The Grand Illusion...

Why Conservatives Have Lost Cultural and Political Ground to Liberals:

Conservatives accept the logically flawed premise that liberals employ. Consequently conservatives often end up not even arguing for their cause. Rather they get drawn down the rabbit hole of illusion which often helps advance the liberal argument and/or makes the conservative seem out of touch or incoherent. 
 
This tactic is successfully complete when conservatives actually adopt the liberal approach of using logical fallacies to construct and support their argument.
  

Atheism: Analytic Thinking Results in Qualified Belief, not Disbelief

It has become fashionable to assert that Atheism is simply a lack of belief. Of course position denies the definition of Atheism and skews the meaning of belief. I have included the definitions of these words at the end of the article for reference.

Analytic Thinking Results in Qualified Belief, not Disbelief

Disbelief is the result of "Intuitive″ type of thinking. Intuitive thinking is spontaneous, unreflective thinking which generally results in short, easy, binary answers like "Yes" or "No" to questions.

Belief is the result of "Analytic″ type of thinking. Analytical thinking is careful (suspicious due to skepticism), deliberative and reasoned thinking. Conclusions from this type of thinking result in qualified belief. 

People who initially answer questions in an intuitive mode, which is prone to easy binary answers, will say, "Yes" or "No." But when you engage their analytic traits, they will begin qualifying their response through a process of cognitive thinking or reasoning based upon a body of evidence whether seen or unseen. 

Consequently if an Atheist is going to present an intellectual argument, denying a supreme being or beings, they would be doing so from an analytic perspective which is grounded in qualified belief. Therefore, they too are subject to the same "burden of proof" as those they oppose. Otherwise there is no opposition and their entire argument fails by default. 

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. (Psalm 14: 1)

a·the·ism

noun

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.

2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

be-lief:

 noun

1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.

2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.

3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.

dis-belief:

 noun

1. the inability or refusal to believe or to accept something as true.

 February 18, 2016
Author: Brett Kunkle
Stand to Reason Ministries

On Sunday, I returned home from another Berkeley Mission trip, where I intentionally exposed high school students to some of my atheist friends in the Bay Area. For the last six months, we’ve taught apologetics to these high schoolers from Upland Christian Academy. Now it was time for them to “get off the sidelines and into the game” and engage non-Christians with the truth. Of course, my atheist friends are more than happy to oblige, so they meet with our missions teams, challenge them with a short lecture, and then dive into some rigorous dialogue.

Without fail, a couple of our atheist guests will contend, “Religion is the cause of most wars.” This cultural mantra has been uttered so often and with so much force, it has come to be accepted as an undeniable declaration. Prominent atheists like Sam Harris contribute to the chorus of voices, arguing religion is “the most prolific source of violence in our history” (The End of Faith page 27). Richard Dawkins claims, “There’s no doubt that throughout history religious faith has been a major motivator for war and for destruction.”

But as we trained students for this trip, we equipped them with a simple question to expose such claims: “How did you come to that conclusion?” (also known as Columbo Question #2). We simply taught students to recognize when someone makes a claim and then to request their supporting reasons. When our atheist presenters were challenged to provide justification, they could only offer up the Crusades, the Inquisition, 9-11, or vague references to Islamic terrorism. Certainly we recognize religion’s role in these examples, but three or four references cannot support the claim that most wars are caused by religion.

Not only were students able to demonstrate the paucity of evidence for this claim, but we helped them discover that the facts of history show the opposite: religion is the cause of a very small minority of wars. Phillips and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars lays out the simple facts. They examined 5 millennia worth of wars—1,763 total—and found that only 123 (or about 7%) were “religious in nature.” If you remove the 66 wars waged in the name of Islam, it cuts the number down to a little more than 3%. A second scholarly source, The Encyclopedia of War edited by Gordon Martel, confirms this data, concluding that only 6% of the wars listed in its pages can be labelled religious wars. Thirdly, William Cavanaugh’s book, The Myth of Religious Violence, exposes the “wars of religion” claim. And finally, a recent report (2014) from the Institute for Economics and Peace further debunks this myth.

We didn’t stop there. We showed students it gets worse for the atheists’ claim. A strong case can be made that atheism, not religion, and certainly not Christianity, is responsible for a far greater degree of bloodshed. Indeed, R.J. Rummel’s work in Lethal Politics and Death by Government has the secular body count at more than 100 million...in the 20th century alone.

Our students were able to see that a simple examination of the facts relieves religion from blame for most of the world’s wars. In addition, we were able to help cultivate in students a healthy skepticism of atheistic claims. If the skeptic will shout such an unsubstantiated claim so loudly and with so much force, what other skeptical claims might quickly fall apart under rational scrutiny? 

Pulpits Are Silent

Jeremiah 5:26-31

For wicked men are found among my people; they lurk like fowlers lying in wait. They set a trap; they catch men. Like a cage full of birds, their houses are full of deceit; therefore they have become great and rich; they have grown fat and sleek. They know no bounds in deeds of evil; they judge not with justice the cause of the fatherless, to make it prosper, and they do not defend the rights of the needy. Shall I not punish them for these things? declares the Lord, and shall I not avenge myself on a nation such as this?” An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land: the prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule at their direction; my people love to have it so, but what will you do when the end comes?

Despite what the political parties would like you to believe, the problem in America is not the politicians, it is the pulpits. I hate to break the news to you, but most of America’s pulpits are filled with cowardly men unwilling to address the issues that have swept over our country like a tidal wave.

