The Pugnacious Irishman

Powerless Pulpits

February 8, 2010 · Leave a Comment

Preach it:

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , , ,

Becoming a Three Thirds Disciple

February 7, 2010 · Leave a Comment

My friend Brett Kunkle, who works for apologetics organization Stand to Reason, recently sent me his newsletter.  I’m going to quote some of it to you, for it highlights something about the role of apologetics in disicpleship that people often miss.

A bit of background: oftentimes when Brett speaks to Christians in high school and to youth pastors, he first poses as an atheist to the crowd.  They don’t know he’s really a Christian, so he engages them and slowly picks apart their faith.  He “comes out” later and walks them through the challenges, but his main goal in doing the posing is to wake the audience up to their need to learn how to defend their faith.  Most can’t do it very well.  Most can’t do it at all.

On to the letter:

It was eighty against one.  Not good odds, but when I role-play an atheist with the typical Christian students, I like my chances.  But these weren’t students.  They were adults.  And not just any adults, but Christian leaders on the East Coast.  Pastors, youth pastors, parachurch leaders, school teachers, and administrators.

I launched in to my “Why I’m not a Christian” arguments.  Debate quickly followed.  From the start, a number of adults appealed to their experience of the Holy Spirit–”I know God is real because I’ve experienced His Spirit.”  I quickly shot back, “How do you know that’s really God?  Mormons say the same thing.  Do you think they’re experiencing God as well?”

One man in particular was emphatic.  “I just know it’s the Holy Spirit speaking to me.”  He tried to bolster the argument, declaring God had spoken to him through the Bible as well.  I responded with a typical atheist challenge.  “The Bible tells us that God spoke to Abraham, asking him to sacrifice his son.”  Then I looked him in the eye and questioned him, “If God asked you to kill your son, would you do it?”  He joked about his son sitting there next to him, but he could not answer the challenge.

In fact, there were only two leaders out of those 80 who gave me real trouble during the exchange.  The first, a youth pastor, launched into the moral argument for God’s existence.  I tried to take the “morals are determined by society” route, but he calmly pinned me down.  The second, a deacon and Sunday school teacher, offered a design argument, articulating Michale Behe’s argument from irriducible complexity.  I quickly changed topics.

 

Brett goes on in the letter to reveal that both men had included thinking skills training in their discipleship to Christ: both made extensive use of the training materials from Stand to Reason.

Then, Brett continues:

Later, the man who claimed he just knew it was the Holy Spirit speaking to him approached me.  He wanted my help.  “My son, sitting next to me, is doubting everything.”  Then he burst into tears.  Embarrassed, he grabbed my arm and pulled me around the corner.  As he wept bitterly, his son’s story emerged.  A bright kid, grew up in a Christian home, led friends to the Lord, on fire for Christ, even preached in their church.  But now, he questioned it all.  He begged me, “Will you talk to him?  Please, will you talk to him today?”

After my final teaching session, the son approached me, quickly launching into a laundry list of objections to Christianity.  A lenghty conversation ensued, covering topics like objective moral truths, utilitarian ethical theory, Kant’s categorical imperative, retributive justice, divine hiddenness, intelligent design, and the experience of the Holy Spirit.  From the conversation, I guessed he was a graduate student in philosophy.  Wrong.  He was a high school senior.

His objections boiled down to this:  “I’ve been taught that Christianity’s truthfulness is confirmed by my experience.  I am no longer having powerful Christian experiences.  In addition, I’m reading arguments against Christianity.  I now wonder if it’s rational for me to remain a Christian.”  He had just rehearsed his father’s argument for Christianity…and its shortcomings.

I listened, offered thoughts to reframe his view of Christianity’s truthfulness, put personal experience in its proper place, and introduced him to apologetics.  He thanked me and we parted ways.

He ends by making a request to pray for the young man.

Brett’s letter underscores a few important things.  First, the Christian worldview has the resources to answer the objections and questions that are posed to it, but few believers are actually even partially equipped to grasp and communicate those resources.  Brett’s experience of the majority in the Church that he recounts in this letter is pretty standard for him. Just think: these were not youth group kids, but adult leaders.  When pressed, the only resource all but two of them fell back on boils down to a certain felt experience.  That is a biblical part of the life of the Christ follower, but it is of little help when doubts from within and challenges from without come…and both of those will come.

Secondly and relatedly, when we as the Church fail to value the life of the mind, we leave our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ naked and defenseless against the harsh winters of doubt, and we leave non-believers (those who are not easily persuaded by an appeal to a felt experience–which is most non-believers, I’d think) with nothing to grasp onto but “I know because I know because I know.”  Brett’s conversation with the high school senior bears this out.  Seriously, how is that valuing and loving them?  There are lots of smart folks outside the church.  When we have nothing to appeal to but the experience of the Holy Spirit, does that take their intellect seriously?  If we truly love them, the least we can do is prepare ourselves to be able to walk them through the answers to some of their nagging questions and doubts.

