beliefs and treat them seriously. Of course I believe that Muslims and atheists are wrong in their beliefs about God, but I don't assume everything that they say is wrong from the start. How they came to become a Muslim or an atheist or whatever is irrelevant to whether or not what they are saying is true or not. I let evidence decide. By letting evidence be the reason why you discount the belief, you are being a solid representative of Christ. Of course, being familiar with evidence means studying and research and understanding. Failure to do any of those is to handicap you beyond repair. Do your homework, but make sure you understand the facts. Trust me, you don't want to be a "quote mine" unless you can explain the ins and outs of your quotes!

The next post will be about the relationship of the claim "I don't believe that Christ is God because of hypocritical Christians" and the Genetic Fallacy. If you have ever wrestled with that claim, either from yourself or someone else, you will want to check out the next post.