I am about fed-up with what I see. How did we ever get such man-pleasing leaders? All that our fore-fathers held dear is being destroyed before our very eyes and hardly a peep from the pulpit. They don’t want to hear it. It's the pulpiteers that I am talking about. They are concerned with being too harsh, they tell me that “Jesus is in control,” that they are not “called” to fight evil and that "we should pray for our enemies.”

What we need is a return of the Voice of God thundering through the prophets standing in America’s pulpits. Not the prissy purpose driven therapeutic Christianity drivel passing as the Gospel today. Few of the feminized-preachers of the day can hold a candle to those who ushered in The Great Awakening which led to the American Revolution, and the abolition of slavery -- two world-changing events spearheaded by the pulpit.

·         Public schools are destroying the faith of Christian children and the pulpits are silent.

·         Legislation is introduced to remove the rights of parents and the pulpits are silent.

·         Children are taught they came from apes and the pulpits are silent.

·         Millions of children are “medicated” to control their behavior and the pulpits are silent.

·         Gambling is promoted to pay for schools and the pulpit is silent.

·         Precious babies are being murdered in the womb and the pulpits are silent.

·         Planned Parenthood kills babies with our tax dollars and the pulpits are silent.

·         Judges make laws and the pulpits are silent.

·         Tolerance trumps Truth and the pulpits are silent.

·         Sodomy is granted legal protection and the pulpits are silent.

·         The institution of marriage is crumbling and the pulpits are silent.

·         Obama says the Sermon on the Mount justifies gay marriage and the pulpits are silent.

·         Government has replaced God as defender and provider and the pulpits are silent.

·         Faith-based initiatives invite the government into the Church and the pulpits are silent.

·         The IRS muzzles the voice of the Church and the pulpits are silent.

·         Taxes are levied to do the work of the Church and the pulpits are silent.

·         The Church locks arms with compassionate-conservativism and the pulpits are silent.

·         Children’s service agencies separate family members and the pulpits are silent.

·         Self-help books replace the Bible and the pulpits are silent.

·         A Purpose Driven Life is elevated above dying to self and the pulpits are silent.

·         Leaders say Christians and Muslims worship the same God and the pulpits are silent.

·         The Constitution is ignored and the pulpits are silent.

·         Pagans pray to open a session of Congress and the pulpits are silent.

·         Our elected officials lie and steal and the pulpits are silent.

·         Private property is stolen by government and the pulpits are silent.

·         Mother Earth is protected more than Father God is defended and the pulpits are silent.

·         Illegal aliens over-run our borders and the pulpits are silent.

·         The entertainment industry celebrates debauchery and the pulpits are silent.

Learning from Young Atheists

Learning from Young Atheists

What Turned Them off Christianity

By: Eric Metaxas|Published: July 1, 2013

 

Have you ever asked a young atheist why he or she doesn’t believe? Well, one researcher did. And the answers may surprise you.

 

It’s something most Christian parents worry about: You send your kids off to college and when they come back, you find they’ve lost their faith. The prospect of this happening is why many parents nudge their kids towards Christian colleges, or at least schools with a strong Christian presence on campus.

But in many ways, the damage has been done long before our children set foot on campus. That’s the message from a recent article in the Atlantic Monthly.

My friend Larry Taunton of the Fixed Point Foundation set out to find out why so many young Christians lose their faith in college. He did this by employing a method I don’t recall being used before: He asked them.

The Fixed Point Foundation asked members of the Secular Students Associations on campuses around the nation to tell them about their “journey to unbelief.” Taunton was not only surprised by the level of response but, more importantly, about the stories he and his colleagues heard.

Instead of would-be Richard Dawkins’, the typical respondent was more like Phil, a student Taunton interviewed. Phil had grown up in church; he had even been the president of his youth group. What drove Phil away wasn’t the lure of secular materialism or even Christian moral teaching. And he was specifically upset when his church changed youth pastors.

Whereas his old youth pastor “knew the Bible” and made Phil “feel smart” about his faith even when he didn’t have all the answers, the new youth pastor taught less and played more.

Phil’s loss of faith coincided with his church’s attempt to ingratiate itself to him instead of challenging him. According to Taunton, Phil’s story “was on the whole typical of the stories we would hear from students across the country.”

These kids had attended church but “the mission and message of their churches was vague,” and manifested itself in offering “superficial answers to life’s difficult questions.” The ministers they respected were those “who took the Bible seriously,” not those who sought to entertain them or be their “buddy.”

Taunton also learned that, for many kids, their journey to unbelief was an emotional, not just an intellectual one.

Taunton’s findings are counter-intuitive. Much of what passes for youth ministry these days is driven by a morbid fear of boring our young charges. As a result, a lot of time is spent trying to devise ways to entertain them.

The rest of the time is spent worrying about whether the Christian message will turn kids off. But as Taunton found, young people, like the not-so-young, respect people with conviction—provided they know what they’re talking about.

Taunton talks about his experiences with the late Christopher Hitchens, who, in their debates, refrained from attacking him. When asked why, Hitchens replied, “Because you believe it.”

I don’t know what that says about Hitchens’ other Christian debate partners, but it is a potent reminder that playing down the truth claims of the Christian faith doesn’t work. People don’t believe those they don’t respect.

Here’s something that one of the students told Larry Taunton; he said, “Christianity is something that if you really believed it, it would change your life and you would want to change [the lives] of others. I haven’t seen too much of that.”

Folks, that’s pretty sobering. This puts the ball in our court. Are we living lives that show our children that we actually believe what we say we believe? And here’s another question—do we actually believe it? I have to say, as a parent I’m taking this very seriously. If possible, join me in reading Taunton’s excellent article. Come to BreakPoint.org  for other resources to equip young adults to contend for the faith.