All this reminds me of a friendship I had with a colleague at my former school.  We talked about questions and objections to Christianity often (he was an agnostic) in the same manner that Brett talked with the young man.  After a few years, one day my friend remarked to me how satisfying it was to be able to talk to me intelligently about such things.  I was the only Christian in his life he could do that with.  Though the compliment meant a lot to me, I had a certain sadness in my heart: I was the only one?

Thirdly, I know many shy away from training their minds because they think that it’s somehow unChristlike and they view it as combative.  Visions of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly quickly pop into their heads, and they say, “no thanks.”** 

But apologetics need not be like that.  Used properly, it is conversational and relational.  The conversation Brett engaged in was natural.  I know the guy: he doesn’t walk around with a Evidence that Demands  a Verdict holster, and he doesn’t have a belt of William Lane Craig bullets strung across his chest.  He’s normal.  Furthermore, because he has trained his intellect, he can confidently converse with any non-believer, whether he be seeker or skeptic, full-time professor or full-time mom.

If you have nothing but an experience to stand upon, consider devoting your intellect to Christ too.  You need not get a phd in philosophy, though that’d be nice.  All you gotta do is…do something.  You can begin here.

**That’s not to put down either man; it’s just that many would rather not be so aggressively combative, and the two men fit the stereotype.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , , ,

Book of Eli

February 1, 2010 · 1 Comment

I just watched Book of Eli.

Violent?  Very.

Slight pluralistic message at the end.
Kinda funky definition of faith (then again, his faith drove him to action, he was certain of the hope he had, and he’s clear of what God has called him to do even though he doesn’t have it all figured out…so I guess there’s something to it).

Yet thought provoking all the same.  I guess you can’t win ‘em all.  Given that Book of Eli came from Hollywood, I’ll give it an “A” for effort.

The man who read the Bible was the righteous one, the one who had never read it was power-hungry, violent, and wanted to abuse the Bible.

I even liked it when Eli said, “some people thought that this book [the Bible] caused the war.”  He put a tiny emphasis on “some” and “thought,” enough of an emphasis to make a difference.

There were very interesting and genioius symbols strewn throughout the movie.  For example, when Carnegie’s main henchman, Redridge, dies, he dies on his knees, head bowed (prayer, anyone?).  Immediately before his death he has a repentance of sorts–he could kill Solara, but he simply steps out of the vehicle and dies peacefully.  Another example is the destination toward which Eli is headed to take the Bible: Alcatraz prison.  That made me recall the fact that Jesus came to save the sinners, the outcasts, and those with no hope.  Jesus takes the untouchables and uses them to spread the Kingdom.

Some would balk at what Carnegie says about the Bible: that it is an instrument of power, and those that wield it can control people like “sheep” by giving them a false hope.  That message makes me cringe too, but consider the source.  In the end, the movie itself was not endorsing that message.  If Eli had championed it, that would be different, but he stood for a completely different take on the Bible, and it is clear it’s his voice we’re supposed to pay heed to.

I don’t think any of those involved would profess Book of Eli to be a Christian movie, and it’s certainly not for everyone.  It does have many, many deep and thought provoking themes though.

Any of those who have seen it care to comment on it?

→ 1 CommentCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , ,

Can You Change Someone You Love?

January 31, 2010 · Leave a Comment

Can you change someone you love?

A friend of mine on Facebook brought up that question recently.  He saw a book at the store that gave a resounding “yes” answer to that question, so he took a picture and posted it on FB in order to ridicule the concept.  His answer was that it is “simply not possible.”

I know my friend’s hesitancy, for many who get into co-dependant relationships tend to think they can change their significant others.  How many times have we shaken our heads at the girl who gets involved with the loser man-boy because she thinks she can change him into husband material?  It is obvious to us that she is making a losing bet, but not so obvious to her (or maybe it is obvious to her but she’s just in major denial because the sex is good.).

There is another side to the question, however, that my friend and the others who commented on his status missed.   His words that changing someone you love is “not possible” reflects an overly individualistic attitude that is harmful if taken to its logical conclusion.

I replied to his status by noting how my wife has changed me for the better.  She loves me, and has spoken much grace, truth, and love into me, and has made me a better man.  Just the other night I sat and reflected with her on how her giving me grace and bearing with my follies has made me more patient.

What if I really believed that “changing someone you love isn’t possible?”  Chances are, I wouldn’t be open to her influence in my life.  I’d just focus on me improving me and I’d be totally oblivious to how her love could change me, and vice  versa.  It would be a shame if my wife bought into the slogan in question; she then wouldn’t be open to me speaking into her life.  What’s more, she wouldn’t try to influence me for the better, thus depriving me of much goodness and beauty.  If one of us believed, it would deprive us both.

