Category: theological rant

Posted on

The Reason for God.

The Reason for God by Tim Keller is a must-read for anyone looking for a pastoral, thoughtful, and compelling defense of the Christian faith.

I call it pastoral because, unlike some theological works (even those by such great minds as CS Lewis), this book doesn’t at any point talk down to it’s reader.  It is a defense, to be sure, of the Christian faith.  But it feels like Pastor Tim is talking to you over a cup of coffee, not a podium and his reading glasses.  He is respectful of, and even encouraging to, those who enter into the discussion with doubts.

The real strength of this book, (and what I’d like to see skeptics like Dawkins respond to) is when (in the chapter called “Intermission”) Keller points out the differences between “strong rationalism” and “critical rationalism.”  His basic point is that not even atheistic naturalists have to give proofs that will satisfy people from every conceivable perspective, yet that is precisely what those same atheists require of Christians.  This is the only point at which I think those atheists and skeptics could find reason to be offended by this book.

All things considered, I’d highly recommend this book to anyone searching, or any Christian looking for a model of how to have a thoughtful, intelligent conversation with skeptics.  My word of caution to those Christians would be to replicate the tone of the book (caring more for the person than the philosophical debate), and avoid weaponizing the very compelling truths contained in the book.

Posted on

The Terrifying thought of Christ-centered Laborers.

Thanks to the power of Twitter, and my ever-running search for “campus crusade” I saw this tweet yesterday:

A terrifying description of the Campus Crusade for Christ Club: “We are here to help turn lost students into Christ-centered laborers.” —@gogocosmonaut

To which I responded:

you and I must have a different view of Christ. It’s terrifying that anyone would not want to be a Christ-centered laborer.

To which he responded:

If your life is centered on labor for someone you’ve never met and that has a chance of not being real… That’s terrifying.

At which point, I felt the 140 character-at-a-time limit on our perspectives needed lifting.  Hence, this post. (to which I welcome a response either in the comments or on some other platform—even email)

I don’t know anything more about Nick Wood (@gogocosmonaut) than is revealed online, but from what I can tell about him through a brief perusal of his tweets, He and I share a lot of the same interests.  This isn’t a blog post where I slam the guy.  From his perspective, I’ve never met Jesus, and Jesus has a “chance of not being real.”

I could write a long defense of why I believe in God, but he’s heard it before, and probably has convincing arguments against even my best philosophical positions.  Ontological proofs are not what he wants or needs.  What he needs is to meet a Christian who actually finds their ultimate purpose, identity, and joy in Christ.

Because Nick is absolutely right.  If I’ve never met someone, and don’t know anything about that person, and then proceed to devote my life to them, and call that devotion “labor,” I’ve either lost my mind, or worse.  But, if I were to devote my life to someone like President Obama, or Billy Graham, or my pastor, or even my wife or child, and call that devotion “labor” it would lead to disastrous results as well.

Why? Because, at the end of the day, and at their most basic level, those men and women are flawed, as well. Ever met a parent who hinges all their hopes in life on the success/fame/competence of their child?  More often than not those are crushing expectations for flawed people to live up to.

That’s what’s different about Jesus.  The Jesus I meet in the Bible is perfect. Not swayed by human opinion, not selfish, not greedy, full of integrity, perfect. The type of guy that finds 100 bucks on the subway and gives it to lost and found.  Whether or not the Bible is true (different topic for a different day), the picture you get from the Bible is of a Jesus who never stopped giving himself away.  Devoting my life to a completely (and perfectly) selfless person would lead to me becoming the type of person who increasingly gives myself away.

There are countless examples in the history of Christianity of this principle coming true, from Mother Teresa to Jim Elliot to Dietrich Bonhoeffer to Martin Luther (King and otherwise).  People who saw it as a small thing to stand up against the Nazis, the bigotry of early 20th century America or 15th century Europe, and the horrors of poverty and disease.

If we have this view of Christ—selfless, sacrificial giver—there is nothing terrifying about an army of people walking behind Him and modeling their lives after him.  This world could stand to have a few more Martin Luther Kings who stand up against tyranny, even when there’s nothing but death in it for them.  Even if Jesus weren’t real, as Nick posits, to have a big group of people live like that imaginary man would actually benefit the world.

My fear is that many Christians in general and Campus Crusade staff and students in particular are not living in light of this Jesus, giving guys like Nick every reason to dismiss Christ without a second look.

I would beg folks like Nick to consider Christ.  You’ll always find more than enough Christians to ridicule, and find fault with.  After all, being a Christian means surrendering in the fight to be perfect, and admitting we can’t save ourselves.  But look at Christ long enough, and you’ll find an amazing truth worth devoting your life to.  In light of Christ’s perfect, selfless love, grace, and ultimate control over all the earth, it would be far more terrifying to center your life on fleeting counterfeits like self-actualization, money, sex, fame, power, or control.

Posted on

Pat Robertson and I, the Temanites.

I just got done reading Job 4 and 5, and was struck by the parallels between Pat Robertson’s comments yesterday and Eliphaz the Temanite’s comments to Job.

The major lesson? In the face of tragedy, responding with theological truisms (or conjecture) is not only insensitive, it’s the exact opposite of the Christian message, even if those truisms and conjecture are correct.

What strikes me is how many people, like myself, heard about both the tragedy and Robertson’s response and reacted by being mad about the response, not by actually doing something to help the tragedy.  I’m no different than Pat Robertson.

Here’s a way that you can respond in a more biblical way. I’ll go first-we’ll be donating to what CCC is doing in Haiti.

Posted on

Stuff Christians Like a little too much.

I, being a guest poster at SCL, have noticed a problem that is nearly universal among Christians.  Christians like Jon Acuff.  But they take it a single, insidious step further than that.

They’re Acuffist.

I know, I don’t like throwing around political buzzwords any more than you like reading them, but this needs to be brought to the light.  A quick perusal of the “most popular posts” on his site will show you that nearly every one that has any staying power was written by Jon Acuff.  The posts that have the most comments? Also Acuffian posts.  And even though my spell-check thinks that’s a ridiculous word, I fear the slide toward a single, monolithic Christian satire blog “experience” is well underway.  It’s subtle, but the Acuffitude of his website is beginning to take over areas that previously lay untouched by his wit and charm.  Did you notice how he subtly moved in on the Power Team, that staple of Christian satire?  Readers find themselves pining for his next Twitter update, the next comment he makes on his already-Acufficient blog post of the day, or the next witty thing he’ll say on his facebook “fan page.”

Jon’s actions are not what is up for debate here, though.  It’s the overt way in which other bloggers are forgotten, marginalized, and disrespected that has me taking a stand against Acuffism today. I’ve developed this test so that you can see just how Acuffist you really are.

1.)Which of the following Stuff Christians Like was written by a guest poster?

(a)The Popcorn Collision
(b)Near Death Visits to Heaven
(c)The Campus Babysitter
(d)Those are made up post titles, not written on his blog.

2.)What’s the last SCL post you commented on?

3.)Is your answer to #2 a post written by Jon Acuff?

4.)What’s the last SCL post you laughed out-loud about, or felt strong emotion while reading?

5.)Is your answer to #4 a post written by Jon Acuff?

6.)Can you name, without looking, just 5 of the guest bloggers who have posted on his site?

7.)Have you ever taken issue with the fact that Jon Acuff is the only blogger listed on this site, despite no less than 30 guest posts written by at least 10 other bloggers?  Or is that sort of favoritism OK with you, you Acuffist?

I don’t even have to work up a score card for this one, because I’m sure that you’ve noticed your own Acuffism at this point.  And identifying the problem is the first step.  I’m starting a support group today, here at my blog.  Together, we can stamp out Acuffism for good.  Do your part today by commenting on today’s non-Acufficious post.

What’s one way you commit to ridding your life of Acuffism?

Posted on

Will you still have to Raise Support?

Like LL Cool J, I feel like this topic is less of comeback, and more like I’ve literally been here for years.

This isn’t the first time I’ve written about raising funds.

Perspective, when it comes to finances, is something I lose about every 15 minutes.  I need to be reminded of the truth on a regular basis.  I figure if I lose perspective, so do the people who support us.  Hopefully not as often, though.

So when we talk about moving, and among the first questions is the ticking time-bomb of “will you still have to raise support?” I like to pause and remind myself (and anybody standing nearby enough to hear) why support raising is not a chore, but a blessing.  A privilege.  Not a “have to” but a “get to.”

The short answer is yes, we are still fully supported by the generous contributions of concerned individuals and churches. There’s no central fund for paying office staff or field staff within Campus Crusade.

And I’m glad.  This way, we really rely on God even for the folks in the cubicles in Apex.  There’s still a department that does the hiring, but God does the confirming by doing what we can’t do, raise up the funds to pay the staff.  And as I’ve mentioned in the past, raising support is a constant reminder (in the midst of the money-driven “ethics” of western culture) that I am not a rock or an island, no matter what Paul Simon tells me, and I can’t do or have it “my way,” even if Frank Sinatra or Burger King urge me to.  Calling folks and challenging them to be on my team of ministry partners pushes me toward a biblical, humble, interdependence with others.

In answer to Colleen’s specific question about the difficulties we’ve been having raising support recently, what coming off campus for a whole semester did was help us see clearly what it might look like to be off campus.  So, yeah, the support struggles lately did help us to make the decision, but not because we are done raising support.  They just afforded us the opportunity to see outside of the “campus” bubble we’d been in for years.  And we liked it outside of the bubble.

So, until the next time I need reminding, you can always join our team of partners here.

Proudly powered by WordPress