My Apology to Mormon Readers

Mike Adams | Jun 05, 2013

Dear Stacey:

You have written demanding an apology for my recent characterization of the Mormon religion as "non-Christian." I am happy to write a public letter of apology to you and to the countless Mormon readers who responded negatively to my characterization.

I am sorry that so many of my Mormon readers have brazenly accused me of ignorance of their religion and suggested that I read the Book of Mormon. I am sorry that they were unaware that I read the Book of Mormon back in 2006.

I am sorry that the science of genetics has refuted claims made in the Book of Mormon concerning the relationship between Native Americans and Semitic people. These refutations undermine the entire historical premise of the Book of Mormon.

I am also sorry that while archeological discovery supports the claims of the Bible it clearly does not support the claims of the Book of Mormon. Battles that were supposed to have occurred in specific locations in North America simply never took place. The archeological evidence just isn't there.

I am sorry about the plagiarism of the Holy Bible that runs through the Book of Mormon. I am sorry that Mormons cannot see that Joseph Smith's refusal to reveal the golden tablets is strong evidence of their nonexistence. The heavy plagiarism in the Book of Mormon puts the lie to the rest of the story of Smith, the former seeker of the lost treasures of Captain Kidd.

I am sorry that my Mormon readers have put all their eggs in one basket by constantly writing to me quoting Matthew 7:16. So I am sorry that I must now apply that verse to the very first Mormon.

I am sorry that among the 33 well-documented plural wives of Joseph Smith, there were close to a dozen unions in which the wife was already married to another man.

I am sorry that in his lifetime, Joseph Smith married four different pairs of sisters. I am sorry that Joseph Smith married a young woman and also married her mother.

I am sorry that some of Joseph Smith's marriages were the result of religious coercion secured only after he told the prospective bride that marrying him would ensure the bride’s place in heaven. I am sorry that Smith also coerced teenagers into marrying him by promising their families a place in heaven.

I am sorry that Joseph Smith kept fourteen-year-old Helen Mar Kimball from marrying her sweetheart Horace Whitney because he wanted to marry the teenager instead. I am sorry that Joseph Smith also asked Helen’s father Heber C. Kimball to give him his wife.

I am sorry that before he eventually married Helen, Joseph Smith gave her a 24-hour deadline to give in to his offer of a place in heaven. I am sorry that two years after the death of Joseph Smith, Helen married her old sweetheart Horace Whitney. I am sorry that the marriage between Helen and Horace was only temporary because Helen was already "sealed" by marriage to Joseph Smith for eternity. I am sorry that Horace Whitney was "sealed" to an already dead Mormon woman before his “temporary” marriage to Helen.

I am sorry that after her mother died, Joseph Smith approached teenager Lucy Walker with a command that she marry Smith with the threat of eternal damnation as the punishment if she refused. I am sorry that the year before Joseph Smith died, he said the following to Lucy: “I will give you until tomorrow to decide (whether to marry me). If you reject this message the gate will be closed forever against you.”

I am sorry that the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith claims to have transcribed from the golden plates given to him by the Angel Moroni, says the following: “Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, Saith the Lord.” (Jacob 2:24).

I am sorry that Joseph Smith said the following shortly before his death: "(W)hen I get my kingdom, I shall present it to my father, so that he may obtain kingdom among kingdom, and it will exalt him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take his place, and thereby become exalted myself.”

I am sorry that Smith’s polytheism is not consistent with John 14:6. I am also sorry that since these are the words of Christ, polytheism cannot be Christian. Moreover, I am sorry, my Mormon friends, but the the words of Christ trump the words of Joseph Smith who will never be God.

I am sorry that Mormonism teaches that Christ was not there in the beginning, that god was just a man who became God by following a moral code he did not create, and that we may all become gods by following the same moral code that predates the existence of Jesus. I am sorry that the theological mess caused by Joseph Smith is irreconcilable with the teachings of the Holy Bible.

Finally, I am sorry that my Mormon readers have unfairly accused me of criticizing Mormonism without doing my homework. But I am glad I did. Now I understand the significance of Galatians 1:6-9.

A Savage Attack

Redefining Bullying By: Eric Metasxas

A few days ago, Americans got a lesson in hypocrisy -- and of how dangerous it can be to redefine words.

It all began when the National High School Journalism Conference invited a gay rights activist named Dan Savage to speak to students in Seattle about the need to prevent bullying. But it turned out that this was a lesson Savage badly needed to learn himself.

To the shock of the students, Savage launched a vicious attack on the Bible and Christian beliefs. As he put it, “We can learn to ignore the [BS] in the Bible about gay people.” Of course he didn’t say "BS." As Savage continued his attack, some students broke into tears. Dozens of offended students walked out of the auditorium. As they left, Savage heckled them with vulgar words I can’t repeat on the air.

One of the teachers present — Rick Tuttle of Sutter Union High School in California — said the speech “took a real dark, hostile turn ... It became very hostile toward Christianity.”

Savage later apologized for using vulgarity to describe the students. But he refused to back down on his other comments —including his offensive comments about the Bible.

Now, what are we to make of this conundrum?

First, I think we can safely assume that the term “bullying” has gone the way of “tolerance.”

Tolerance used to be defined as a willingness to put up with the beliefs or practices of those with whom we disagree. Today, tolerance means we must accept the beliefs and practices of others as correct — or risk being called a bigot. It's interesting that this redefinition of tolerance almost always involves debates over homosexuality — and it always seems to be people on just one side of the debate calling those with whom they disagree “intolerant.”

I mean, when was the last time you heard a Christian accusing a gay-rights activist of intolerance because he refused to acknowledge that biblical teachings about homosexuality are correct?

And now we're seeing the same kind of redefinition going on regarding the word bullying. If you so much as whisper that you believe that true marriage can take place only between one man and one woman, you're accused of bullying.

You and I need to be aware of changes in word definitions that are used as weapons against Christians. But we need to do a couple of other things, as well.

First of all, whatever the subject, we must always take care to make our case winsomely, and with great civility. No one should ever be able to truthfully accuse Christians of bullying, including the kind of verbal bullying Dan Savage demonstrated last week.

This insistence on graciousness and civility for those on the other side of these issues was the hallmark of what Chuck Colson believed, and let it be ours as well.  As for intolerance towards homosexuals, Christians ought to be — and often have been — the first to volunteer at AIDS hospices, to demonstrate kindness to the children of same-sex couples, and otherwise display the love of Christ to those with whom we have such different views. In other words, we should demonstrate love and true tolerance. In this way, as the Bible teaches, we heap ashes upon the heads of those who dislike us for our views.

Second we need to pray for people like Dan Savage — so filled with anger and hurt — that their eyes would be opened to God's love and mercy, just as we pray for our own loved ones.

Finally, three cheers for those high school students who refused to sit still and listen to attacks on their faith. We should never be bullied into silence.

By What Standard?

A few years ago, a documentary called Collision was made where Douglas Wilson debated Christopher Hitchens on Is Christianity Good for the World? Hundreds of hours of footage was shot and edited down to 90 minutes of solid debate and conversation. The clip you see above didn't make into that 90 minutes. Consider it deleted scenes. This is the first time it's being released, and we have it here for you to learn what it means and looks like to make a defense for your faith.


Notes from Douglas Wilson

Wyoming Supreme Court: Ban on abortion protest unconstitutional

BEN NEARY  Associated Press

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — A state court order that barred abortion protesters from appearing at Jackson's town square last year violated the protesters' constitutional rights, the Wyoming Supreme Court ruled Tuesday [April 10, 2012].

In a lengthy 3-2 decision, the state Supreme Court ruled the temporary restraining order issued by District Judge Timothy Day violated the First Amendment rights of protesters with the group Operation Save America.

Dozens of members of Operation Save America, based in Concord, N.C., descended on Jackson last May with graphic signs of aborted fetuses that they showed around town.

The group said it picked Jackson for its campaign in an effort to make Wyoming the first state in which no doctors would provide abortions. The group targeted a family practitioner whom it said was the only doctor in the state to offer abortions.

The restraining order that Jackson secured from Day last year barred the protesters from appearing within two blocks of the town square. The town's lawyer told Day that city police feared violence if the protesters came together with about 200 Boy Scouts and their families who were gathering for Elkfest, an annual auction of elk antlers.

The protesters weren't alerted beforehand that the town was seeking the court order.

"Assuming the town had established a compelling interest in the protection of its youth and in maintaining the peace, we would nonetheless find the temporary restraining order unconstitutional," Justice Michael Golden wrote for the court majority. "The town has not met its burden of establishing that the temporary restraining order ban was necessary to serve the town's interest and that less restrictive measures would not have been adequate."

Chief Justice Marilyn S. Kite and Justice William U. Hill wrote a dissent saying they believed the case was moot and that the constitutionality question shouldn't have reached the court.

"No evidence was presented in this case that Operation Save America will return to Jackson and attempt to assemble or display posters during another scheduled event such as the Boy Scouts expo and auction or, in the event it does, that the town will again file for a temporary restraining order without providing notice and an opportunity to be heard," Kite and Hill stated.

Rusty Thomas of Waco, Texas, is assistant director of operations for Operation Save America. He said Tuesday his group intends to return to Jackson next month. "I just got the news, and just tears of rejoicing," he said of the court ruling. "The timing is incredible."

Thomas said the group believes the ruling "strikes a blow for liberty and puts our government, both the federal and state authorities, on notice that the First Amendment is alive and well in the United States of America."

Flip Benham, director of Operation Save America in Concord, said Tuesday the group has applied to the town of Jackson for permits to hand out materials next month but hasn't received them yet.

"What they've done is put us off. They've said they're going through new criteria for permits," Benham said. He said the group's experience in Jackson was the first time it has ever been restrained "from presenting the gospel."

Attempts to reach town officials were not immediately successful Tuesday.

Audrey Cohen-Davis, lawyer for the town, argued before the Wyoming Supreme Court in November that it was proper for the town to secure the restraining order.

"Parents taking their Boy Scouts to the Elkfest event did not expect to have a group subjecting their children to such material," Cohen-Davis said in November.

Jack Edwards, a lawyer in Etna, represented Operation Save America.

"I think it's important to realize that the First Amendment, and the cases from the U.S. Supreme Court that have interpreted that amendment, were not to protect speech that people welcome and that people enjoy, but the basis for that amendment is to protect speech that causes arguments and dissent in the public square," Edwards said Tuesday.

The state supreme court ruling comes just days after the state of Wyoming reached a settlement with another anti-abortion group, WyWatch Family Action.

In the agreement approved last week by U.S. District Judge Nancy Freudenthal of Cheyenne, Wyoming admitted it violated WyWatch's constitutional rights by removing anti-abortion placards from a tunnel leading to the state Capitol during last year's legislative session.

The state agreed to pay WyWatch $1 in nominal damages and $30,000 in attorney fees. WyWatch was represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a national advocacy group for social conservatives.

Freudenthal allowed the American Civil Liberties Union to enter the WyWatch case to argue on the group's behalf that the state had violated the group's constitutional rights. Linda Burt, director of the Wyoming ACLU, said Tuesday that the courts decided both cases correctly by protecting public speech.

"While we disagree with both of the organizations involved in these cases, we firmly respect their right to discuss these issues in the public square," Burt said. "The remedy for speech that you disagree with is more speech, and more debate and more information, and disallowing this kind of speech that you disagree with does not support that."

Related: Original story

Changing Culture

By T.M. Moore

Christians are rightly concerned about the state of culture in our day. The fear is that, as the culture continues its decline into mere sensuality and self-indulgence, it will drag our children and us down with it.

Which makes it appropriate to ask, Are you changing culture, or is culture changing you?

For the followers of Christ there is no middle ground. We're either actively engaged in bringing the reality of God's Kingdom to light amid the cultural contexts of our lives, or we're allowing those cultural contexts to dim or obscure the light of Christ. Either the light of Christ in us is shining in the culture, or the bushel basket of the culture is turned upside-down over our heads.

All of us spend our lives in a variety of cultural settings. Our Personal Mission Fields unfold within the various cultural spheres in which we live and work. Every cultural setting is characterized by norms, protocols, and practices which embody the values and priorities of those spheres. What messages do the cultural spheres of our lives proclaim?

The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it. Thus, we who are ambassadors of Christ and His Kingdom have a responsibility to bring the manifestation of that Kingdom to light wherever we occupy space for the Lord. Our Kingdom citizenship should make a difference - in our homes, schools, work places, communities, and the like – showing that we are there, living for Christ and seeking to take every thought captive and make it obedient to Him (Matt. 5:13-16; 2 Cor. 10:3-5).

The way things ought to be

Changing the culture in which we travel is a high calling and ongoing task. Can you envision ways the cultural arenas of your life would be different if they were wholly devoted to Christ and His Kingdom? If things were more the way we think they ought to be, what would that look like?

Cultivating a vision for transforming culture is the starting-place for this work, and Scripture is the place to turn for nurturing such a vision. By learning the Biblical meaning of such concepts as beauty, goodness, and truth, and then by envisioning the outworking of those concepts in our various cultural spheres, we can begin to get an idea of where we might establish goals and objectives for our own work in changing the culture around us.

"Culture" is not some abstract, far-off idea which is only amenable to shaping by academics and "cultural types." We are all involved in culture, all the time - using it, making it, and either shaping or being shaped by it. We can't escape culture, and we must not allow culture to define the values and practices of our lives. Instead, we need to take up the challenge of changing culture, in as many ways as we can to reflect the beauty of Christ, the goodness of God, and the truth of His Word.

If our culture is not the way we think it ought to be, then we can do something about that.

Culture - along with the people in our lives - is where the cutting edge of the Kingdom engages the world, through each of our lives. God is determined to bring His Kingdom to light on earth as it is in heaven, and we are the tools of His Spirit for sculpting, crafting, and creating a new world for the glory of God.

We don’t have to let the culture change us or our children. If we will sharpen our culture-making skills and take up the daily challenge of shaping the world, we might begin to see our culture start to reflect the reality of Christ's rule.

Christians are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. These are transforming attributes which bring wholesomeness and goodness to the world. Believe this, and act on it, and you may be surprised to see what God is able to do through you in bringing the light of Christ to your world.

If we’re not changing the culture in which we participate, shaping it in the ways of beauty, goodness, and truth, then we’re probably being shaped by the culture according to its own vision of the way things ought to be.

Change the culture, or be changed by it. You’re making that choice every day.

Can it be Christianity without the Church?

 By Chuck Colson|Published Date: March 26, 2012

This BreakPoint commentary was published October 1992.

Americans today hold a paradoxical attitude toward religion: Polls show a rise in people's interest in religion--but at the same time there's a decline in church membership.

This appears to be a contradiction.

But the explanation is simple: A lot of people think they can have religion without the church. The baby-boomers have given up their beads and guitars, but they still harbor a deep distrust toward institutions--including organized religion. 81 percent say they can find their own religious truth apart from the church.

Many Christians--especially evangelicals--see their faith primarily in individualistic terms, as the gospel of "Jesus and me."

It's true, of course, that the gospel begins by restoring our relationship with God. But that's only the beginning.
Listen to what Jesus said about the church. In Matthew 16, He asked his disciples, "Who do you think I am?" Peter burst out, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." It was a confession of faith inspired directly by the Holy Spirit.

But notice Jesus' response. He did not say, "Peter, that's wonderful. Go your way and have an abundant life." No, immediately Jesus announced that He would establish His church--a new society of people who share Peter's confession.

What does it mean to be part of this new society? Do we just join the neighborhood church?

No, when we become Christians, we first become part of what theologians call the church universal: the whole body of believers throughout the ages and across the globe, of every nation and color.

This universal body is broken down, however, into smaller units--the church particular. This is where the work of the church is done: preaching the Word, making disciples, and administering the sacraments.

You can think of it like an army. At first, army recruits are an untrained mass. Then they are clustered into training units to learn the skills of warfare. Later they are stationed into divisions. Finally, when the army is fully deployed, it is able to carry out its task.

It's the same way with God's people. Every Christian is a member of the church universal, which reigns invisibly in the hearts of all true believers. But to make that church visible to the world, we unite with other Christians into smaller units.

That means, for example, a local congregation; it may also include command structures, like denominations; it may include special training forces, like Prison Fellowship, to equip the church's fighting units.

Once we see this bigger picture, it becomes obvious that membership in a local church is not optional; it's the very essence of what it means to be a Christian.

This has to be the answer we give to those who say it doesn't matter whether you belong to a church--the advice we give to friends who are church-hopping. As I write in my new book The Body, a casual attitude toward the church is the central reason we Christians have so little influence in society.

Sucked in by the individualism of the age, we undermining the very instrument God has chosen to witness His kingdom to the world.

Fillet of Faith

Do You Really Believe?
By: Chuck Colson|Published: March 21, 2012

 The militant atheism behind this month’s upcoming “Reason Rally” on the Mall in D.C. isn’t the only flavor of skepticism these days. In fact, instead of blaming people of faith for the woes of the world, some atheists now are actually speaking out on behalf of religion. But their reasons for doing so are as different as one could imagine.

Alain de Botton, the famous British atheist who challenged Richard Dawkins’s “destructive” attacks on religion, says society needs faith. Now there’s a “man-bites-dog” story.

De Botton explained in a recent interview: “[M]y argument is that…religion is full of useful, interesting . . . consoling ideas that could…appeal even to someone who has…no interest in being a believer.”

In his book, Religion for Atheists, de Botton insists that churches and other places of worship are just some of the many elements of religion unbelievers must incorporate into their lives if secularism is to survive. And he’s proving how serious he is by sponsoring an atheist “temple” in London, a place he says is designed “for ‘love, friendship, calm and perspective.’”

Now, love, friendship, calm, and perspective are all fine things, but how do you get the fruits of religion without the religion itself?

Coincidentally, de Botton’s views sound like an echo of another voice here in the States — retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong, a man whose views place him squarely outside Christian orthodoxy. Spong took to the airwaves last month to promote his new book, in which he argues that Scripture was never meant to be read literally. Letting go of rigid doctrines like the Virgin Birth and Divinity of Christ, he says, are necessary if Christians hope to “stop the exodus of people from religion.”

In fact, he says, fundamentalists who get distracted by debates over abortion, homosexuality, and birth control are missing the point just as badly as atheists who reject faith completely.

Well, as nice as it seems that some atheists are favorably disposed toward religion, they can’t have it both ways. In fact, another atheist, who is a homosexual rights advocate in Britain, thinks de Botton and Spong’s ideas are both ridiculous. And he’s right! In a recent Spectator column, Matthew Parris calls religious believers to wake up and realize that their “faith is being defended by the wrong people, in the wrong way.” He warns us: “Beware…the patronage of unbelievers. They want your religion as a social institution, filleted of true faith.”

“To those who truly believe,” he writes, “the implicit message beneath ‘never mind if it’s true, religion is good for people’ is insulting.”

According to Parris, the only valid reason to believe the religion of Jesus Christ is if it’s true! And if it is true, he says, “it must have the most profound consequences for a man and for mankind.”

I couldn’t have said it better myself. Nor could I have more accurately summed up the core message of BreakPoint: The Christian worldview claims to explain and embrace all of reality. It makes hard-and-fast truth claims. And — as another one-time atheist, C. S. Lewis, argued — does not leave us the option of reducing Christ or the Bible to being “good moral teachers.”
No, religion is only “useful” or “consoling” insofar as it is true. And Christianity, unlike others, is both because it is.

Lost Episode for January 23

Watchman On The Wall

In a letter to fellow Founding Father John Adams on January 23, 1807, Benjamin Rush wrote:

“By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects. Our Saviour in speaking of it calls it the “Truth” in the abstract. It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published. It contains a faithful representation of all its follies, vices, and crimes. All systems of religion, morals, and government not founded upon it must perish, and how consoling the thought – it will not only survive the wreck of these systems but the world itself. ‘The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.’ [Matthew 16:18]*

Founder Benjamin Rush’s belief that the Bible is an essential foundation for enduring government is a lost episode in American history.

*Source Citation: L.H. Butterfield, ed., Letters of Benjamin Rush, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1951), 2:936. Bracketed item added.

According to the Scriptures

Legacy Moment | Crawford Loritts
1 Cor. 15:3-4

Recently I had a conversation with some friends. We were talking about how important it is to believe that the Bible is the Word of God, that it’s the final authority for how we live and what we do with our life. It’s without error. Not everyone who claims to be a Christian believes that. In the course of the conversation, I made reference to a seminary I know about. They teach people how to be preachers and Bible teachers, and they release people to Christian service. But a few faculty members are post-Christian. They would say they’ve grown beyond the need to believe that the Bible is the Word of God. They embrace other teachings, even though they might contradict the Bible. They’re post-Christian.

Well, it’s not popular to say this in our relativistic culture, but not everybody can be right. The claims of Jesus Christ are not merely warm sentiments and optional perspectives. The Gospel is not advice to be considered, it is objective Truth to be believed.

That was the Apostle Paul’s passion when he penned these words in 1 Corinthians chapter 15 verses 3 and 4; “…I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”
Notice: Paul appeals to authority, and his appeal to authority is nothing less than to the Word of God. He says, “I’m not giving you ideas, I’m not giving you my truth, I’m not giving you my insight. What I’m telling you is anchored to the Truth.”

Here’s what I want you to remember today. It matters a great deal whether or not we believe the Bible is the Word of God. It’s the difference between a life-changing message and merely good-but-impotent advice.

The Lie, Now and Then

Nothing Left to Say
By T. M. Moore | Published Date: December 06, 2011

“And the LORD said to Satan, 'The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you!'”  - Zechariah 3:2

We have seen that both David and Paul acknowledged a day when lies would be widespread among the human community. They also saw the reign of the Lie to be a short-lived phenomenon. David insisted that all those who speak lies will be stopped (Ps. 63:11), and Paul, echoing that, promised that those who reject the Truth of God will not continue to make progress (2 Tim. 3:9).

We should take great comfort in these words, because the epidemic of lies with which our world is presently infected is wreaking havoc in the affairs of people and nations.

We need to ask ourselves whether we actually believe this. The Word of God says it – and not just in these two passages. In various places the Scriptures indicate that those who traffic in lies will not be able to stand against the Truth as it marches on through the ministries of the Church. Here is just a sample: God promises to bring the plans and schemes of the nations to naught (Ps. 33:10). His glory and the testimony of His children will still His enemies (Ps. 8:2). God will shut the mouths of all wicked people (Ps. 107:42) and all who practice injustice (Job 5:16). He puts to silence every sinful mouth before the testimony of His Law (Rom. 3:19). He raises up church leaders to stop the mouths of those who traffic in lies (Titus 1:7, 8).

What the Scriptures promise throughout is symbolized in Zechariah’s vision in chapter 3 of his book. The prophet saw the High Priest and Ruler of God’s people – named, “Joshua” or “Jesus” – being condemned by Satan because He was dressed in filthy garments in the presence of the Holy God. Here is the tale of the ages: the father of lies railing against the very embodiment of Truth. This is the very essence of the Lie – the denial of validity to the Truth of God.

But those filthy garments which Zechariah saw are our sins. Jesus bore them in His own body before the Father. His sacrifice accepted, He was clothed in proper garments of righteousness, and Satan was commanded to shut up and was sent packing.

The righteousness of Jesus Christ is the ammunition we need to stop the mouths of liars. As we read in Matthew 22:46, once Jesus established His deity, sovereignty, and coming Kingdom, on the authority of God’s Word, all those who had to that point opposed him publicly and outspokenly were no longer able to answer Him and had nothing left to say. From that point on they would turn to violence rather than words.

It was the testimony of Jesus and His power to make all things new that Peter and John proclaimed before the religious leaders of their day, leaving those enemies of Christ with nothing left to say (Acts 4). The salvation of Jesus Christ – His forgiveness, holiness, transforming grace and power – lived out and declared by His people, is the power of God for salvation, the power to stop the Lie and lead men into the light of Truth. And while we do not expect a complete vanquishing of the Lie here and now, we do expect to see real progress of the Truth; moreover, we know that a day is coming, then and there, when all lies and liars will be eternally banished from the presence of God.

It is toward that far horizon that we are called to strive against the Lie in all our daily activities.

Download the series "Nothing Left to Say." Click here:  Nothing Left to Say

Explaining Altruism

By T. M. Moore
Researchers are trying to explain the source of altruistic behavior. Why do human beings do good to one another?

Evolutionary thinkers all the way back to Darwin have struggled to account for this very un-evolutionary behavior. Why should we care when people suffer and die? What causes us to rush all kinds of aid and assistance to people in need? Isn’t survival of the fittest supposed to be our watchword and rallying cry?

As Alice G. Walton explained, writing at The Atlantic website, altruism “doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since we’re all out to preserve ourselves – and our genes. There must be something else going on.”

Something else, indeed, but something which, thus far has defied scientific explanations.
Evolutionists used to believe there was something communal about altruism, that people cared for one another, and even strangers, because it helped ensure the viability of the local gene pool. This theory, pioneered by E. O. Wilson almost a generation ago, had become accepted as a “good enough” explanation for altruism.

Until, that is, Dr. Wilson repudiated his own theory last summer, only to be vilified by many of his peers.

Ms. Walton reports on research with children which demonstrates that altruism may be something inherently human. Children, it seems, are capable of altruistic behavior before they’ve ever even learned the word or have an opportunity to think about what it means or requires of them. “Researchers,” she explains, “have recently demonstrated that altruism and fairness appear to develop, perhaps simultaneously, from an incredibly early age.”

But they still don’t know where the behavior comes from, whether it’s innate – which seems likely, but why? – or learned. Many kids just seem to show generosity and even sacrifice because, well, it’s the thing to do, I guess.

The Biblical view of humankind explains this. We are made in the image of God, and we have the works of His Law written on our hearts. The Law of God instructs us to love our neighbors as ourselves. We are our brother’s keeper, and we know thus just because of the kind of beings we are.
Now evolutionary researchers aren’t likely to accept that opinion. They will continue looking for other explanations for altruistic behavior, but it doesn’t matter. Even if they find a particular altruism gene which incites this kind of behavior, they will still have to explain how such a development fits within an evolutionary life framework.

And that will just require a lot more research.

Sooner or later, as the evidence continues to build across a wide range of disciplines and topics, advocates of an evolutionary worldview are going to have to explain why their view of life explains so little and the Biblical view explains so much.

And that’ll take some serious ‘splainin.

Dual Commissions

Evangelizing and Engaging Culture
By: Chuck Colson
It’s not an either-or situation. It’s a both-and. I’m talking about fulfilling the Great Commission and the Cultural Commission.

A few years ago, I spoke to a gathering of pastors about engaging the cultural battles of the day. Afterward, the pastors had a lot of questions — but they were also a little confused. One confessed, “I’d never heard of the Cultural Commission, and will it interfere with fulfilling the Great Commission? Isn't that our job — to win people to Christ?"

That people still think this way left me momentarily speechless. "Of course we're called to fulfill the Great Commission," I replied. "We're also called to fulfill the Cultural Commission." Christians are agents of God's saving grace — bringing others to Christ. But we are also agents of His common grace: We're to sustain and renew His creation, defend the created institutions of family and society, and critique false worldviews.

I saw this was an “Aha!” moment for some of the pastors.

But the Scriptures are so clear. In Genesis, we're told that for five days, God created the universe. On the sixth day, He created human beings — and ordered them to pick up where He left off. They were to reflect His image and have dominion, but from then on, the development of the creation would be primarily social and cultural: It would be the work humans performed as they obeyed God's command to fill and subdue the earth.

The same command binds Christians today. We bear children, plant crops, build cities, form governments, and create works of art. While sin corrupted God's created order, it did not obliterate it. And when we are redeemed, we are both freed from sin and restored to do what God designed us to do: create culture.

Remember, every part of creation came from God's hand, every part was drawn into the mutiny of humanity against God, and every part will someday be redeemed. This means we must care about all of life. In Colossians 1, Paul notes that "everything" was made by and for Christ, and that everything will be reconciled by Christ; it's clear that Christians are saved not only from something (sin) but also to something (Christ's lordship over all of life).

This is why Christians must never limit themselves to evangelism alone or to the "feel good" church. We must not stand by while our culture is hijacked by alien philosophies hostile to the created order. Look at the issues before us: so called gay "marriage,” which is an oxymoron and will undermine the family; then there’s the creation of life in man's image, that is, cloning; abortion; and terrorism driven by religious extremists, and that’s just naming a few.

If Christians do not seize the moment and act on the cultural commission, there soon won’t be any culture left to save. But when we do our duty, we can change the world. Look at Christians like William Wilberforce, who spent most of his life fighting — and winning — the war against slavery in Britain, and bringing about a great cultural renewal in that country.

Today on my “Two-Minute Warning,” which I urge you to view at ColsonCenter.org, I talk about a church that really gets it. It’s growing rapidly, and it’s fulfilling both commissions. It’s the Watermark (Community) Church in Dallas, Texas; the pastor Todd Wagner, a great leader. And when you go to watch my "Two-Minute Warning," we’ll link you to a video of a stirring message he delivered to his congregation. You won’t want to miss it.

Dwight Eisenhower Believed the Bible

"The spirit of man is more important than mere physical strength, and the spiritual fiber of a nation than its wealth. The Bible is endorsed by the ages. Our civilization is built upon its words. In no other book is there such a collection of inspired wisdom, reality, and hope."


"It takes no brains to be an atheist. Any stupid person can deny the existence of a supernatural power because man's physical senses cannot detect it. But there cannot be ignored the influence of conscience, the respect we feel for the Moral Law, the mystery of first life…or the marvelous order in which the universe moves about us on this earth. All these evidence the handiwork of the beneficent Deity…That Deity is the God of the Bible and of Jesus Christ, His Son".    -- Dwight Eisenhower

Make Your Case!

By T. M. Moore|Published Date: November 11, 2011

“Keep them and do them, for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.”
Deuteronomy 4:6

The day of salvation has come! Now is the favorable time for making known the Good News of God’s Kingdom and the righteousness, peace, and joy it brings to everyone who enters it. God calls all those who believe in Jesus Christ to take up the challenge of breaking the “spiral of silence” and making the case for the Christian worldview. As we have seen, this must begin in our everyday conversations at home, in the community, at work, and wherever we gather with others.

A second means by which we must make our case for the Kingdom is by publishing the Christian worldview through every available means. This does not require that we all become authors of best-selling books. That’s simply not going to happen. But never before has so much opportunity been available to affect the thinking of so many people by sharing the written word. Through local media, the Internet, and social networking we may expect to influence many for the Kingdom of God whom we will never be able to talk with face to face.

Here is a second area where every Christian can play an active role in making the case for the Christian worldview. In our day there is no shortage of media through which we can employ the written word to challenge the secular mindset and propose our Christian alternative. Local newspapers still receive occasional op/ed pieces as well as letters to the editor. Even national journals of opinion will publish letters that are concise, considerate, and well-written. There is plenty of help to be found on the Internet concerning how to craft an effective op/ed piece or letter to the editor. By engaging local papers and other journals and periodicals, we can help to make the case for a Christian worldview, if only with those who screen such missives.

But by far the greatest medium through which believers can make the case for the Kingdom of God is the Internet. Websites abound where Kingdom citizens can comment on contemporary issues, moral concerns, matters of belief, and ethics. Opportunities can be easily found for becoming involved in blogging conversations in which we may set forth our Scriptural views.

Moreover, many websites exist in which questions of public policy and similar concerns are given thoughtful consideration by Christian thinkers. Articles from these websites relating to public policy matters can be downloaded and copied or simply emailed to friends. We should always make sure to follow-up on any emailed articles, or articles copied and distributed, with a view to engaging in conversation over the issue examined.
Believers should not be reluctant to post their own thoughts about worldview issues – on their own websites, through email, or for discussion in small groups – and thus to encourage conversation that can affect what people believe and how they live.

No one is going to publish our Christian worldview for us. But with email, blogging, social networking media, and other outlets ready to hand, it would be irresponsible for us not to employ every means for making our case on behalf of the Kingdom of God. When believers are not present in those settings, the spiral of silence rules. So let us determine that here, too, we will challenge the existing worldviews of the day and make our case for the Good News of the Kingdom of God.

Next steps: Ask some friends about good websites to visit where you can get involved in blogging about the Kingdom of God. Make a list of two or three points about the Kingdom you’d most like to share. Then visit those websites and join a conversation. Stay at it for a while until it’s clear you have begun to engage some readers. Let the Lord lead you from there.