There are many other relationships like this; for example, one job a dad has is to mold his sons into men of character and his daughters into women with inner beauty…in other words, he’s supposed to change them.

The point here is that if either person in a love relationship (friends, spouses, brothers and sisters, etc) buys into the slogan, it deprives both of much joy.

Somewhat ironically, “changing loved ones” is one motivating factor of interventions.  When an addict is out of control and won’t stop binging on his addiction, his loved ones often gather together, with a professional counselor, and stage one last attempt at stopping the destruction.  They all agree to stop enabling the addict and draw a line.  If the addict doesn’t agree to stop the behavior and seek professional help, there are often big consequences such as certain family members cutting off contact.   What else is all this if not an attempt to change the person they love?

Changing loved ones is also a concept built into the 12 steps.  I used to be a part of a 12 step group.  One of the practices built into the group was accountability relationships.  From time to time, the members of the group would make phone calls to “check in” with each other.  If the other person was about to break sobriety and engage in their addiction, the job of the other person on the line would be to talk them out of it.  If one person was rationalizing or making excuses, the other was not supposed to just go along with that: s/he was supposed to hold the other accountable.   Both myself and other guys in the group even, at times, arranged for the other group members to administer certain consequences and boundaries if we couldn’t keep straight.  This was all done with the prior agreement of all involved, but suffice it to say, we were all agents of change in the lives of the others in the group.

In sum, I can recognize my friend’s hesitancy.  There comes a point that if the other is resistant, it is best to let dead dogs lie.  However, contrary to what he said, change is certainly possible and, at times, it is necessary to strive for.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Scary Clown

January 26, 2010 · 1 Comment

Now this is funny!

→ 1 CommentCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: ,

Quote of the Day

January 25, 2010 · 2 Comments

“Saying ‘Preach the gospel, and if necessary, use words’ is like saying ‘tell me your phone number, and if necessary, use digits’ “~ J.D. Greear

I got into a bit of a row on Facebook about this one on Sunday.  St. Francis’ saying (“preach the gospel at all times.  If necessary, use words), is quite popular today.  Regardless of what St. Francis meant by it, many today use it to subtly drive a wedge between words and actions.  An undercurrent of the quote is that words aren’t necessary to “preach” the gospel.  Some pastors even use it to quietly discourage their congregation from sharing the gospel message with proclamation and discussion.  This, however, is neither biblical nor practical.

Think about it: did Jesus, the apostles, John the Baptist, the Church Fathers, or any New Testament or early church player live by this mantra?  One glance at the Bible and church history will tell you “no!”  They all used both in tandem, and they used them often.  What’s more, they took the initiative.  They didn’t keep silent for months and years and wait for someone to say “hey, there’s something different about you.”  They were up front and vocal about the saving message, in addition to doing good works.

Practically speaking, most folks, whether they go to church or not, aren’t going to “hear” the gospel just from your actions–if we define “action” as it is defined through the common modern-day interpretation of the St. Francis quote. If you just “live out the gospel with action” like that–say, you serve at a soup kitchen, do an AIDS walk, volunteer your time for troubled youth, etc–folks are more likely to think you are a Mormon than a Christian. Most Mormon folks I know are just that way–very nice, incredibly moral and loving, but not too keen on talking about Jesus/religion/spirituality with non-Mormons…they aren’t even that keen on talking about Joseph Smith (unless they are on their mission).

In short, “how will they *hear*, without someone *preaching* to them?” I know the word “preaching” is a 4 letter word today, but so what? Some might insist that you can preach or proclaim without words, but let’s get real.  Don’t even try to water down the meaning of that term to make it sound like doing social good works *alone* (key word…I’m not bashing on good works) is preaching.

Others will misconstrue my point by responding, “if you don’t back up your words with actions, your words are meaningless.”  This is true, but my point isn’t that actions aren’t necessary–they are. All those examples I gave above are excellent, God-honoring, and praiseworthy.  My point is that words are equally as necessary. One ought not split the two, and that’s what many try to do with St. Francis’ words.  Saying that words and actions are both important really shouldn’t be that controversial, but for some reason, it is so hard for many folks to simply admit.

→ 2 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , ,

Southern California Weather

January 24, 2010 · 2 Comments

There were some mighty big storms in Southern California this last week.  I know that the midwest and the southwest have a reputation of having the most severe weather, but folks miss the fact that So. Cal has its fair share of severe weather too.

I’ve included below a picture of some damage one particular storm caused last week to a home in San Diego.  It really makes you think and be thankful for what you have.

PS–the phote is quite graphic, so I’ve put some scrolling space in before the pic so you can hide the pics from any easily scared younguns.

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

→ 2 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , ,